The billionaires in my town are the Asplundhs, whose wealth derives from Asplundh Tree Company. Sure, their lives are a hell of a lot easier than mine.. but they can’t move a muscle without employing somebody, directly or indirectly.
Even the wealth they “hoard” benefits others in a thousand different ways. Their vast land holdings wind up being ecological preserves.. when I enjoy “the view”, or walk on the trail, is that their view or mine? Who cares.
Everything they spend, everything they invest in… everything they develop - every patch of wilderness they prevent from being developed - it all gets shared somehow whether they like it or not.
Of course its hard to see it that way when I compare their standard of living to mine. But “comparisons are odious” as my grandmother used to say.
It’s not healthy to covet - and anyway, many aspects of the world can’t be “owned” per se - even if they are owned ‘on paper’. In many cases, the owner can’t stop me from enjoying what they own, or wouldn’t even want to stop me.
In fact, often, the value of an asset owned by a billionaire is derived from its appeal to others. Disney World, for example - if millions of middle class people couldn’t enjoy it, it would have no value.
A lot of the best art in museums is (or was) owned by someone, but it winds up in a museum anyway, preserved where all can enjoy it.
It it really easier… or just different?