>>
>>Another article I found says that Brits pay 45% on income above 150,000 pounds, so I'd say giving Rowling money is actually not a bad way to spend it.
>>
>
>I think you missed the point. I simply used that as an example because the topic is so well-known.
>
>Vast majority of the time, people don't purchase with their conscience - they purchase for their own benefit (or benefit of friends, family, etc.). I am sure there are many who gripe about WalMart execs, but still shop there. (I try to avoid the place because I think they sell junk, the stores are often dirty and smelly, and the parking lots are a nightmare).
>
>They generally don't care if they are funding the owner of the company, the country where the product was produced, or indirectly the people on welfare who wind up benefiting from the high taxes someone pays. Pretentious Hollywood phones like George Clooney can gripe all the want about social economic injustices, but his own actions in life are far more selfish.

As I think you know, I'm working hard to be more thoughtful about that kind of stuff, to live my values.

>
>Not all wealthy people are doing to do with Rowling does. So my original point remains - unless people want to disconnect themselves from basic consumer markets, they ARE contributing to "pay inequity".
>
>And by the way, I'll come out openly and say it - there is nothing at all inherently wrong with income inequality. "Equal" is unfair. And that's a segue to a book that should be required reading: :)

I have no problem with the idea that different people have different incomes. But it's clear that we've reached a point where the amount of inequality in the system isn't good for anyone. I started to add "but the wealthiest" at the end of that sentence, but realized that even for them, while it may be good in the short run, the level of inequality right now isn't good for them in the long run.

I assume you've seen the video mentioned in this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/03/06/this-viral-video-is-right-we-need-to-worry-about-wealth-inequality/. Inequality is not only way out of what Americans consider reasonable balance, but way out of what they think it is.

Side note: if you ever get the chance to hear Dan Ariely speak, grab it. He's a terrific speaker and the research he does (on a variety of issues in behavioral economics) is fascinating. In fact, if you haven't read "Predicatably Irrational," highly recommended.
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Equal-Unfair-Americas-Misguided-Inequality/dp/125008444X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1461777857&sr=8-1&keywords=yaron+brook

Looked at the link. I imagine that reading something book-length from two people at the Ayn Rand Institute would make me miserable to live with while doing so. If you can point to something article-length, I'll try to plow through.

Tamar