There is nothing wrong with having oligarchs, but it depends on what percentage of the total number of people in society. If it is 0.01% of all people, it is very bad. If it's 10%, it's good. That's what regulates the maximum.
Managed capitalism beats poverty. There will be no poor people.
And your comment is clearly spam too. You don't know what you're saying at all.
Do you like having aligarchs? Do you like having a lot of poor people? I wrote about cryptocurrencies - for today they make no sense.
There is no such economy in China. There are no limits and states of accounts of all people and organizations there.
Why would you think that the economy would be limited to some small value? The value of the maximum limit can be very large.
Other than that, the maximum is personal to each resident. It is to reduce the size of giant enterprises, such as Microsoft, Google, Amazon. Imagine that these companies would have competitors in the form of ordinary start-ups. The startups would have plenty of money to do that.
Maximum restrictions will not reduce the incentive to work in any way. On the contrary, there will be even more incentive to work, because you can make a lot more money and buy a lot more things with that money.
The maximum can be from 0 to infinity.
No parasitism will occur. Businesses will plan their budgets properly.
I think this article is out of your hands. You didn't even realize that the discussion should be in a Telegram group. You read and do not understand what is written.
I recommend you reread the article many times before commenting.