Wealth IS the accumulation of resources and it is naturally unequally distributed. From Oxford's Dictionary: "1 An abundance of valuable possessions or money." "1.1 The state of being rich; material prosperity."
Only considering raw, natural resources, are they not distributed unequally around the world? Some regions have naturally more forests than iron deposits, for example.
If you dissolved society (perhaps a la hunter-gatherers) would not there still be differences? Perhaps one is faster and would collect more berries than his brother, etc, etc...
You are correct in that there might policies that might lead to increased wealth and others that will reduce it. However how would you propose to "police" superyachts?
Furthermore, what makes you think that consumption and the fulfilling of human needs (including superyachts; billionaires must need them otherwise nobody would build them) is not behind technological innovation? I was going to say Economics might substantiate this claim, but I think it is self-apparent. Otherwise what would be the driver of innovation?
Hunter-gatherers usually share what with each other whether they want to or not; not sharing, especially with kin, is the kind of anti-social activity that will get you kicked out of the group and having to fend for yourself on your own in the wild.
It is a social fact because ownership is a social fact, not a natural fact.
Only considering raw, natural resources, are they not distributed unequally around the world? Some regions have naturally more forests than iron deposits, for example.
If you dissolved society (perhaps a la hunter-gatherers) would not there still be differences? Perhaps one is faster and would collect more berries than his brother, etc, etc...
You are correct in that there might policies that might lead to increased wealth and others that will reduce it. However how would you propose to "police" superyachts?
Furthermore, what makes you think that consumption and the fulfilling of human needs (including superyachts; billionaires must need them otherwise nobody would build them) is not behind technological innovation? I was going to say Economics might substantiate this claim, but I think it is self-apparent. Otherwise what would be the driver of innovation?