In the United States, wealth inequality is detrimental to democratic ideals.

Wealth inequality" has become an important issue and separating it from income inequality during this debate is extremely useful. The terms wealth and income inequality are often conflated. Inequality.org states "wealth inequality can be described as the unequal distribution of assets within a population". This organization then adds "We equate wealth with 'net worth,' the sum total of your assets minus liabilities. Whereas, inequality.org also states the following about income inequality, "Income includes the revenue streams from wages, salaries, interest on a savings account, dividends from shares of stock, rent, and profits from selling something for more than you paid for it. Income inequality refers to the extent to which income is distributed in an uneven manner among a population." This separation of terms is extremely important, a person can be wealthy will a low income or vice versa. An example of each, an unmarried farmer that has wealth that is tied up in land and equipment. The farmer's income can be very little, thus wealthy with a low income. A second example is a high paid young married doctor with large student debt. This doctor earns a high income but income is used to pay down debt and care for a family, therefore high income but not wealthy. Wealth can also be looked at as capital accumulation, that is the act, process or result of creating or increasing the supply of capital goods(mises.org). Once wealth has been created it can only be transferred. If the transfer is voluntary, society will benefit but if coercion is the method of transfer society has been harmed. Capital accumulation should also be separated into how the capital was acquired. If capital was accumulated by expropriation, coercion, fraud, or special treatment of government, that wealth is unjust. Capital accumulated by serving another person through voluntary exchanges of goods or services would be just wealth. Poverty is also a different issue. "Democratic ideas" in the United States can only be defined as the ideas of the country's founding documents. Ideas of inalienable rights that expressly include life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but include imply rights of, property, voluntarily exchange, freely associate, and many other unstated negative rights. "Democratic ideas" would also include the idea of self-ownership and theft of a person's property is immoral. Liberty defined as freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice, is vital to American "democratic ideas". 1) Wealth from just sources benefits all of society regardless of distribution Capital accumulation is the source of modern prosperity without capital almost everyone would be subsistence farmers attempting to survive daily. Capital has enabled people to specialize and trade with others to improve the general welfare. Let's suppose that 75% of capital in America was controlled by a handful of extremely greedy individuals. These greedy people are constantly trying to gain more capital to become even more wealthy. To satisfy their greed these individuals must provide a product or service that others are willing to purchase. When coercion is not involved a rich person must serve others, and others must create products or services that others value. All of this creation causes even more capital to enter the economy which betters all of society. With more and more wealth being created those greedy individuals will have their wealth diluted to a lower percentage. 2) One person's wealth causes no harm to others This is a simple concept, one person having more than other does no harm to anyone else. Some might argue that how others use wealth can cause harm. When coercion is left out, and wealth can only be used in voluntary exchanges. A person should be able to purchase the best possible good or service, from healthcare to education to automobiles. All goods and services should be treated equally as long as the exchange is voluntary. Others might attempt to connect inequities in political and justice systems outcomes to wealth, any connection is corruption within systems not of wealth. America's political system has become a system of laws to benefit a few at the price of the many and the justice system is a revenue source for government. Wealth is not the source problem! 3) Wealth from unjust methods is the source of much resentment, this will be covered in the next round due to space limitations. In conclusion, wealth derived through just sources regardless of distribution is not a threat to democratic ideas, this wealth is the source of a society's prosperity. It is the abandonment of democratic ideas that cause unjust wealth to be transferred by immoral means of government.