Hmm. I don't think that works (or maybe you're just describing capitalism). If individuals have control over money, you can't have a societal design that contradicts their spending choices.

• Currently, individuals are rewarded linearly for the amount*degree that they "take responsibility" (=sell products or provide service) for someone who has money to pay. This is a direct result of the operation of monetary transactions.
• Currently, sub-groups can incorporate in order to make individual-like actions.
• There is an increase in power with group size, but there's no simple definition of "power" that makes it feasible to calculate. I'm sure it is mathematically limited, though.
• (optional) private property can be taken if powerful groups (governments usually) think they need it more than the owner.