[sokoloff]

Does anyone seriously argue that mere millionaires shouldn’t exist? That’s a level of wealth that permits only around $50K/yr in retirement, assuming it's 100% liquid/investable. If a retiree had a paid-off house at the median price level, they'd have less than $30K/yr in retirement if they had to remain "not a millionaire".

Nearly 10% of Americans are millionaires (at least at the household level, not necessarily per-person). It's around 6% for UK and France.

[_rpxpx]

But those numbers aren't meaningful in a scenario in which that revenue were redistributed in social housing, public healthcare, and national insurance. I don't think the world needs, or can carry, any millionaires. Public affluence--public luxuries--like housing, libraries, schools, universities, trains, parks, museums etc, do far more for human welfare, and far less ecological damage.