[csomar]

You are focusing on numbers which will lead you nowhere. The reason the US has a struggling population is that the US has a population that didn't have a good education and training. If you want to make a population richer, you need to train people to do things (ie: Plumbing, installing an Air Conditioner, becoming an ophthalmologist, etc...). As evidenced by the latest stimulus checks, giving people money will only create inflation and a shortage of low-wage workers. The US is very rich and connected, so lack of raw resources is not one of its issues.

Jeff Bezos can have $200bn+ in the bank without affecting the economy. The effect of seizing these $200bn and distributing them is the same as quantitatively easing them into the economy. Some people exert power through work or politics. Some people have none and want to exert power through "journalism" and "shaping opinions". It's all fun and games until these people are elected (through populism probably coupled by a recession); which is when you need to prepare your luggage and get the hell out of such a place.

[carnitine]

Quantitative easing swaps bank reserves for high grade bonds. How is that remotely equivalent to the forced liquidation and distribution of equity?

[csomar]

I'm talking about the hypothetical scenario where swapping $200bn worth of equity will generate $200bn worth of cash without disturbance to the market.

Obviously, this couldn't be less true and the market will collapse even before the selling starts.

[carnitine]

How is that analogous to 200bn of bonds for 200bn of bank reserves?