Work doesn't simply create wealth where there was only poverty before. On the contrary, so long as it enriches some at others' expense, work creates poverty, too, in direct proportion to profit.
Poverty is not an objective condition, but a relationship produced by unequal distribution of resources. There's no such thing as poverty in societies in which people share everything. There may be scarcity, but no one is subjected to the indignity of having to go without while others have more than they know what to do with. [...]
think about this more--it's interesting because it's almost the opposite of what PG thinks of as poverty vs inequality. this POV makes a lot of sense.
the real question is: can you have poverty without inequality? and can you have inequality without poverty? where poverty is defined as something "bad". my embyronic theory here is that if everyone is content with what they have, then even if someone has something extra (e.g., more land, or art, or whatever) then, as long as as no one else really feels they like they need, it's not really inequality. that it's a psychological state more than it is something that can be objectively defined. look into this more tho