While I would love for everyone to be "rich" today, it seems that eventual wealth is a good deal, if kind of harsh emotionally. Many of the "poor" (i know there are extreme cases) are richer than kings 1000 yrs ago. I would guess that in 1000 yrs the "poor" of then will be richer than our 1% today.
What are you talking about? Incan kings slept on stone shelves and covered themselves with poorly tanned animal pelts, and were at the mercy of insects and crop fluctuations. They didn't have modern sewage systems or vaccinations.
A king 1000 years ago would have no conception of what a shower is. They would take baths, but even then, that'd be a seasonal/yearly thing.
There's not a chance in hell I'd want to swap places with a king of 1000 years ago.
How would the mercy of not "making it so insufferable that the poor leave as economic refugees" actually work out? Don't millionaires need non-millionaires to clean their houses, cook their meals, and walk their dogs?
This problem is usually sidestepped by the argument that teachers, policemen, sanitation workers, etc, can't live in the communities they serve and that that's fine as a result of a wider services market, better transportation etc, etc, etc.
But at some point you do have to concede that most of the people driving their beat-up 1996 Hondas to bring you fresh sashimi aren't valued in the six figures - and you have to acknowledge and design for it.
that is literally happening right now.