[ciocan42]

I think this view of inequality is misleading. It put emphasis that the top richest should be not rich, or they are not good people. It's a defeating viewpoint that blames other for not having success.

When in fact top 10% richest helped much more people along the way than all average combined. And the consequence is being rich.

Instead of complaining about inequality (aka making the rich poorer), better to think about how to make the poor richer.

[andrepd]

> top 10% richest helped much more people along the way than all average combined

That's complete bullshit. That's maybe how you wish things were. But it's not. I'm in the top 10%, and I've done nothing for it other than having been born in a wealthy country to middle-class parents, with my every need attended to by society. Had I been born somewhere else, I certainly would not be successful as I am now. Instead of being a physicist, maybe I would be boxing cheap plastic gadgets in a factory in Asia. I was born into the top rung on the current global economic arrangement, instead of on the bottom.

To put it this way: if hard work led to wealth every woman in Africa would be a millionaire.

In fact the top 10% keep the statu quo as it is because it benefits them. It benefits them that global economy is arranged in such a way that they are in the center, reaping the benefits of it, and keeping the "periphery" down and in their place, feeding them and their high standard of living. This means everything from stacking "democratic" governments with plutocratic cronies, to simply being a middle-class voter interested in maintaining things just as they are.

[bbctol]

I appreciate how much the rich have helped other people along their way to, uh, being Sam Walton's kid.

[grasshopperpurp]

But, when those extremely rich are siphoning money away from others (via paying for laws that favor them, exploiting workers, etc.), it absolutely makes sense to say, 'Hey, you don't need all that. You need to share more than you are.'

[coolaliasbro]

I completely agree with the drift of your comment, but would nitpick the notion of "sharing" in this context: since, as has been explained above, the system is effectively gamed to legitimize the capturing of value by those that already have most of it from those that produce it and do not, the current situation is tantamount to legalized theft by one class from another. I don't follow that a thief can share something he stole with the person from which he stole it.