Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. The first objection is that the system allows them to marshal massive amounts of resources to achieve their objec

Ninja Edit: I didn't downvote you by the way. The first objection is that the system allows them to marshal massive amounts of resources to achieve their objectives without support the very infrastructure that they rely on to acquire ever increasing control of resources. The second objection is that they've lobbied for a system that benefits them. Do we really think of adding years to copyright is something that actually benefits everyday people? No. Of course not. But the wealthy pressure the politicians and the politicians cave and most of the public is too busy to understand or fight it. The third objection is that they drive up costs for others for areas of the economy that are naturally limited. The larger their house and plot, the fewer people can live there, the more they drive up prices for land. They buy multiple homes. The best lakes and groups of normal people can't compete. In basically any market where there is an arms race the ever increasing economic disparity is making the day-to-day reality of the poor worse. Automation has helped bring the cost of things down, but in so many areas it's a hollower copy of what it used to be. People used to bake bread at home all across Canada. Now, it's wonderbread for the poor. To an economists spreadsheet things look great, but there's a humanness that is getting pushed out of interactions. Imagine this continuing on and on, as technology continues to ever centralize returns. We're going to start having trillionaires soon. Right now the word is marked as incorrect by my spellchecker, but once it hits the news there's going to be the new bar people hit. A new top class. There should be wealth limit. Or very high wealth taxes after, say, $100m. It doesn't make sense for such a small percent of people to own such a large percent of our society.