Limitarianism

1. Extreme wealth concentration undermines democracy and fuels inequality

There is no point in simply relieving the symptoms while doing nothing to address the root cause of a problem.

Wealth buys political influence. The super-rich use their money to:

• Fund political campaigns
• Lobby for favorable policies
• Control media narratives
• Evade taxes through complex schemes

This creates a vicious cycle where:

• The wealthy shape laws and policies to their benefit
• Inequality grows as the rich get richer
• Democratic principles of political equality are eroded

Global impact: Wealth concentration isn't just a problem in individual countries. It allows a small global elite to wield enormous power over international economic systems, often at the expense of developing nations and the world's poor.

2. Much of the super-rich's wealth is "dirty money" acquired through unethical means

Suppose you work fifty hours a week, between the ages of twenty and sixty-five—week in, week out; year in, year out. How much would your hourly wage need to be so that, by the end, you'd have amassed $219 billion? The answer is $1,871,794 per hour.

Sources of "dirty money" include:

• Inheritance from unethical historical practices (e.g., slavery, colonialism)
• Exploitation of workers and unsafe labor practices
• Environmental destruction and pollution
• Tax evasion and complex avoidance schemes
• Corruption and cronyism
• Misleading marketing of harmful products

The wealth-defense industry helps the super-rich maintain their fortunes through complex legal and financial maneuvers. This industry of lawyers, accountants, and advisors exploits loopholes and creates elaborate structures to minimize taxes and shield assets from scrutiny.

Tainted legacies: Even seemingly philanthropic billionaires often built their fortunes on ethically questionable practices. The extreme accumulation of wealth inherently involves some degree of exploitation or unfair advantage.

3. No one truly "deserves" to be a multimillionaire or billionaire

Where exactly they drew that line did differ, however. About half of respondents held the view that a lifestyle that included a fancy villa, a modest second home, two luxury cars, three holidays a year and €200,000 in savings, was enough to lead a very good life with some luxuries.

Unearned advantages: Extreme wealth often results from:

• Inherited money and connections
• Luck and timing
• Societal infrastructure and collective knowledge
• Exploitation of others' labor

Talent and hard work alone don't justify billions. While some degree of inequality might be justified based on effort or skill, the current extreme levels cannot be morally defended. Studies show most people agree there's an upper limit to how much wealth is "enough" to live very well.

Declining marginal value of money: Beyond a certain point (estimates vary, but often around $1-10 million in assets), additional wealth does little to improve quality of life or happiness. The super-rich hoard resources that could dramatically improve the lives of others.

4. Extreme wealth drives climate change and environmental destruction

There is no way around it: almost all of us will be forced to adapt our current lifestyles.

Outsized carbon footprints: The lifestyles of the super-rich produce vastly more emissions than average:

• Private jets and yachts
• Multiple large homes
• Excessive consumption of goods

Vested interests in polluting industries: Many fortunes are tied to fossil fuels and other environmentally damaging sectors. This creates powerful resistance to necessary climate action.

Unequal impacts: While the wealthy contribute disproportionately to climate change, its worst effects often fall on the poor and vulnerable. Climate justice requires addressing wealth inequality.

5. Limitarianism: There should be an upper limit on individual wealth

Limitarianism holds that any affluent person should allocate wealth that they do not need for their own quality of life in a way that meets unmet needs, addresses collective-action problems, and tackles the structural injustices in a society.

Core principle: No individual needs or deserves wealth beyond what's required for a very good life. Excess wealth should be redirected to benefit society.

Proposed limits:

• Political limit: ~$10 million per person (to be enforced by policy)
• Ethical limit: ~$1 million per person (for personal giving)

Implementation: Limitarianism requires a combination of:

1. Structural changes to the economy
2. New tax policies
3. Shift in cultural values and individual choices

6. Philanthropy is not an adequate solution to wealth inequality

Philanthropy is not just about charitable giving, but also about plutocratic power.

Problems with relying on philanthropy:

• Undemocratic: Wealthy individuals decide priorities, not citizens
• Inefficient: Often focuses on symptoms, not root causes
• Self-serving: Can be used for tax avoidance or reputation-building
• Inadequate scale: Giving is dwarfed by ongoing wealth accumulation

Better alternatives:

• Progressive taxation
• Robust social programs
• Addressing systemic inequalities

Role for giving: While large-scale individual philanthropy is problematic, smaller-scale collective giving and mutual aid can play positive roles in communities.

7. Dismantling neoliberal ideology is crucial for creating a more equitable society

Neoliberalism propagates the view that we should implement "technocratic" solutions to problems, rather than solutions that emerge from democratic deliberation.

Neoliberal beliefs to challenge:

• Markets always know best
• Individualism over collective good
• Profit-seeking as highest virtue
• Government is inherently inefficient

Impacts of neoliberalism:

• Erosion of social safety nets
• Deregulation favoring corporations
• Privatization of public goods
• Growing wealth inequality

Reclaiming alternatives: We need robust public discourse on different economic models that prioritize human well-being and environmental sustainability over pure profit and growth.

8. Reducing wealth inequality would benefit everyone, including the rich

A world that accepted that the sky is not the limit—that there is only so much any one person should have—would be a world transformed.

Benefits of a more equal society:

• Greater social cohesion and trust
• Reduced crime and social unrest
• Improved public health outcomes
• More innovation and economic dynamism
• Environmental sustainability

Psychological benefits for the wealthy:

• Less anxiety about status and security
• Stronger community connections
• Sense of purpose beyond accumulation
• Healthier relationships, especially for their children

Averting instability: Extreme inequality historically leads to social upheaval. The wealthy have a vested interest in creating a more stable, equitable system.

9. Concrete policy changes are needed to limit extreme wealth accumulation

We need changes at all these different levels—in the stories we tell ourselves, in the culture of schools, businesses, and organizations, in the way we cooperate in society and internationally.

Key policy areas to address:

• Tax reform: Close loopholes, raise rates on extreme wealth
• Labor rights: Strengthen unions, improve working conditions
• Campaign finance: Limit money's influence in politics
• Inheritance: Cap lifetime gifts/inheritances
• Corporate governance: Increase worker representation

International cooperation: Tackling issues like tax havens requires global agreements and enforcement.

Cultural shift: Beyond policy, we need to change societal values around wealth, success, and the social contract. Education and media play crucial roles in shaping these narratives.

Last updated: August 11, 2024