Small group of people (investors and early employees) pull in a ton of money while a big group of people (restaurant owners and employees) face worse economic outcomes.
Similarly, private mkt investors get insane outcomes while retail investors end up buying at peak prices and less information.
I'm not saying what DD did was unfair or unethical. We're just moving quickly to a very unequal society and this is a small ex of how that's happening
1. When this gets too extreme people start to ignore whether it is fair, logical or right, and respond with rage. People who have to close down, or feel poor, while they see a small group get crazy rich don’t care about economic theory, they just feel that something is wrong. Politicians use that rage to get elected and ‘fight for the people’, often implementing harmful policies to please angry crowds.
2. Australia has minimized this problem pretty well by having a pretty unregulated economy but a robust safety net.
"[a] Stanford professor posits that throughout history, economic inequality has only been rectified by one of the 'Four Horsemen of Leveling': warfare, revolution, state collapse and plague."[1]
You can hang on to imaginative phrases like "inequality of opportunity" or an economy that reliably delivers food. I think most people are going to go with the second option.
Similarly, private mkt investors get insane outcomes while retail investors end up buying at peak prices and less information.
I'm not saying what DD did was unfair or unethical. We're just moving quickly to a very unequal society and this is a small ex of how that's happening