The above title is multifarious in dimension. Yet, here, it essentially pertains to the amount of wealth and assets required for a ‘good life’; although this is relative term. At present, huge economic disparities exist in our society. Vast numbers live below the poverty line and some are unable to provide the minimum requirement of two meals a day either for themselves or their families. Sadly, this has pushed many to take their own lives. The opulent elite, on the other hand, are so fabulously rich that they don’t know how to best flaunt their wealth. This segment of society sets the standards of high living for others to imitate by fair means or foul. Usually the latter. The quest for ostentatious living is the hallmark of many Muslim societies. Even though our religion ordains that we must be generously give to charity. Yet still the majority of Muslims are obsessed with acquiring wealth and property; with an eye on ultimately leaving behind a large inheritance for their heirs. That’s when an insatiable greed for wealth takes hold of a society. On the other hand, rich westerners care less about leaving inheritance behind for their kin. Instead, they prefer donating their savings and possessions to charities when they feel they have played close to their final innings. Or else, they leave instructions in their will to bequeath their holdings to welfare organisations. Bill Gates is one of the world’s best known philanthropists. His donations, which run into billions of dollars at a time, are not restricted to any particular country and are sent where needed most. Do we have anyone like him in the Muslim world, including the Gulf sheikhdoms and monarchies? The latter may be known for their luxury sea cruisers and foreign mansions but not so much for philanthropy. Bill Gates is one of the world’s best known philanthropists. His donations are not restricted to any particular country and are sent where needed most. Do we have anyone like him in the Muslim world, including the Gulf sheikhdoms and monarchies? In his book, ‘Conquest of Happiness’, British philosopher Bertrand Russell observes that the poor envy the rich for their ‘good life’ and wealth. But, Russel ponders, does this mean that the rich are happy? The great social social critic raised a genuine query. Decades later, apply his philosophic thought to the self-aggrandising elite club in this country and what do we find? Members of this club seem in a mad rush to acquire fortunes by whatsoever means, which includes making new rules or bending the existing ones to their benefit. But does this bring happiness into their lives? Not really! Were it so, their ravenous appetite would have been satisfied at some point. According to the old adage, the good life begins when you stop wanting a better one. You develop a comfort zone to suit yourself and don’t want to look outside it. Remaining within certain moral limits, you even stop caring what people think of you. Because trying to come up to others’ rather exaggerated expectations creates its own set of problems. For the sake of argument, let’s divide society into three categories: the bureaucratic class, the political class, and the masses. The first two classes rule and the third — the beast of burden — is ruled over. Most among the first two classes are on an acquisitive binge. They have targets set upwards and they never bother looking at the miseries faced by the downtrodden. At times, even the judicial system seems apathetic towards the destitute. Recall the case of juvenile Mohammad Anwar who was implicated in a murder case in 1993 and remained behind bars for 28 years, including 20 years on death row. He continued to appeal against both verdict and sentence until he was finally acquitted. A teenager when first locked up, Anwar found himself in his forties when he eventually saw the bright light of freedom. Usually the rich get away with everything while the poor suffer at the hands of the system. It reminds me of an old movie scene from the sixties. Dashing actor Mohammad Ali plays a character who was wrongly charged for a crime he did not commit. He spent 20 years in jail before the judge pronounced him innocent. The heroine, though much older by then, was also present in court. As the judge banged his gavel and acquitted Ali’s character, the hero roared back: “Judge Sahib, who will give me back my twenty years.” Even the judge wept. But that happens only in movies. However, it was class disparity that triggered the French Revolution more than two hundred years ago. Societal and economic inequality had divided society there into two classes: the privileged class and the unprivileged. The unpalatable reality is that our situation at present is symptomatic of that which existed before the French Revolution. On one side are the luxurious residential suburbs with palatial homes and on the other are the shanty towns. On one side is a lifestyle of excesses and on the other jobless and desperate youth and hungry millions. It’s a tinderbox that only needs a single matchstick to ignite it. The writer is a Lahore-based columnist and can be reached at pinecity@gmail.com