kugel7c

Obligatory wirtual Clip: https://youtu.be/Vq1iqwGQblo

No because assets and their place in capitalist enterprise represent control. I.e. an owner has fundamental rights to use workers according to the owners needs, and the owner also has the option to advertise and otherwise facitate propagand and take part in political process, including lobbying and corruption to affect circumstances outside of their direct control for example customer demand and government regulation, all of this control is proportional to the absolute wealth of that person family or group.

Obviously this is not to say the owners are in full control of all of their workers and assets individually, it's just that they decide the system that all workers must use and this has an obvious effect on the things these workers do.

So the useful metric is certainly not pollution per $/person but one that is proportional in some way to the total wealth.

Sure this control can be mutually beneficial for the owner and the society at large, but it's pretty clear now that with fossil enterprise especially, this is not the case, control gained from extracting an unfortunate life necessity from the ground, a resource that is set to destroy life on the planet as we know it, should not be able to be used for anything but to replace itself as quickly as possible, the tactic for the last 50 years from these owners was the opposite.

For this question it's important to understand that there are positive and negative rights, a positive right might give you the ability to do something like shoot a gun, a negative right might be a right that forbids killing you, both are very important and are often in conflict with one another.

Knowing this a 40h work week and paid vacation of 5 weeks is a negative right forbidding your employer from exploiting you for more than that time. On the other hand social security and similar things are positive rights allowing you access to resources where otherwise you wouldn't have any/enough.

Keeping this in mind and assuming that economic rights are generally the most important for freedom under a capitalist system, because fundamentally almost every positive right you want to use also requires you to have money. And assuming freedom is greater if more people are reasonably free than if few people are completely free.

wealth Gini

Europe I'd say.