Well, part of what you describe may not show up in what is defined as capital in his work, as this would to an extent be "human capital", which he addresses as almost an oxymoron early on -what he calls capital can be traded.
But the part that would fall in his definition would resonate with something that he shows, that there is a divergence in capital. Very big fortunes had high rates of return (probably also in part because they could easily diversify, though there are stronger effects in play). Very small ones, not so much.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi