. It's also a poor idea ideologically, because why in the hell should the state be putting caps on our ability to serve each other?
Please clarify. Are you equating how much money a person makes with ability to serve each other?
Well I suppose it's possible to make money by stealing art, or by some other form of extractive criminal activity, but, yes, under our system of economic organization, the way we tend to make money (especially large sums of money) tends to be by serving each other.
Bezos, for example, is catching a lot of heat right now because Amazon has done so well during the Lockdowns. Which, is to say, people are upset with him because they wanted people to stay more in their homes
, and he was able to provide a fantastic way to help people stay more in their homes
. Bill Gates is pretty rich, because he gave me (and millions of others) the ability to do things like write on this website and put out the occasional word document or power point.
If you don't serve people's needs or wants, in this economy, then they won't give you any money. If you not only serve their needs and wants, but, serve the needs or wants of millions or tens of millions of people in a particularly helpful way, they will give you a lot
Now I'm not going to say that's an absolute rule - you have corrupt political deals that throw public money into politically connected economic enterprises (and, the more that government is able to steer economic outcomes, the more corruption you will see of that nature), and you have criminal organizations. But, generally? Yeah.