For most people, thinking about ten thousand euros is simple: it is the amount that can represent savings, a small investment, or a goal that has been achieved with difficulty. But if we start multiplying that sum, the perception changes rapidly.
The average wealth of a person in Italy, according to available data, is around 220 thousand euros. A figure that already seems like a lot of wealth compared to 10 thousand euros, but which appears much (much!) lower when compared to a million.
However, although it is a figure far from the pockets of most people, we can still imagine what it means to have a million euros. But what if the figure goes up?
To understand the proportions, you need to think about how much larger a billion actually is compared to a million: 1 million seconds is equivalent to 11 and a half days, 1 billion seconds is instead 31 years and eight months.
And if we think about the large assets of the super-rich – from Taylor Swift with 1.7 billion dollars to Warren Buffett with 150 billion, up to Elon Musk with around 450 billion – these are on a scale that our minds can hardly conceive.
Because it’s hard to conceive of billions
The human brain is not made to process numbers of this magnitude. This is why, to understand the disproportion, we need to compare different levels of wealth.
A billion is not simply “a lot of money”: it is a sum that opens the door to immense economic and political power, capable of influencing markets, institutions and even democratic life.
Growing inequality
The concentration of wealth is not just a symbolic fact. Year after year, a smaller and smaller number of people control a growing share of global wealth.
This has two main consequences:
- Democratic imbalance: those with more money also have more possibilities to finance parties, campaign, lobby and buy media, influencing in a very direct way the political decisions and the information that reaches voters.
- Artificial scarcity: large assets tend to remain concentrated, rather than circulate in the real economy. This creates social inequalities and deficiencies that often do not correspond to a real lack of resources.
Concrete examples
Just think about food: the world produces enough to feed not only the entire population, but also two billion more people. Yet, in 2023, one in 11 people suffered from hunger (WHO data).
Or again, the case of the United States: in 2024 there were 770 thousand homeless people, compared to 15 million unoccupied homes. A paradox that highlights how wealth, although it exists, is not redistributed in such a way as to respond to the real needs of society.
What future?
The issue is not just about ethics, but about economic and social sustainability. A system that concentrates immense wealth in a few hands ends up generating imbalances that are difficult to manage and growing tensions in the community fabric.
For this reason, more and more economists and institutions underline the importance of redistribution policies: fair fiscal instruments, significant taxation of mega-rich individuals, strategic public investments, efficient welfare.
In other words, we need a model that allows wealth – generated collectively – to benefit the community, instead of accumulating without limits in the hands of a very few.
