Community wealth versus personal wealth. Private business assets that serve the public, can be considered part of community wealth along with public infrastructure and so forth.

I prefer community wealth to personal wealth. My thoughts are different than the thinking of many folks. I think community wealth can include private wealth that serves the public; for instance a store that the public can shop at. This is different than wealth is not open to the public; such as the store owner's private home.

Community wealth also includes wealth owned by government; such as parks, roads and schools. Community wealth can be owned by worker's collectives, coops, non profits and so forth.

Even large private corporations can be community wealth. Chains of stores, such as even Walmart, can serve the public if the public wants the fruits of "economy of scale." Bigness sometimes means lower prices, more selection and so forth. Small "mom and pop" stores offer other virtues; such as connection to local community.

Big corporations can be owned by a very wealthy individual who's wealth is invested in the stores themselves, or they can be owned by stockholders. Stocks can be owned by things like union pension funds, or exclusive private circles of super wealthy and often greedy owners.

Much of the quality of life depends on how people behave who own and use the wealth. Undue influence over politicians is irresponsible use of wealth. Advertising can be seen as a problematic use of wealth.

Community wealth, that is open to and used by the public, is better in my opinion, than personal wealth; such as a bunch of mansions that are for private use only.

Interesting to note; I've heard that Oprah Winfrey had one of her private homes on Orcas Island, near here. It was later sold to another owner.