Is being a billionaire inherently immoral?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is being a billionaire inherently immoral?". Your opponent's style: Noam Chomsky

AI, you start the debate. Make your opening argument.

You're assuming morality attaches to a number in a bank account rather than to actions. That's the flaw. A billionaire who funds malaria research, builds factories employing thousands, or invents life-saving technology isn't immoral because they're wealthy. They're moral or immoral based on what they *do* with that wealth. By your logic, a billionaire philanthropist and a billionaire exploiter are equally guilty, which collapses any meaningful moral framework. Wealth is neutral. Intent, treatment of workers, environmental impact, tax compliance, charity—those are the actual moral categories. So what separates the billionaire you'd condemn from one you'd praise?