[vpears87]

Wealth is relative to others in society. If the pie grows, I maybe better off in absolute dollars. But if the percentage of the pie I control decreases, I am relatively poorer. Comparing how much wealthier/happier/successful/beautiful I am to my previous self is niether as satisfying nor as real as comparing to those immediately around me.

I also wouldn't think a conspiracy is necessary. Just lobby to write tax, tariff, and property laws out in the open that benefit one class of people/industry more than another.

[tomp]

That is a self-defeatist view that encourages and amplifies the "hate the rich" sentiments in the society.

1 of 5 children of John D Rockefeller (richest man in history) died at 13 months. In the past 130 years, child mortality has decreased massively in the developed world. If that's not "real" or "satisfying" and the only achievement that truly fulfils you is beating other people, that's a fairly sad life to live.

[natrik]

I believe that's what humanity should strive for, but looking at a labourer making $5 a day, it would be easier for him to 'hate the rich' neighbour who makes $10 a day and can afford an Air Conditioner than appreciate the fact that he is well off compared to his grandfather or people in neighbouring villages making $1 a day in terms of health, etc.

Also the experiment of being given the choice of either getting nothing or getting $X and giving their worst enemy 2*$X. Small groups often compete against each other, "keeping up with the Joneses", and while it is a sort of hedonistic treadmill, it's an easy way to gain satiety.