Louis XIV did not bankrupt the country, and did not exploit the common people, I think, far the contrary.
His reign suffered a kind of a glaciation, with 20 years of very strong cold in the winters, particularly in 1709, with the seeds unadapted to such cold. In addition, in 1792-1793, terrible rains destroy the crops.
The price of flour was multiplicated by 5, of course the poorest peasants (about 1/2 of the population) could not afford them. They had only vegetables to eat, and so did their pork, which in consequence was less fat, and as the wealthiest peasants had only enough to buy food, nor them could afford the ordinary textiles made buy the peasants' wives and by plant workers, who were on the dole.
The king did what he could do, with limited means (taxes were very low in these times), he made fuse once more his gold and silver dishes and furniture, to sell the metal, even his throne that was of silver. It was an example for the nobility, who did the same. This is why there is nearly nothing left of the XVIIth century French table art, that was the most admired in Europe. He bought flour to Ukraine and sold bread at the price they were sold before the hunger (1792-1793) or gave it with soup (in 1709-1710). He employed as many people as possible as road-builders, or as soldiers (he didn't need to read Keynes to understand it was a solution), and in spite of all that, there was an overmortality in the realm, that diminuated the population by 7,5% as evaluate some historians, which is enormous; but what could he do more?
