Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
In different cultures, people often struggle with whether they have enough or not. Wealth A blessing, a burden or a moral problem.
According to our new Researchhow does one see billionaires just not about EconomicsThe decision also depends on certain cultural and moral tendencies, which help explain why the opinion is given. Property Very polarized.
The study, which my colleague Mohammad Attari and I published in the research journal PNAS Nexus in June 2025, examined survey data from more than 4,300 people in 20 countries. We found that while most people around the world do not strongly condemn having “too much money”, there are cultural differences.
In wealthier, economically more equal countries, such as Switzerland and Belgium, people were more likely to say that having too much money is immoral. In poorer and more unequal countries like Peru or Nigeria, people view wealth accumulation as more acceptable.
Beyond economics, we found that decisions about extreme wealth are also shaped by deep moral intuitions. Our study is based on moral foundation theory, which proposes that people’s sense of right and wrong is built on six core values – caring, equality, proportionality, loyalty, authority, and sanctity.
We found that people who value equality and purity highly tend to view excessive wealth as bad.
The result of equality was expected, but the role of purity was more surprising. Sanctity is usually associated with ideas of cleanliness, purity, or avoiding contamination – so finding that it is associated with negative thoughts about wealth gives new meaning to the phrase “dirty rich.”
As a social psychologist who studies morality, culture, and technology, I am interested in how these types of decisions vary across groups and societies.
Social and institutional systems interact with individual moral beliefs, shaping how people view culture war issues like wealth and inequality – and in turn, how they engage with the policies and conflicts emerging around them.
Get free fractional shares worth up to £100.
Capital at risk.
terms and Conditions apply.
Advertisement
Get free fractional shares worth up to £100.
Capital at risk.
terms and Conditions apply.
Advertisement
why it matters
The influence of billionaires in politics, technology and global development is increasing. According to Oxfam, an organization that focuses on fighting poverty, the richest 1% of people on Earth own more wealth than the combined wealth of 95% of people.
However, efforts to address inequality by taxing or regulating the rich may be based on a false assumption – that the public generally condemns excessive wealth. If most people consider wealth accumulation morally justifiable, such reforms may face limited support.
About the author
Jackson Traeger is a PhD candidate in psychology in the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences. This article was first published by The Conversation and is republished under a Creative Commons license. read the original article,
Our findings show that in countries where inequality is highly visible and persistent, people can morally justify their structural economic system, arguing that it is fair and legitimate. In wealthier, more equal societies, people appear to be more sensitive to the potential harms of excess.
While our study shows that most people around the world do not consider excessive wealth to be morally wrong, people in wealthier and more equal countries are more likely to condemn it.
This paradox raises a sharp question: When people in privileged societies condemn billionaires and attempt to limit them, are they shining a light on global injustice – or projecting their own sense of guilt? Are they projecting on poor countries a moral principle built on their prosperity, where wealth can represent survival, progress or even hope?
What hasn’t been found out yet?
An open question: How do these views change over time? Do attitudes change when societies become more prosperous or more equal? Are young people more likely than older generations to condemn billionaires?
Our study provides a snapshot, but long-term research may reveal whether ethical decisions track broader economic or cultural changes.
Another uncertainty is the unexpected role of purity. Why would the values associated with cleanliness and purity determine how people evaluate billionaires? Our follow-up study found that purity concerns extend beyond money to other forms of “excess,” such as rejecting “too much” ambition, sex, or fun.
This suggests that people may view excess – not just inequality – as corrupting.
what will happen next
We are continuing to study how cultural values, social systems, and moral intuitions shape people’s judgments of fairness and excess – from considerations of wealth and ambition to knowledge and AI computing power.
Understanding these gut-level, moral responses within larger social systems matters for debates about inequality.
But it may also help explain how people evaluate technologies, leaders, and institutions that amass disproportionate, excessive power or influence.