>2. The whole idea of inequality, while potentially useful, kind of assumes a fixed pie This is incorrect assumption. The idea behind too much inequality bein

>2. The whole idea of inequality, while potentially useful, kind of assumes a fixed pie This is incorrect assumption. The idea behind too much inequality being bad assumes feedback loop. If you want to grow the pie, every non zero-sum investment into production and innovation must be matched by equivalent increase in consumption that creates the ROI. Post industrial economies are 60-70% private consumption, rest is government spending. All busines-to-business earnings flow from these two if you follow the money. Every product and industry has their money flowing trough private consumption or government spending, including WhatsApp. If too much of the money flows into the richest people, they only consume fraction of what they earn. Rest of their money is spend buying property or investments (increasing property prices or recusing P/E values). Economy turns into rent seeking, ROI decreases and the pie stops growing. All innovations that grow economy must pay themselves by producing money flow goes into the private consumers or to the governments pay collecting taxes. If private consumption is reduced, then either governments must step up and pay welfare benefits and invest into stuff like military or else the real economy slows down. Growth economy is not a pipeline that has the beginning and the end. It's a loop where money flows to other direction and products flow to the opposite direction. Income equality is not categorically bad. __too_much__ income inequality creates a stunt that directs too much money into capital goods and reduces the overall flow.