Wealth Concentration - Support

Support

Generally, supporters defending wealth concentration also support capitalism. They argue that, the principal assumption that wealth is neither created nor destroyed but rather shifted, is wrong. Wealth is not a zero sum game and thus wealth collected by the wealthy might not be distributable to the poor anyhow. They argue that over the course of human history, total global wealth has grown over the last several centuries, and therefore, investors may reap large economic benefits, and the side effect of investment is the creation of new jobs and industries that increase the overall standard of living for anyone participating in the market. Opponents argue that an increase in economic and social inequality, results in a reduction in the standard of living. In response, neoclassical economics dictates that if a business decreases the standard of living for people participating in the market, participants will exit the market until the business cannot function (that is, bad businesses go bankrupt). Even though there is a priority of who's standard of living is most worth increasing, they will all be increased overall, since none are actually "decreased." For defenses of economic inequality, see the article for Equality of outcome.

Read more about this topic:  Wealth Concentration

Famous quotes containing the word support:

    Many people now believe that if fathers are more involved in raising children than they were, children and sons in particular will learn that men can be warm and supportive of others as well as be high achievers. Thus, fathers’ involvement may be beneficial not because it will help support traditional male roles, but because it will help break them down.
    Joseph H. Pleck (20th century)

    To suppose such a thing possible as a society, in which men, who are able and willing to work, cannot support their families, and ought, with a great part of the women, to be compelled to lead a life of celibacy, for fear of having children to be starved; to suppose such a thing possible is monstrous.
    William Cobbett (1762–1835)

    ... married women work and neglect their children because the duties of the homemaker become so depreciated that women feel compelled to take a job in order to hold the respect of the community. It is one thing if women work, as many of them must, to help support the family. It is quite another thing—it is destructive of woman’s freedom—if society forces her out of the home and into the labor market in order that she may respect herself and gain the respect of others.
    Agnes E. Meyer (1887–1970)