3 ms·
It does matter: wealth represents resources. Huge wealth inequality allocates resources, and therefore decisions of how to allocate those resources, into a smal
by brightstep 5y ago
It does matter: wealth represents resources. Huge wealth inequality allocates resources, and therefore decisions of how to allocate those resources, into a small number of hands. Take Bezos' rocket and mega yacht. Is that a useful way to to apply the huge amount of materials and labor it took to create? What could we have done instead?
- cloverich 5y agoTo play devil's advocate, we could tax 100% of the wealth of those individuals which would cover the cost of another US invasion of Iraq.
- Jensson 5y agoThe sum cost of the worlds luxury projects like yachts or super mansions or personal jets etc is still a tiny fraction of the economy, taxes are a much bigger concern than those. And other than such projects the wealth of wealthy people are resources used wisely investing in production capabilities of products people want to buy, like new CPU generations or new warehouses etc. This is how most resources governed by the wealthy is allocated, which seems entirely reasonable, having a small fraction of that get lost to their personal whims seems like a very cheap price to pay for the efficiency of capitalism compared to other systems, we already pay like 40% in taxes, why not pay 1% or so tax to capitalism?