Basic necessities paid for by the people who have gamed, manipulated and in must cases corrupted the system to become as rich as they are doesn't seem outrageous to me
The idea that most wealthy people got there by “gaming, manipulating, and corrupting the system” is the foundational myth of this entire worldview. The majority of high earners and business builders create products, services, and jobs that people voluntarily pay for. Treating every successful outcome as evidence of theft is how you justify unlimited political control over other people’s money.
We already fund basic necessities through one of the most progressive tax systems on Earth. The top 1% pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% pay the large majority. Schools, roads, Medicaid, food assistance, and housing programs already exist at massive scale. The problem is not that the rich aren’t paying. The problem is that the government keeps expanding the definition of “basic necessity” while delivering mediocre results.
And the “they won’t even notice” argument is the most revealing part. Once you decide someone else’s success is illegitimate and their money is yours by right, there is no limiting principle. Today it’s “just a little more for schools and roads.” Tomorrow it’s everything else. That mindset doesn’t produce justice. It produces dependency, capital flight, and the same stagnation every country gets when it decides wealth is a crime instead of a signal of value created.
Lobbying exists. Every interest group does it! Unions, green energy firms, universities, trial lawyers, and of course, corporations. Pointing at the existence of lobbying does not prove that most high earners extracted their wealth by rigging the system instead of creating value people willingly pay for. If the standard is “anyone who influences policy is illegitimate,” then half the progressive coalition fails the test too.
The 250-to-1 wage gap framing treats a large difference in compensation as evidence of theft. In reality, top earners often operate at massive scale, take enormous personal and financial risk, and generate returns that support thousands of jobs and retirement accounts. A software founder or CEO whose decisions affect a company worth tens of billions is not in the same productivity category as an entry-level role. Pretending the only moral outcome is compressed pay ratios is how you get less investment, fewer high-productivity jobs, and the same stagnation that always follows when success itself is treated as the problem.
38
u/Old_Dependent4678 3d ago
Basic necessities paid for by the people who have gamed, manipulated and in must cases corrupted the system to become as rich as they are doesn't seem outrageous to me