> Most of the time people are just fighting over scraps and the best they can hope for is some steady source of income that pays their rent and affords them some basic luxuries like visiting Las Vegas and watching a few acrobatic shows.
I'm sorry to react so strongly, but I think it's demeaning to suggest that the life condition you described is one of "fighting over scraps". It's also... (I'm struggling to find the right words) really entitled in a materialistic way to suggest (correct me if this is not what you suggest) that it's unfair that almost nobody can move from the average station to the station of uber-wealthy. Who is owed the life of opulence? And who owes it to them? And how many people actually aspire to this extreme wealth, vs. recognize that there is a heck of a lot more meaningful things to do with life than make money?