All of us actually. Quite badly.

There aren't 10 wealthy people. There's about 12 million millionaire households in this country. That's not even discussing the generational implications of that. Young couple in their 20s or 30s that don't have a lot of wealth themselves, but can fallback onto a parental group to help them. There's only ~210 million people > 18 years of age. 12 million households is a lot even when you start excluding people based on being cash poor (locked up in long-term bonds, most of it is housing appreciation, etc).

These people generally can afford their own health care, they have good health outcomes even when they get COVID (access to health care, diet, general healthiness, etc). They likely already have jobs that they can do remotely & generally minimize contact with other people indoors via food delivery services & whatnot.

We're already prioritizing lots of "famous" people because they need to help the media get the message out. I find this argument questionable but at least it's plausible & I haven't researched the data/case studies on this. The rest of us need to wait. We need to make sure that we're prioritizing those people who are likely to GET COVID multiplied by their expected likelihood of how many people they'd infect & somehow score that against their personal risk for fatality. In a list like that I'd expect elderly homes to get the most attention. Very susceptible as we have seen in the reports. Doctors & nurses would be lower as they have access to healthcare, they have great access to high quality handling of COVID, etc.

These are the guidelines I would use. Then I'd have the candidate groups vote amongst themselves in terms of who they think should have priority. If there's a nurse there that's well like & is working two jobs that have them in contact with large population groups because of shitty pay, let that information source bubble up to the overall organizational level. Then from those loops have cut-offs (i.e. everyone this spot & below gets the next batch because there's more needy people elsewhere). As you vaccinate more of a group then you end up having better heard immunity. As you vaccinate more people who travel between groups regularly, you decrease the speed of disease spread.

There are ways to do this fairly & efficiently. The problem is how to fight the innate selfishness we all have where we look with either missing or partial data & complete the gaps in a way that happens to benefit the group I'm in in some way. At the extremes you have those who are willing to do it blatantly & pay bribes to get advantage over their fellow being. At the other it's "we have to use famous/powerful people to advertise!", or "sell to the rich!" which again promote ways of privileging the people who make these decisions & their friend networks. This kind of flawed thinking is eating apart American society. We need to be focused downward. How can we best help those less fortunate than ourselves. We need to get them to the poorest & most vulnerable the fastest. They're suffering from it the most & are likely to be in housing conditions or working conditions that keep the disease alive longer. Why is this important? The disease has a fantastic opportunity to mutate if vaccine doesn't perfectly contain it. Think Spanish Flu that turned into the annual flu. Or we can roll the dice again on this thing. YOLO?