>> Isn't inequality a measure of efficiency, though? There are so many weirdos living in their little political fantasy bubble that I can't even tell if your p

>> Isn't inequality a measure of efficiency, though? There are so many weirdos living in their little political fantasy bubble that I can't even tell if your post is satire. But in case somebody comes up with an equivalent but more serious looking argument than "living in an aluminium box with no aircon and eating over my own toilet bowl? I'm kind of jealous!" or "the successful should be rich, ergo the less successful should obviously have any dignity stripped from them", let's offer some counter arguments: What rates a society as a Third-World country is not its absence of super-rich (most countries have these) but its absence of a middle-class. So by your own reasoning Congo and Angola, with their tiny billionaire class ruling over starving millions, are "super efficient". I'm sure you'd enjoy living there and the rest of the world should be kind of jealous. Anyway. On a more grounded note, in the realm of people who rely on data instead of sophistry, inequality is considered economically inefficient, even by historically free-market organizations like the IMF and OECD: https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/06/economist-explains-11 https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/06/e... https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2014/12/09/income-inequality-hurts-economic-growth https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2014/12/09/income-i...