Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly are you objecting to when it comes to billionaires, though? The nominal wealth? The relative wealth? Whichever metric, where is the point where it goes into "immoral" territory and what is the justification for choosing that point over another?
I'm objecting to the idea, ethically, that a single person can own so much money. 1 billion is far beyond what anyone needs to have a comfortable life. Whatever the line is, 1 billion is clearly on the other side of it. I'm not interested in sorites paradox-ing the question beyond that.
Also there's probably lots of billionaires here in Indonesia, where 1B IDR is only $67k USD. Do you object to Indonesian billionaires as well? Or does it only matter if you're a billionaire in USD? What if I'm a billionaire in GBP?
Do you really believe that everyone on earth should only be allowed to have exactly what is needed to "have a comfortable life" (which definition of comfortable we're following seems like another quandary that we'll ignore for the moment) and nothing more?