When people talk about income disparity, its usually framed as a fairness issue. Which sounds perfectly legitimate as long as you’re in among the 99%, or believe your interests are those of the 99%.
For those who’ll never have to rub elbows with the rest of us, or for those temporarily embarassed millionaires who aspire to not have to care once their ship arrives-fairness is a terribly abstract concept that doesn’t really take hold in the conscience the way “normal” people might expect.
This is why (among other reasons, like being aspie as hell) I favor arguments having to do with design theory, over moral responsibility. While its much less pronounced, the rich are also inconvenienced when the rest of us die avoidable deaths, they certainly don’t twirl their moustaches and cackle.(excepting outliers like dick cheney)
Giving a tiny minority sole access to design issues that impact everyone is poor design. The richest of us are not as smart as all of us, and in a lot of ways they’re even dumber than the poorest of us.
What keeps the revolution from swooping in and wiping the slate clean and making everything different if not better, is the percieved inconvenience of it all. We’re conditioned to feel as if things will improve on their own if we just give the system a chance, and clinging to that false hope is far more convenient than jumping in taking risks, and trusting ourselves and each other to know our own best interests.
