I’m not sure I understand your comment. Do you mean to say that you think the market’s notion of value DOES align with the importance acting individuals place on a good / importance worth or usefulness of something?

How could this possibly be true when the majority of wealth is held by a minority of individuals?

It’s contradictory. A majority of people are incapable of expressing their values through wealth dispersion. If you assume that wealth dispersion is an expression of value, then by definition wealthy individuals are disproportionately able to express value.

  How could this possibly be true when the majority of wealth is held by a minority of individuals?

You went from value to wealth too fast. And this catchy sentence is only true because some statistical institution said so. Read De Soto about dead capital : http://www.thepowerofthepoor.com/concepts/c6.php

> The developed world has devised a formal property system of titles, title registries, and inclusive property law that includes real estate used for homes or businesses. We in the West take that system for granted, probably because it is invisible to us. De Soto shows that this is in a large part why some nations are rich while others remain in poverty.

   then by definition wealthy individuals are disproportionately able to express value

How do you think "everyone able to fairly able to express it's own value" would work ?

> How do you think "everyone able to fairly able to express it's own value" would work ?

I don't believe this is possible; it seemed like that might be what you were suggesting. I wasn't sure what point you were trying to make with your links and "seems to fit" comment in response to the "markets notion of value" correlating to wealth, but I also wasn't sure that I was correctly interpreting your comment.