> But, as the fine original article basically says, that doesn't make it wrong to want to redistribute the wealth. It won't replace other things, like a more equitable distribution of income, but it sure helps.
Show me the math. Redistribute it how? Help who, and help them how?
> The problem is equity. Not only in it's economic meaning, in its social context. We don't really need equality, we need an equitable outcome. And there is no way that Musk being paid $54b for his actions in control of his companies, is equitable, no matter how legal, proper or permitted in law it is.
If you mean equity in an economic sense, then it's perfectly equitable for a company with >=$54b in assets to transfer <=$54b to an individual. That individual will then pay income tax on said transfer, further funding the development of the society.
If you mean "equitable" as in "fair", then that's a value judgment - something is equitable because people feel it is equitable, not because of any objective measure. Even me personally, whatever wealth I have today I only have because I happened to be born within a particular country's borders and not another. Is that equitable?
We'd get farther as a society focused on solving the real problems in people's everyday lives, not focused on the people who have things we don't have.