Ok, let's forget the crooks who get wealth they haven't worked for.

Now my believe is that for you to be extremely wealthy, self-made, then you either do it in one of two ways, you own a product or service that people really want or you manipulate the system ie find loopholes in the system and manipulate.

@2012, I'd like to hazard the following assertion: It is impossible to be a billionaire by simply providing what people need at a price, and without taking advantage of loopholes in government and society.

On the other hand, I'd like you to share some names of billionaires who break this rule.

A few from the top of my head, Oprah Winfrey, J.K. Rowling Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffet, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Kenyan: Narendra Raval, SK. Macharia.

All I'm saying is that the thought of us or our children believing that you cannot make your dreams come true through honest means would be sad.

I am back, @2012

First, to my surprise, my odds of being a billionaire are higher than I expected. I was groomed since childhood, I passed adolescence with my script safe, by 25 I had laid the foundations of 'my greatness'. And I am in more agreement with my father There are only a few moves to go, and inshallah, I am likely to join the billionaires club.

But still on the other hand, I am convinced that being of an exclusive economic class and having more wealth than others is immoral and unethical. For this I will turn to Dienes's idea of 'Psychological wealth' and Plato's Republic as key evidence along with other aspects of reason and truth, and of course, the general trend in history.

Moreover, my assertion that billionairehood entails crookedness, of price and social responsibility stands.

The main argument given for the validity of the billionaire class is given by Gregory Mankiw, a Havard prof who wrote 'In defence of the 1%'.

In this paper, Mankiw posits that billionaires earn their money justly from their respective marginal productivity.

Firstly, marginal productivity isn't easily and objectively determined. For example a book written by Rowling under a pseudonym won't be priced the same way if the name Rowling is on the cover.

Besides, does marginal productivity increase or decrease with time? Do prices reflect expected change accordingly? In my estimation MP is supposed to decrease, other factors held constant.

Again, accumulation of wealth necessarily means the use of surplus value for capital investment. Where does surplus value arise if all are paid 'by their deserts?'

Some of the answers to these questions are given by Didier Jacobs of Oxfam, in his 'Extreme wealth is unmerited'. In this work we are shown the ladder that makes for the billionaire class. The ladder is made of crime, cronyism, inheritance, monopoly, globalization and technology. In this case, the higher you go, the more the crime is sanitized.

For instance, Mankiw alludes to the unequal distribution of wealth in the US since 1970 due to uneven skills development. But think of how these skills are researched on and distributed within a population. The rich take their children to elite schools and prescribe lesser education for the masses. Just like in our new CBC curriculum.

The social organization needed to prop the mythology of price and economics is steeped in falsehood and false promises.