> For what it's worth this is why I believe that inequality and some level of wealth at the top is useful and necessary. You want a class of people who can just

> For what it's worth this is why I believe that inequality and some level of wealth at the top is useful and necessary. You want a class of people who can just sort of mess about as they see fit. Otherwise everyone is just scrambling to meet basic needs. I’m not sure who you’re responding to, but it doesn’t sound like a position any Marxist I read would take. I also think your position is contradicts reality. Consider 1. Some inequality is necessary to fuel competition, and that is good. But the level of inequality we have today is destabilizing and breeds abuse. It’s about quantity, not quality 2. Why is the choice between “everyone scrambles to meet basic needs” and “a few people can mess around”? The level of wealth we have as a country could make it such that far more people can mess around than do today. Wouldn’t that be better, by your own logic?