Four Arguments Against The Extreme Concentration of Wealth
- Contrary to popular beliefs, extremes in wealth are bad for society, the economy, and the planet.
- Concentration of wealth is unjust and confers undue advantage to those with the most wealth, who then use this wealth primarily to usurp the democratic process and further enrich themselves at the expense of the majority, and the ecosystems that support all life.
- There is no moral or economic justification for extremes in wealth.
- Wealth accumulation is often accomplished by illegal means, but it can also derive from the unjust (but legal) pressure that the wealthy use to influence lawmakers to legislate in their favor. The accumulation of extreme
wealth is the result of laws that inappropriately reward the marginal contributions of individual innovation but ignore the vastly larger contributions that flow from the heritage of common knowledge. This extreme wealth, which has gone into private hands, truly belongs in the public purse. The very wealthy “didn’t earn it and don’t deserve it.”
Reducing the extremes in wealth is therefore a major goal for progressives of all kinds.