You will agree, though, that you are on the far left end of the political spectrum, and believe in wealth redistribution and more of a socialist mentality, right?
Well that's true...i believe in a society that pools it's resources to a greater degree than you do, although I don't think of myself of being on the "far left" of that ideology. I believe in helping those who are born with disadvantages, be that racial, social, physical...but in a way that gets to where they can help themselves eventually. Education first and foremost...then basic needs like health care, physical security, food when necessary...stuff like that.
All of the differences you and I have seem to me to stem from that one thing -- that we believe you should be able to keep what you earn while you believe the state has the right to take that money and redistribute it to those who are less fortunate. Is that not the essence of the opposing views? Is there any other substantive issue?
Yes, you should be able to keep what you earn, after the bills are paid....that means taxation. And since the concentration of wealth is skewed, taxation is as well....and compromise is still required...for instance, you must have an $800B/year military, while I would like to have a national health care system...
That is to ask, don't most of these disagreements between right and left essentially relate to how much of the profit from one's own labor and investment he should be allowed to keep for himself?
After the bills are paid...in any society there is "co-mingling of value"...so people who are making a contribution to the nation, like the soldier that allows you to be safe at home earning a good living co-mingles his contribution with yours...he happens to have chosen a profession that pays poorly and affords him low upward mobility, but his contribution makes your earnings possible..do you understand what I am trying to say?
Al |
