[video=youtube;bOMksnSaAJ4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOMksnSaAJ4[/video]
The fundamental flaw in the way many people discuss economics is the assumption that wealth is some kind of fixed or finite resource.
Wealth is simply the concept of value. Wealth is generated by expressing one's value to society as a whole - IE - the more demand there is for one's skills or product, the more of their own wealth (value) people are willing to exchange for that service or product (generally speaking).
At the core of a society's wealth are things like food, shelter, clothing, and water - basic survival needs. Wealthy societies have individuals who are producing large sums of food that allow them to sell each individual 'meal' for a relatively low cost. This allows other people to focus less on supplying their own food and coming up with other things to spend their time doing (that the farmer is willing to trade with).
After the raw basics have been supplied, people begin finding value in materials for construction and the energy necessary to process those raw materials. Ores need to be smelted into metals that can be used for more durable tools and time-saving devices/inventions.
This is where the foundation of an economy resides - upon supplying the material needs for the ideas and ambitions of individuals. Any society should be able to easily produce its dietary and sheltering needs in abundance. There are a few exceptions to this, but if the Egyptians could build their own goddamned metropolis in the middle of a desert by manipulating the flow of rivers, then people can figure out solutions for their areas.
Wealth, therefor, is not a fixed asset nor is it a finite resource that is somehow 'owned' by society. It is an expression of individual capacity and capability.
Yes, sometimes this capacity is, as the economy grows, related to capital resources ('banking'), but this is simply a 'frill' or convenience of the collective wealth of a population.
When you realize that there really is nothing but the free action of human beings, then it becomes obvious why many of our contrived systems to control those free actions ultimately lead to a spectacular failure.
So, in the end, yes, it is a good thing for people with money to spend or save their money as they see fit. Market research has generally shown that some of the biggest spenders, in fact, are not 'wealthy' people, but enthusiasts who are willing to dedicate massive chunks of their budgets to specific high-end investments.
Do rich kids buy the super-duper high-end graphics card to plug into their computer? Maybe - but, more likely, it is the young bachelor who regularly saves to build himself a high end computer every few years. Similarly, it's not the "super rich people" who buy "whale packages" in MMOs - it is yet another average person who has decided that is what they wish to spend a thousand dollars on (or, whatever).
That doesn't mean that rich/wealthy people don't have expensive tastes, but that not all "things for the rich" result in stratification of the consumer market. A lot of high-dollar restaurants get their income from tourists - people who have committed to a once-in-a-year (perhaps once in a lifetime for that area of the world) expense, or perhaps once a month if they are local - a sort of "family treat."
When my friends and I get together from across the various towns we live in, we'll pick a restaurant that is new and/or different and eat there. We'll go hang out at an arcade or some place we'd normally never 'waste' money on. We've decided that we're going to spend x number of dollars and that's usually what we spend, give or take a bit.
Other times - we just hang out at someone's house and bring in stuff to cook/grill.
The point is that there is an attempt within the media to portray the world in terms of class. "These are low class poor people, these are middle class working people, and these are high class rich and wealthy people with desk jobs."
The reality is not in agreement with that perception, but that perception is necessary for statements like "we know middle class economics works" to sound intelligent in the slightest. Since almost everyone feels as though he/she is part of the middle class (even many of the 'poor people' and 'rich people' - depending upon who is setting those standards), the goal is to try and create a mythical victimized poor who are continually exploited and a privileged rich who are always doing the exploiting.
Because, somehow, the illiterate idiots who can't fill a food order are some vast resource to be exploited.
Meanwhile, the politicians use this message to gain control over the economy. They use it to determine how many business of what varieties can exist, who can own them, what those people should be paid, and whose ideas for a product should be followed up on. In essence, they wish to be able to direct the efforts of each and every human being under their jurisdiction because they are so enlightened and empowered as to know what we should be spending our time and resources on.
That is what the economic argument boils down to.
Either you believe that each person should have control over his/her own talents and decisions.
Or, you believe that a person is to be controlled by some individual or ideology as to what he/she should do with his/her talents.
There is a third option - where you don't believe anything. That is most people as they've never considered the issue and just try to vote or decide on whatever feels right for the moment. They usually end up being hoodwinked into slavery by con men known as politicians.
