I almost agree. "Why do you rob banks?" "Because that's where the money is."

We really need to ask what and where value is instead of money. For example: the price of a house is "location, location, location", but the real value lies in whether a person has a place to shelter them and they can be useful to that place. Billionaires are being made out of the anti-usefulness of competing consumptionism. So, we take all their money and then what? Try doing the same thing all over, but with richer consumers and a poorer environment?

The basic problem is believing we should be competing over things that don't contribute to our places or our children's future places, or each other.

The money that the rich hold doesn't have value if the poor stop trying to be like the rich (moneyed consumers). The rich got rich by convincing the middle that Enough is never enough, and convincing the poor that only money determines value. The biggest churches are often in the poorest places. Why? Because wealth is a belief marketing process. It's been developed over thousands of years to maximize the number of competing losers("Pro-Life!!") in order to put a few winners on top of landfill pyramids. Laborers and gladiators are convinced that the only merit to their lives is in 'serving' (serfing) those who are 'special'. A competing scheme always arises along with the pyramid/stock market/castle: forming a mob to "make things more equal", but humans don't form mobs and churches to be generous in care for the soil and water (not successfully competitive ones, anyway). Eventually, the local cooperative is overpowered by the global market: with bullies in charge.

Boom, bust, boom, bust until death do humans part from consumptionism.