The global recession is increasing economic inequality in countries. Most philosophers, politicians, and businessmen make billions, and there is no stopping them. Economic limitarianism is the idea that focuses on risks and effects if one is excessively wealthy. It also explores the harms of having too much rather than focusing on poverty or sharing with the poor. The theory suggests that putting a limit on how much wealth a single person can have is not a punishment. Instead, it encourages positive social improvements in the population and the economic system. A few million dollars adds to the happiness to some extent but after that, it doesn’t have the same effect on the person. The theory doesn’t break down how much money a person can accumulate or doesn’t suggest a limit for how much money is too much for a person.

Where Did The Idea Come From?

Ingrid Robeyns, a Belgian theorist, researches and teaches philosophy focusing on social justice, ethics, and political philosophy. She presented the idea of economic limitarianism at a conference in 2012. Since then, she has been working tirelessly talking, publishing papers, and writing a book on the issue. The theory is much more than just discussing income inequality; it’s more about morality and when it is crucial to intervene in an economic system for the benefit of society as a whole.

Limitarianism worries that democracy can be undermined because of inequality. The rich can influence politicians, lobbyists, and lawmakers through their money to get things in their favor. If this doesn’t work, they can pay media houses to influence public opinion in their favor. Economic limitarianism also assumes that a better distribution of wealth would lead to a better quality of life for most people. Those living in extreme poverty can benefit greatly from the addition of money rather than the rich who have accumulated wealth.

Robeyns says that it’s not only about money; the theory suggests that the rich can be a danger to the environment as they create CO2 footprints. It wouldn’t be wrong to say that the material lifestyle of the rich is ecologically harmful. One can argue that it’s only fair that the excess money that the rich possess should be used to address climate issues. The government can use some money from the rich to invest in renewable energy sources or improve technology that can help all citizens. Some critics suggest that companies should have limitations, too.

However, philosophers and economists disagree with the idea of creating a wealth limit. They feel that there should be no limit to wealth earned or inherited. Moreover, they argue that limiting wealth will not finish political inequality. A progressive tax system is a solution to this problem. Yet the problem still seems to exist: the rich are getting richer. According to a survey conducted by Forbes in the year 2022, it found that more than 1000 billionaires became richer than they were a year ago.

The real problem is implementing this theory, yet Robeyen feels that by presenting her ideas, she is still able to change the perspective of many people.