My comment was specifically pointing out that measuring inequality should not be based on how much one could potentially consume, but (obviously) the extreme po

My comment was specifically pointing out that measuring inequality should not be based on how much one could potentially consume, but (obviously) the extreme power they derive from their wealth. GP did a good job at explaining how wealth can result in extreme domestic and international power (by using their wealth to impact/drive economic initiatives, etc). So to tie it all together - if we believe in the American democratic project we are running, I deserve the same amount of domestic political power as any other civilian, not necessarily the same wealth. However, if wealth acts as a power multiplier (as we just discussed), than, naturally, wealth inequality results in democratic inequality and needs to be acknowledged in order for democracy to work. Unrelated to my point, but in response to your question: Wealth (especially the wealth Bill Gates has acquired) comes from creating value for shareholders, not society. Do not conflate those two things.