There isn't anything inherently wrong with a wide rich-poor gap. There is a floor for poverty but not for wealth. You can be really really poor, but you'll nev

There isn't anything inherently wrong with a wide rich-poor gap. There is a floor for poverty but not for wealth. You can be really really poor, but you'll never be poorer than having $x.xx of debt associated to your name (I am just ballparking like $50,000, though I know this can fluctuate some -- please no nit arguments about Bernie Madoff) The rich have no ceiling to how much they can accumulate. In fact, they can accumulate vast sums (maybe more than poorer people make in a lifetime) by simply letting their money sit in a bank account. 1% holding 35% of the wealth doesn't mean anything beyond the most superficial level. What is more important is if the remaining 65% of wealth is distributed in such a manner that allows the other 99% to survive with some amount of quality of life.