[NO-SPAM] Income Inequality

[Jonathan Meer]

I'm not dodging your points. I'm addressing them as I understand them. There's a lot of obscuring rhetoric that makes it difficult to get at your actual argument.

I don't know the actual statistics on choice vs happenstance for poverty, and honestly, I don't particularly care. The fact is, there are indeed people who are impoverished, through no fault of their own, and this is a problem that needs to be resolved as far as is reasonably possible.

Of course, we're only talking about the US, here. My original comment about the immorality of making and keeping more than $100,000 a year was more with reference to world hunger/thirst/healthcare, etc.

I'm splitting hairs on your rhetoric because it's flat false, and I have no idea what you're trying to get at by putting it in those terms, so I was left with nothing else but to show why it's false.

Your follow-up definition is one I've never heard before (except maybe with some poetic license, which certainly doesn't have any place in rational argument). My doctor gives me a vaccine because of reasons X, Y, Z. It doesn't make sense to call that vaccine a reward or punishment. Further, some 'givings' are actually punishments (chickenpox), and some 'taking aways' are actually gifts (removing the handcuffs).

The fundamental issue is, you haven't stated your position in anything resembling clear and straightforward prose, and digging through the false rhetoric is a chore.

Investments are not what produce products and services. The drive and creativity of small/large business is what produces products and services. Investments certainly play a part in the development of businesses to meet user demand, and are particularly helpful in getting a business going in the first place, but investment without user demand is wasted.

Returns on an investment are a product of economic growth, not an instigation.