> Wealthy people have taken disproportionately from society
This seems like an uncharitable statement. In many cases (although maybe not the majority), the wealth generated is additive to society and and not "taken" because it might never have existed otherwise.
Consider PayPal. Did the development of PayPal take or give to society? It seems to me that it increased the wealth of everyone both in a direct sense and also indirectly through the enablement of large scale secondary and long-tail economies in Ebay.
This statement isn't to suggest a reason for "tax breaks to the wealthy," only to offer an alternative theory to "taken disproportionately."
This seems like an uncharitable statement. In many cases (although maybe not the majority), the wealth generated is additive to society and and not "taken" because it might never have existed otherwise.
Consider PayPal. Did the development of PayPal take or give to society? It seems to me that it increased the wealth of everyone both in a direct sense and also indirectly through the enablement of large scale secondary and long-tail economies in Ebay.
This statement isn't to suggest a reason for "tax breaks to the wealthy," only to offer an alternative theory to "taken disproportionately."