1. The premise that everyone is benefiting is false. A tremendous amount of people are in industries that are shuttered, communities that are withering, locatio

1. The premise that everyone is benefiting is false. A tremendous amount of people are in industries that are shuttered, communities that are withering, locations that are in decline, or otherwise not 'getting better'. 2. The proper basis for comparison for the iterative generation of wealth and productivity isn't the past, it's the reasonable alternatives at the same time in development. Imagine you and I start with 100 coins each. In Scenario A, I take 30 of your coins. Then we fight each other and fritter away 10 coins each. Then our respective coin volume doubles. I end up with 240 coins. You end up with 120. We're both better off than in the past. In total, we have 360 coins. In Scenario B, I steal all your coins. Without any coins, you can't fight me, so neither of us loses any further coins. Our coin volume doubles. I end up with 400 coins. In Scenario C, I don't steal your coins and because we're not busy fighting each other, no losses occur. We both end up with 200 coins. In total we have 400 coins. I think the lesson here is self evident, and that's without raising the fact that growth slows and societies collapse due to wealth disparities. If the simple thought experiment isn't enough and you'd like something a bit more involved, read up on the history and philosophy surrounding our transition away from the feudal system. Our distaste of titled hereditary privilege was very well deserved.