Limitarianism
= In a nutshell, economic limitarianism holds the view that no one should hold surplus money, which is defined as the money one has over and above what one needs for a fully flourishing life. [1]
Contextual Quote
In answering the multidisciplinary question what, if anything, is wrong with a society in which some are very wealthy, I would like to propose a view in this literature on the pattern of distributive justice, called Economic Limitarianism (Robeyns 2017). In a nutshell, economic limitarianism holds the view that no one should hold surplus money, which is defined as the money one has over and above what one needs for a fully flourishing life. Limitarianism as an ethical or political view is, in a certain sense, symmetrical to the view that there is a poverty line and that no one should fall below this line. Limitarianism claims that one can theoretically construct a riches line and that a world in which no one would be above the riches line would be a better world."
(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19452829.2019.1633734)
More information
* Article: What, if Anything, is Wrong with Extreme Wealth? By Ingrid Robeyns. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities. A Multi-Disciplinary Journal for People-Centered Development, Volume 20, 2019 - Issue 3 doi
URL = https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19452829.2019.1633734
Abstract:
"This paper proposes a view, called limitarianism, which suggests that there should be upper limits to the amount of income and wealth a person can hold. One argument for limitarianism is that superriches can undermine political equality. The other reason is that it would be better if the surplus money that superrich households have were to be used to meet unmet urgent needs and local and global collective action problems. A particular urgent case of the latter is climate change. The paper discusses one objection to limitarianism, and draws some conclusions for society, as well as for the human development paradigm and the capability approach."