Just think about what would happen if wealth were redistributed. Instead of an obscenely rich elite class, we would have an evenly spread out "global middle class" where everyone had the same average living standard as a Russian.
This would be horrendous for the environment. Income inequality is great for global warming, because it concentrates wealth into the hands of a few, and there's only so much consumption these few people can do.
Having 5% of your population (global elites) own 90% of the wealth is great, because it prevents the other billions of people in Europe/India/China from eating meat, living in larger houses, and engaging in general wastage.
Imagine if we did wealth redistribution in the US, and gave tons of money from the 5% to the bottom 30%. People would become rich enough to move out of cities and buy houses in rural areas. They would buy bigger houses, they would drive more, they'd buy more lamb/beef instead of pork/chicken, they'd leave the lights on longer. This does way more damage to the environment than 5% of the population owning mansions.
This would be horrendous for the environment. Income inequality is great for global warming, because it concentrates wealth into the hands of a few, and there's only so much consumption these few people can do.
Having 5% of your population (global elites) own 90% of the wealth is great, because it prevents the other billions of people in Europe/India/China from eating meat, living in larger houses, and engaging in general wastage.
Imagine if we did wealth redistribution in the US, and gave tons of money from the 5% to the bottom 30%. People would become rich enough to move out of cities and buy houses in rural areas. They would buy bigger houses, they would drive more, they'd buy more lamb/beef instead of pork/chicken, they'd leave the lights on longer. This does way more damage to the environment than 5% of the population owning mansions.
