Actual learning is only one of the multiple aims of college degree. One aim is also to improve career prospects in terms of better job opportunities and networking. And for that, Harvard has vast advantage over cheap online education.
It seems tautological to say that one of the benefits exclusively allocated to the rich is an ability to be rich. Stipulate that the rich are going to stay rich, or even get richer. How are you rebutting the comment upthread, which argues that regardless of income gaps, the quality of life gap is narrowing? Isn't the quality of life gap the more meaningful of the two gaps?
Rather than income gap or quality of life gap, I personally find "opportunity gap" to be more important. And I believe that gap is proportional to wealth disparity, i.e. rich people have a lot more opportunities than poor people.
Basic safety net in the rich societies may ensure a decent quality of life even for the poor folks. But does that mean they have opportunities to escape poverty, and have means to pursue whatever they are interested in pursuing?
Since you asked for concrete evidence in one of the other comments, here is one example showcasing opportunity gap - a child in Atlanta raised in the bottom fifth of the quintile has only 4% chance to rose to the top fifth.
EDIT: tptacek, seems I cannot reply to you here as well. But you are right - the biggest advantages of being rich today is that you have better life today and you have better chances to be rich tomorrow, which means you (and your heirs) will keep having better life than others.
I responded to your appeal to opportunity downthread. It seems tautological. The benefit you're reduced to allocating exclusively to the rich is "becoming rich".
