It doesn't matter either way to me. The economy isn't a zero-sum game, and the fact that one individual has millions of dollars doesn't mean that others have less than they would have had otherwise.
Thats not entirely true.
Once a certain level is reached, people stop spending money on things that create jobs and monetary velocity and start doing things like gambling on the stock market and speculating. Activities that are primarily extractive rather than productive.
The overall economy, and everybodys quality of life is better served when a hundred people have ten million dollars each than one with a billion.
There are reasons only a tiny fraction of the population has seen great gains the last forty years while everyone elses wages have been stagnant or even fallen.
Extractive, non productive fiscal activities.
Piles of money to buy politicians.
Ego (at the end of the day, after a point acquiring more wealth is just scorekeeping and self aggrandizement. Pride and a sense of superiority.)
Further, at any given point in time the economy IS a zero sum game. And those with most of the existing pie get most of all new pie BECAUSE they have most of the existing pie.
The majority are poorer as a result of all this.
When a millionaire buys a fancy car, that money goes through numerous hands. The manufacturer, his employees. The dealer and salesman. Mechanics. Etc. And all those people spend a lot of that money, on food, housing, entertainment. Providing jobs and income to MANY people as that money flows through the economy.
When someone uses that money to speculate on real estate, for example. They make money. Maybe a real estate broker and a remodeling contractor. Far fewer "conduits" of money to flow into the overall economy. And the profits from such speculation come directly from consumers in the form of higher rents and home prices, often with no addition of value. Just artificial "shortages" that create higher prices due to perceived high demand.
Its even worse with things like currency speculation.
Another issue with the upper fractions of a percent is they tend to be the ones in control of everybody's retirement money. So all our eggs are in their basket. And they decide what new businesses get investment and which don't. Picking winners and losers. Based on profitability alone. Which means that a product that would improve the lives of every human on the planet but would cut into profits of companies the fund managers own stock in will never see the light of day. And highly profitable crap gets all the investment.
So its not just the wealth the possess but that which they control as well that is problematic.
