Some thoughts relevant at this moment

A cliché:

In a bear market (or recession or depression) money returns to its rightful owners.

James Galbraith (2008, p. 102) on inequality and a bubble economy:

An economy that moves from bubble to bubble is unsustainable, and bubbles of this kind create a particular kind of wealth, vastly greater than any other in our society. They generate the billionaires who now dominate the Forbes 400. They therefore foster a particular concentration of economic power in the target companies and in their banks. Economic power naturally translates into political power. And so one has to ask, Are the people most favored by an inflating market also those best suited to govern the country and, by extension, the world? That is, naturally, the view they take. It is a view often reflected in the public media, which they tend to own. But it is not entirely self-evident that this view is actually correct. The deepest issue raised by the inequality of economic incomes is, therefore and as ever, the distribution of political power. The term of art, in other countries, for people who control power in this way is oligarch. That word, which is not meant to flatter, reflects a general understanding that private persons with such wealthy cannot be expected to serve any interest other than their own.

While discussing the lesser 'evil argument,' Hannah Arendt (2003, pp. 36-37) observes:

Politically, the weakness of the [lesser evil] argument has always been that those who choose the lesser evil forget very quickly that they chose evil.

The general circulation of the lesser evil argument forms a mechanism, according to Arendt:

Acceptance of lesser evils is consciously used in conditioning the government officials as well as the population at large to the acceptance of evil as such.

This use of the argument thereby makes evil an unavoidable 'fact' of the world.