Quote

In financial terms, my sense is that the distribution of wealth, unequal as it is, is self-perpetuating, and, especially in a linked and accelerating world, the rich get ever more quickly richer while the poor get ever more speedily poorer.

Redistribution of wealth would require enormous amounts of investment. The only time an elite has accepted this has been during crises, such as in America in the 1930s under Roosevelt.

Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants.

Many of the technologies that are now racing ahead most rapidly, replacing human workers in factories and offices with machines, making stockholders richer and workers poorer, are indeed tending to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth.

One of the great political and economic challenges of our time is figuring out the balance between wealth that benefits society and wealth that distorts.

The difference between rich and poor is becoming more extreme, and as income inequality widens the wealth gap in major nations, education, health and social mobility are all threatened.

Some degree of inequality in income and wealth, of course, would occur even with completely equal opportunity because variations in effort, skill, and luck will produce variations in outcomes.

The biggest obstacle to wealth is fear. People are afraid to think big, but if you think small, you'll only achieve small things.

Wealth after all is a relative thing since he that has little and wants less is richer than he that has much and wants more.

The key thing about wealth in a capitalist economy is that it reproduces itself and usually earns a positive net return.