R: Ban Billionaires

Some of us might find extravagant wealth vaguely distasteful. Billionaires seem to exist in a completely separate world from the rest of us. Their money purchases elaborate birthday parties, dining halls on Ivy League campuses, and seats at fancy banquets and private concerts. It's all a little obscene. Moreover, unbridled wealth in the hands of a few individuals can be poisonous to society. Money exists to multiply itself, and greed is not easily checked or directed. Ultimately, the ultra-rich do not own their wealth; their wealth owns them. The same principles which cause us to be suspicious of overly centralized government authority should also inspire wariness of centralized economic power. To this end, perhaps billionaires should not exist at all. If centralization is to be avoided, however, one will have to imagine creative ways to cap wealth without concentrating power.

On the other hand, just because billionaires are unnecessary does not mean they should be illegal. Some might even argue that billionaires are an essential indicator of the health of a market—they exist because their companies are wildly successful, which means ostensibly that they provide something useful to consumers. Furthermore, their net worth is almost entirely non-liquid, ebbing and flowing along with the valuation of the companies they own. To ban billionaires would require a thorough restructuring of America’s largest corporations, to unknown and possibly calamitous effect on the economy.

Perhaps, among those in the negative, there are even some starry-eyed believers in philanthropy. After all, those in possession of enormous fortunes are best positioned to share their wealth with those in need. Furthermore, although all but the most zealous free-market libertarians would agree that some restrictions on economic activity are necessary in a capitalist system, a hard cap on wealth—even one for which only a millionth of one percent qualify—contradicts the spirit of capitalism itself by eliminating further incentives to profit.

Is the existence of billionaires a sign of the depravity of our times, or an indicator of economic vibrancy? Must the super-rich be reined in before they destroy themselves and us, or can they be trusted to contribute to a flourishing society? Is the idea of a wealth cap compatible with free-market capitalism? Is such a thing practical enough to be genuinely considered?