The greatest success of the Occupy movement has been to make people realize that the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a few is not healthy for society. The image of 99% vs. 1% seems to have caught the attention of a public which up till now has been swindled by dreams of either joining the rich or by one day being able to share in some of the wealth through the trickle-down process.

Now that mass consciousness is beginning to change, it is important for progressives to offer solutions to the problems caused by a lopsided economic system.  Indeed, people who look at protest movements sometimes say “We know what you are against, but what are you for?”

In this spirit, I would like to offer what could be one part of a comprehensive program that would bring about a more healthy economic system, and it is something which might seem controversial and far-fetched today, but hopefully will become the norm in the future.  I think it is time to put limits on the accumulation of individually owned wealth.

When it comes to alleviating poverty and correcting social inequalities liberals have always talked about things such as a proper minimum wage and a social safety net, in the form of healthcare, unemployment insurance and other measures.  They say that no one should be allowed to fall under the poverty line, that there should be a floor in our collective house which no one is allowed to slip under.

This is certainly a noble concept, one which I support, but the glaring social inequalities and economic injustice which has brought the demonstrators out on the streets can never be solved only by concentrating our efforts on traditional anti-poverty legislation aimed at shoring up the floor of the economic system.  Rather it is more important to start thinking about putting a ceiling on our economic house.

The ceiling that I talk about is a ceiling on individual wealth accumulation.  Presently the sky is the limit. Anyone can accumulate as much wealth as he or she possibly can. Selfish accumulation of wealth, we are told, is the engine that drives the economic system, and that one day the wealth that is accumulated by the people at the top will trickle down to everyone else.

Trickle-down economics is a myth. Around the world a small number of people own and control a disproportionate amount of wealth. This unequal distribution of wealth leads to all kinds of social and economic problems including poverty, starvation, crime, social disruption, and more.  The greed of a few is not healthy for the wider society (ED).

The solution to this problem is not to enact a maximum wage bill or even a maximum income bill. Such measures would only address part of the problem, and leave a few people with their wealth intact. Rather it is time for a more drastic measure: establish the upper limit on individual wealth holdings, and to confiscate and redistribute the excess wealth.

If you have read this far, you might think that I am a raving lunatic. If a wealth cap was even proposed the super-rich would be up in arms.  They can barely stand it when someone even suggests that their taxes be raised a little, what to speak of confiscation and redistribution.
Valtrex
Not only do the rich and super rich go ballistic when anyone raises the wealth issue in public, but middle class people in the USA also take their side. A lot of people really believe that one day they too will be very wealthy and fight for the rights of the wealthiest few to continue grabbing all that they can.

I am well aware that the proposal to cap wealth in this country or anywhere else is not something that will be easily adopted, but sooner or later, when people come to their senses and really understand the root causes of our present economic problems, I am confident that they will whole heartedly agree with the Indian philosopher and activist, P.R. Sarkar who in 1959 declared “No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission and approval of the collective society.”