thecuriousmail wrote on Aug 19
th, 2017 at 7:46am:
Extreme wealth inequality is bad for a society.
This sentiment, some would say evidence, goes back more than 2500 years. From Plato in ancient greece, Plutarch in ancient rome, thru to adam smith, the architect of capitalism, thru to presidents, philosophers, scientists and economists, I would say the best of the human race, all say the same thing. Have we become so ignorant, so ideologically driven, that we refuse to at least listen? And think.
Extreme wealth inequality is bad for the society. It
gives wealthier people an unacceptable degree of control over the lives of others compared to the rest of the population. Are we not all democratically, morally, equal? If wealth is very unevenly distributed in a society, wealthy people often end up in control of many aspects of the lives of poorer citizens: over where and how they can work, what they can buy, and in general what their lives will be like. As an example, ownership of a public media outlet, such as a newspaper or a television channel, can give control over how others in the society view themselves and their lives, and how they understand their society.
undermines the fairness of political institutions. If those who hold political offices must depend on large contributions for their campaigns, they will be more responsive to the interests and demands of wealthy contributors, and those who are not rich will not be fairly represented.
undermines the fairness of the economic system itself. Economic inequality makes it difficult, if not impossible, to create equality of opportunity. Income inequality means that some children will enter the workforce much better prepared than others. And people with few assets find it harder to access the first small steps to larger opportunities, such as a loan to start a business or pay for an advanced degree.
it comparatively unrewards workers, who as participants in a scheme of cooperation that produces national income, have a claim to a fair share of what they have helped to produce.
That is the crux of it. A society is a co-operation between all in it. Moderate inequality is often understood to be a good thing, as people are incentivized etc. Extreme inequality is bad for a society. We ignore that at our own peril.
Arguments here that it is a good idea are based exclusively on some kind of jealousy on the part that those who say it is a bad situation, or that it is the "fault" of those who object that they are not one of the eight.
But such extreme wealth inequality is BAD for society, whether I am speaking as one of/not one of the 8.