A limit to wealth: that is what Ingrid Robeyns argues for in her latest tome entitled "Limitarism". According to the expert in political philosophy, extreme wealth is harmful to society, the planet and democracy. Moreover, she labels it as “often undeserved”. In her view, one million euros per person is more than enough to live on comfortably. Inheritance should be limited to 200,000 euros.
Wealth distribution is skewed, says Robeyns. This she explains using a simple but striking example. "Suppose you have 100 Belgians and 100 gold nuggets. One person owns 15 gold bars. The 9 people after that get 37 together. In other words: the 10 richest people in Belgium together own 52 gold nuggets. The next 40 people get 40 gold bars. That leaves only 8 gold bars for the 50 poorest people."
Everyone rich, no one too rich
Things could be organised in a better way, she believes. "Limitarism" - a term she herself has coined - may offer an answer. There is nothing wrong with people being rewarded for their work. However, according to the principle of limitarism, there should be a ceiling. "You can also be too rich. Where that limit lies can be drawn from the moment money no longer adds quality to your life. Roughly speaking, that is one million euros per person."
Robeyns realises that not everyone will agree. "Some people are simply driven by money. You also want them to be able to continue contributing to the economy. That is why I suggest an absolute upper limit of ten million euros. The idea is to design society so that you get wealth down to this amount." Everybody rich, nobody too rich, in other words.
Unearned inheritances
A wealth tax could help out, though Robeyns says that in a business context, you could also look at relationships between employers and employees, or at the money flowing to shareholders.
Another possibility is a restriction on inheritances. "Up to a maximum of 200,000 euros, for example," she suggests. "According to professor Dirk Van de gaer at Ghent University, 70 per cent of personal wealth comes from inheritances. Whether your attitude is liberal or socialist: you can always see this as unearned. It reproduces inequality and you get money for which you had to do absolutely nothing yourself."
Neither jealous nor communist
Robeyns stresses that she is not jealous of people with a lot of money - "I have more than enough myself", nor that she is communist. "Those are fallacies to stop the discussion," she says. However, according to the political philosophy professor, it is important to have a debate about the extent of personal wealth.
"Extreme wealth is harmful to society. Super-rich people pollute more and have a much greater impact on the climate. They also undermine democracy. America, where, for example, political figures are sponsored, is a great example of this. It is also very wasteful."
In writing her book, Robeyns spoke to a number of multimillionaires. "People who own 100 million euros or more. Of course, they do not represent all the super-rich - they are people who wanted to talk to me and are often activist-minded - but they were supportive of the idea."