Exploring an Extreme Wealth Line

Summary

Insights from political figures, policy experts, and millionaires on a threshold for harmful wealth It has long been accepted that there is a line beneath which people have too little to thrive or survive. In a period defined by rapidly growing wealth inequities, there is increasing discussion about whether we should also be asking how much is too much. At what point does wealth accumulation become excessive, unjust, or harmful? The concepts of a poverty line and an extreme wealth line (EWL) are not the same. One focuses on the minimum income, or the level of resources, required to access life’s essentials such as food, shelter, and clothing. The other considers whether there is a point beyond which the concentration of global wealth, such as income-generating land, properties, and financial assets, in the hands of relatively few people, is harmful – to individuals, to society, and to the environment. Drawing a line in either case has the potential to be highly contested, but also hugely impactful: it enables us as a society to discuss and reassess our tolerance for inequities and ultimately design better policies to tackle them. There is much evidence to suggest that we should. Wealth concentration has reached alarming levels. In the last decade, the richest 1% of humanity captured over 50% of all new global wealth. The top ten wealthiest people in the world now own more than the poorest three billion combined, and the average billionaire’s carbon footprint is one million times that of the average person. Meanwhile, growing wealth disparities are outpacing poverty reduction; if current trends continue, the world could witness its first trillionaire within this decade, while poverty won’t be eradicated for another 229 years. These figures point to a major policy gap in tackling wealth inequities, but the issue of extreme wealth has yet to receive the visibility and political attention it deserves. Society needs novel approaches to bring this complex topic to life, i...