The real question is primarily: does democracy threaten wealth? And the answer is yes.

In reality, democracy is a socialist system. It pushes towards socialism. Even when the right wing wins, it imposes freedom-restricting laws. The more the population loses freedom, the more the State grows. In this case, with Donald Trump, while he will certainly put the State on a diet, he has other laws that will make it grow, such as protectionism. Protectionism, by the way, does not support the American economy but rather the State (which lines its pockets) and poor American entrepreneurs who are not pushed to do better.

When one is rich, it is normal to use one's resources to corrupt power. Those who don't do so will be eaten by others. This is why we must put our politicians out of work and drastically slim down the State. It's the only way to have a fairer world. Imperfect, but much fairer.

Question aside, this article is embarrassing. You would think an SRF journalist is capable of a little bit more than reciting the wealth distribution just to go on and justify the wealth of the top 1% with the tax efforts of the top 10%. No mention of the ultra rich owning all polarizing media outlets and social media platforms. No mention of tech billionaires endorsing fashist movements, buying votes and financing campaigns. No mention of systematic lobbying, tax fraud or enviromental destruction. No mention of the crucial role of big money in the rise and governing of the Nazis and other historic movements. Then again, I suppose if this was brought up the question would lose it's meaning. And this article, it's power to polarize. Leaves me wondering if the author is just publicly applying for a job at Axel-Springer Group.