Make no mistake even as a moral problem the wealth gap isn't just about empathy. The wealth gap is unjust, unfair and immoral.
Fairness implies that the wealth you generate as an individual is equivalent to the wealth you earn and own.
Right now 1% of the population owns 50% of the worlds wealth.
For 1% of the world to own 50% of the worlds wealth implies that 1% of the world generated 50% of the worlds' wealth.
It is not physically possible for a fraction of the human population to generate half the worlds' wealth. There is no reality where this makes sense. Thus for 1% of the population to own 50% of the worlds wealth, the 1% must obtain wealth generated by other people.
A common example of how this happens is through the ownership of a corporation. As an owner you own all the wealth generated by people who work for you. As owner you can do zero work, yet extract the wealth generated by hundreds of employees.
Owners essentially pay people less wealth than the wealth they generate. There is no circumstance where people will explicitly agree to such a transaction when given other choices.
It is fundamentally immoral and unfair to own wealth you did not produce or generate. This is not a question of empathy, it is a question of fundamental human rights.
Comments
Make no mistake even as a moral problem the wealth gap isn't just about empathy. The wealth gap is unjust, unfair and immoral.
Fairness implies that the wealth you generate as an individual is equivalent to the wealth you earn and own.
Right now 1% of the population owns 50% of the worlds wealth.
For 1% of the world to own 50% of the worlds wealth implies that 1% of the world generated 50% of the worlds' wealth.
It is not physically possible for a fraction of the human population to generate half the worlds' wealth. There is no reality where this makes sense. Thus for 1% of the population to own 50% of the worlds wealth, the 1% must obtain wealth generated by other people.
A common example of how this happens is through the ownership of a corporation. As an owner you own all the wealth generated by people who work for you. As owner you can do zero work, yet extract the wealth generated by hundreds of employees.
Owners essentially pay people less wealth than the wealth they generate. There is no circumstance where people will explicitly agree to such a transaction when given other choices.
It is fundamentally immoral and unfair to own wealth you did not produce or generate. This is not a question of empathy, it is a question of fundamental human rights.