Okay so before I begin.
*Without Prejudice*
A wealth cap is an interesting concept, and I appreciate that you’re thinking critically about solutions to systemic inequality. It’s an incredibly complex issue, and while I don’t claim to have the perfect answer, there are a few challenges with any sweeping proposal like this.
First, history teaches us that no system—whether capitalism, communism, or something else—escapes the flaws of human bias. Systems are created and maintained by people, and people are hardwired for self-preservation. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it often leads to power imbalances, corruption, and the erosion of fairness over time. Governments entrusted with immense power—like those that might enforce a wealth cap—have often left the majority powerless. Egypt, Rome, the Soviet Union, and even modern examples like China—tyranny, no matter how well-intentioned, has always failed in the long run.
A wealth cap, as you describe, raises similar concerns. While it might address inequality on paper, it places a lot of trust in governing bodies to act as neutral arbiters of wealth distribution. History has shown us that this trust is rarely justified, as those in power often fail to balance fairness with opportunity. There’s also the practical challenge of what we’re defining as wealth. As Green Genius pointed out earlier, being declared a billionaire doesn’t mean someone has a billion dollars in cash. Much of that wealth is tied up in assets—investments, businesses, and properties that also contribute to the broader economy. How do you tax or cap something like that without risking broader consequences, like discouraging innovation or dismantling social mobility?
What resonates with me more than these top-down solutions is the idea of pragmatism. Let me clarify—I’m not saying pragmatism is the solution. It’s just what I’ve found works for me personally. I’ve come to realise that navigating the system, however flawed, requires leveraging the tools we already have: financial literacy, education, and opportunities that are accessible to most people if they know where to look. That doesn’t mean the system is fair or that everyone has equal access—but the resources are out there, and they’ve helped me carve out a path forward.
Financial literacy is one area where I think we could make a real difference. Teaching people how to budget, invest, and understand the economy empowers them to navigate this “rat race” more effectively. Capital gains taxes, offshore accounts, and loopholes used by the wealthy are real issues, and addressing them at a systemic level would help. But for individuals trying to get ahead, the key is to understand the system and make it work for you where possible.
I also want to acknowledge the human element here. I’ve been painted as the “bad guy” for challenging certain ideals, but the truth is, the injustices caused by systemic flaws break my heart as much as anyone else’s. I’ve seen the pain they cause, and it’s that pain that fuels my perspective. I’m not blind to the problems—we all see them. But replacing one flawed system with another isn’t the answer. It’s why I think any real solution needs to go beyond politics or human governance.
In the long run, I believe we need something neutral and sustainable—something that transcends human bias entirely. AI and technology might play a role in creating such a system, but even that is far from perfect. For now, the best we can do is keep having conversations like this, stay open to new ideas, and push for systemic reforms that address inequality without losing sight of opportunity.
Pragmatism has worked for me, and I believe it can work for others too—with the right education and access to financial tools. It’s not about compliance; it’s about making the most of what’s available while we advocate for a better future.