The wealth of the 1% should be distributed between the working classes.

'Credit Suisse, a financial services company, published a report' Please cite the report as without any proof I can't argue against what you say, although I will try regardless. Now you say that the top 1% have more wealth than the bottom 99% combined. You also say that the richest 62 saw their wealth increase whilst the others did not. Now this may very well be true. However we must ask ourselves why. Why is it that the wealth of the poorest in society has fallen by such an enormous amount? Is it because the rich stole their money? Of course not, for starters the numbers don't add up. The top 1% saw an increase in wealth of 542 billion, however the poor lost 1 trillion. That is 458 billion dollars unaccounted for. Where did the money go? I propose that the money was lost in the bureaucracy of big government. Attempts by government to increase wealth and opportunity have inevitably failed. State schools are turning out people with awful qualifications, if any. Wealth is made by opportunity as you alluded to in your second paragraph, however this opportunity very often is regulated by the government. It is no use saying that we must simply throw more money at the system. After all, who would redistribute wealth but the government that has already failed its people? 'student loan debt has an inverse effect on economic growth' Student loan does indeed affect economic growth, but why? Many US universities are public universities and so the debt graduates have are paid to the government, which then procedes to waste it. Private universities however are able to improve their services and provide a better education by the tuition fees. Indeed the working classes have a lot of difficulty, especially in the black community, to get the education they need and so the qualifications required to start on the job ladder. However this will not be helped by simply throwing money at them. Schools need radical improvement, which is a failure of government, not the top 1%. To say we must then take the money from the 1% is silly, as there is no guarantee it would lead to better schools. 'members of the working class predominately receive a fixed wage' Any proof? Plus if you aspire to higher pay, high productivity will often lead to promotions and so higher pay. Hard work in a private company can definitely lead to higher pay. Are you honestly saying that a job in the public sector pays you more, the more work you do? Can you honestly say that a job in the local council will pay you more than another for putting in a bit more work? The only extra pay you can expect for hard work in the public sector, which so happens to be the same in the private sector, is being paid more for working overtime. To conclude, in spite of money being pilfered by bosses, can you deny that those who work for the company have a better quality of life than those in other countries? Is the system that we have not infinitely better than that in say the Soviet Union? You complain that people are being robbed, all the while their quality of life is getting better and better every century. I would repeat the point that a rich man who invests his money in other companies increases the number of jobs they can provide, and improves their output, which in turn provides services for the people. To take away their money would do nothing but have it wasted in government bureaucracy and decimate the private sector, leading to fewer jobs, and fewer services.