I agree with only some of the points in this essay. I think that the assumption of efficiency is overstretched. I think that the demonstration that wealth is cr

I agree with only some of the points in this essay. I think that the assumption of efficiency is overstretched. I think that the demonstration that wealth is created is overstretched. The reaction between these imperfections (people who have become very rich by participating in imperfect markets) creates a hole. It is this hole that people react to. Even if markets were perfect, wealth creation is not often dependant to factor that people can control. A factory worker in Japan is more productive then one in Burma for reasons completely outside his sphere of influence. Similarly a 8th century peasant's wealth was generated by him from the land. But, the great variations in wealth of peasants probably had more to do with how much & how good the land was then how hard or how skilfully they worked. Wealth generation does not mean a meritocracy. On the other hand, wealth is something that is created. That is something not enough people grasp. This essay actually got me thinking at the very start in the comment about children. Likewise, it doesn't occur to most kids that wealth is something that has to be generated. It seems to be something that flows from parents. That is something that many parents would react to. "Children need to be taught the value of money. They need to learn that money must be earned." They then set up chores or encourage kids to work and earn money. This is to set them straight. That is a fundamental mistake. It leaves out wealth generation. It encourage them to think that they are entitled to their share if...