Consumption has less external benefit than investment. Due to scale effects and diminishing marginal utility, consumption by the poor wins over consumption by the rich, and investment by the poor (i.e. a founder investing $10k into his own company) is more useful than investment by the rich (taking Apple's market cap from $500b to $500000010000). There are sound economic arguments for each.
I don't know if there's an economic argument for consumption by the poor being more economically efficient than investment by the rich, or for consumption > investment in general.
I don't know if there's an economic argument for consumption by the poor being more economically efficient than investment by the rich, or for consumption > investment in general.