Time for a mass redistribution of wealth

ProfessorChaos
I think that no matter what "system" is put in place, there will always be injustice. There will always be a privileged few as compared to the under-privileged many; it's human nature.

The only thing I know for sure is that when I get up in the morning to go to work, I don't do it to make the world a better place, I do it to try to improve my family's situation. Is that greed, or personal responsibility?

I grew up very poor, living on welfare and all sorts of government assistance. Do you know why? Because my father was a shiftless layabout drug addict and drug dealer, who couldn't hold a job because someone was always "holding him down". He and my mother were the reason we were poor, not because someone else was rich. They didn't try to make a better life for themselves and their children, and got what they'd earned; nothing.

We lived in the projects in the Boston area and everyone around us were living the same way; there was no effort on the part of any of them to change their lives. Why? Because they didn't have to; the check came every month.

I've resented my childhood and the life I was born into ever since I could work (I began working at 14), and I do not intend to allow my children to have the same example that I did, so I work.

I don't make much, but I'll be damned if anyone's going to take my earnings and give them to someone else's kids. I didn't make them, and I have no intention of supporting them. Does that make me cold-hearted? If so, then I guess that's what I am.

This entire argument of taking from some to give to others is complete and utter B.S. Is the current system messed up? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean that ideas like the one espoused by the OP of this thread should ever be considered.

I have to admit, this discussion and the tenor it has adopted, not only makes me physically ill, it fills me with contempt for what would appear to be a very large group of people who appear to have nothing better to do than to ogle the lifestyles of others, and to desire it for themselves, but are unwilling to attain for themselves through work.

edit on 1/30/2014 by ProfessorChaos because: typo

That last paragraph is so sad. Does it really have to come down to jealousy for you? An ogle of lifestyles? Could it be a disgust in a deeply unfair system? Why do we even have religion on this planet if we aren't going to strive for some sort of divine path of love and hope for all?

I know you see a problem with 1% owning the wealth, being in charge of policy, basically rigging the system for themselves. To speak against that system, does it have to be out of jealousy?

If you look at a nation, many low in poverty, and you see a single tall spire of incredibly wealthy, and on closer examination you see laws passed that say money is free speech, corporations are people--- Do you not see a horribly corrupt system taking advantage of so many? Enslaving people.

Don't despair in jealousy. See the truth.

reply to post by spiritualzombie


So is your problem with the people with all the money or the corrupt government?

spiritualzombie

ProfessorChaos
I think that no matter what "system" is put in place, there will always be injustice. There will always be a privileged few as compared to the under-privileged many; it's human nature.

The only thing I know for sure is that when I get up in the morning to go to work, I don't do it to make the world a better place, I do it to try to improve my family's situation. Is that greed, or personal responsibility?

I grew up very poor, living on welfare and all sorts of government assistance. Do you know why? Because my father was a shiftless layabout drug addict and drug dealer, who couldn't hold a job because someone was always "holding him down". He and my mother were the reason we were poor, not because someone else was rich. They didn't try to make a better life for themselves and their children, and got what they'd earned; nothing.

We lived in the projects in the Boston area and everyone around us were living the same way; there was no effort on the part of any of them to change their lives. Why? Because they didn't have to; the check came every month.

I've resented my childhood and the life I was born into ever since I could work (I began working at 14), and I do not intend to allow my children to have the same example that I did, so I work.

I don't make much, but I'll be damned if anyone's going to take my earnings and give them to someone else's kids. I didn't make them, and I have no intention of supporting them. Does that make me cold-hearted? If so, then I guess that's what I am.

This entire argument of taking from some to give to others is complete and utter B.S. Is the current system messed up? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean that ideas like the one espoused by the OP of this thread should ever be considered.

I have to admit, this discussion and the tenor it has adopted, not only makes me physically ill, it fills me with contempt for what would appear to be a very large group of people who appear to have nothing better to do than to ogle the lifestyles of others, and to desire it for themselves, but are unwilling to attain for themselves through work.

edit on 1/30/2014 by ProfessorChaos because: typo

That last paragraph is so sad. Does it really have to come down to jealousy for you? An ogle of lifestyles? Could it be a disgust in a deeply unfair system? Why do we even have religion on this planet if we aren't going to strive for some sort of divine path of love and hope for all?

I know you see a problem with 1% owning the wealth, being in charge of policy, basically rigging the system for themselves. To speak against that system, does it have to be out of jealousy?

If you look at a nation, many low in poverty, and you see a single tall spire of incredibly wealthy, and on closer examination you see laws passed that say money is free speech, corporations are people--- Do you not see a horribly corrupt system taking advantage of so many? Enslaving people.

Don't despair in jealousy. See the truth.

If all you got out of my post was that I've put your idea down to simple jealousy, then you've missed the point entirely, and that is the real problem with this entire discussion.

ProfessorChaos

spiritualzombie

ProfessorChaos
I think that no matter what "system" is put in place, there will always be injustice. There will always be a privileged few as compared to the under-privileged many; it's human nature.

The only thing I know for sure is that when I get up in the morning to go to work, I don't do it to make the world a better place, I do it to try to improve my family's situation. Is that greed, or personal responsibility?

I grew up very poor, living on welfare and all sorts of government assistance. Do you know why? Because my father was a shiftless layabout drug addict and drug dealer, who couldn't hold a job because someone was always "holding him down". He and my mother were the reason we were poor, not because someone else was rich. They didn't try to make a better life for themselves and their children, and got what they'd earned; nothing.

We lived in the projects in the Boston area and everyone around us were living the same way; there was no effort on the part of any of them to change their lives. Why? Because they didn't have to; the check came every month.

I've resented my childhood and the life I was born into ever since I could work (I began working at 14), and I do not intend to allow my children to have the same example that I did, so I work.

I don't make much, but I'll be damned if anyone's going to take my earnings and give them to someone else's kids. I didn't make them, and I have no intention of supporting them. Does that make me cold-hearted? If so, then I guess that's what I am.

This entire argument of taking from some to give to others is complete and utter B.S. Is the current system messed up? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean that ideas like the one espoused by the OP of this thread should ever be considered.

I have to admit, this discussion and the tenor it has adopted, not only makes me physically ill, it fills me with contempt for what would appear to be a very large group of people who appear to have nothing better to do than to ogle the lifestyles of others, and to desire it for themselves, but are unwilling to attain for themselves through work.

edit on 1/30/2014 by ProfessorChaos because: typo

That last paragraph is so sad. Does it really have to come down to jealousy for you? An ogle of lifestyles? Could it be a disgust in a deeply unfair system? Why do we even have religion on this planet if we aren't going to strive for some sort of divine path of love and hope for all?

I know you see a problem with 1% owning the wealth, being in charge of policy, basically rigging the system for themselves. To speak against that system, does it have to be out of jealousy?

If you look at a nation, many low in poverty, and you see a single tall spire of incredibly wealthy, and on closer examination you see laws passed that say money is free speech, corporations are people--- Do you not see a horribly corrupt system taking advantage of so many? Enslaving people.

Don't despair in jealousy. See the truth.

If all you got out of my post was that I've put your idea down to simple jealousy, then you've missed the point entirely, and that is the real problem with this entire discussion.

THe problem is the refusal to maintain personal focus, poor epistemology, and lack of time management skills.

neo96
There is nothing misleading about calling them what they are.

Medicare and Social Security are billed separately, and are NOT part of welfare.
I have yet to see anyone agree with you on this topic, and you really should consider not posting it that way anymore. For one thing, its misleading, and you know it. Also its debt that the government owes back to those who paid into it, the same as a Treasury Bond.

neo96
Since a person pays 6/2 percent in total contributions, and other people are paying the rest (employers/medicare tax on capital gains), and the difference is made up by the rest of us, and printing and borrowing.

Its supposed to be covered by the employee and employer, the government is supposed to invest the rest to make up the difference. The fact that they spent it is not the investors problem, its the governments. Maybe if the government would not have been allowing corporations to skip out on paying their taxes for years, they would not have had to borrow the money in the SS system all these years. Either way though, they owe that back just as assuredly as they owe someone for a treasury bond.

neo96
They are indeed WELFARE.

No they are not, that is why they don't have the same name nor are administered by the same organization. You are posting false and misleading information.

neo96
Yeah I am fully aware of the French and Russian 'revolutions' killing people over money. Who now have more debt than ever.

That is the French Revolution, the sacking of the Temple by the Romans, and (I believe) the battle of Trafalgar.

Russia actually was in debt because of keeping up with us over the cold war, and that none of the greedy bankers was going to go do business in the Soviet Union. Why would they want to do business in a country where they couldn't cheat their way to keeping everything for themselves after all? Where they would have to fairly pay the people who actually did the work for them? Despite this, Russia was able through its own citizens hard work, to keep pace with us through the cold war, and even beat us for many years in the space program. Russian engineers built rocket engines using slide-rules that today our engineer cannot even duplicate with computers. And they did all that without the rich corporations and backing of a greedy central banking system.

All this Ann Rand “Atlas Shrugs” nonsense about the governments interference into business, is just tripe that was proven wrong even before she died in the 80's. If you look into her background story, you'll see that her writings were simply sour grapes from her family losing their business in the Russian Revolution.

ProfessorChaos

spiritualzombie

ProfessorChaos
I think that no matter what "system" is put in place, there will always be injustice. There will always be a privileged few as compared to the under-privileged many; it's human nature.

The only thing I know for sure is that when I get up in the morning to go to work, I don't do it to make the world a better place, I do it to try to improve my family's situation. Is that greed, or personal responsibility?

I grew up very poor, living on welfare and all sorts of government assistance. Do you know why? Because my father was a shiftless layabout drug addict and drug dealer, who couldn't hold a job because someone was always "holding him down". He and my mother were the reason we were poor, not because someone else was rich. They didn't try to make a better life for themselves and their children, and got what they'd earned; nothing.

We lived in the projects in the Boston area and everyone around us were living the same way; there was no effort on the part of any of them to change their lives. Why? Because they didn't have to; the check came every month.

I've resented my childhood and the life I was born into ever since I could work (I began working at 14), and I do not intend to allow my children to have the same example that I did, so I work.

I don't make much, but I'll be damned if anyone's going to take my earnings and give them to someone else's kids. I didn't make them, and I have no intention of supporting them. Does that make me cold-hearted? If so, then I guess that's what I am.

This entire argument of taking from some to give to others is complete and utter B.S. Is the current system messed up? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean that ideas like the one espoused by the OP of this thread should ever be considered.

I have to admit, this discussion and the tenor it has adopted, not only makes me physically ill, it fills me with contempt for what would appear to be a very large group of people who appear to have nothing better to do than to ogle the lifestyles of others, and to desire it for themselves, but are unwilling to attain for themselves through work.

edit on 1/30/2014 by ProfessorChaos because: typo

That last paragraph is so sad. Does it really have to come down to jealousy for you? An ogle of lifestyles? Could it be a disgust in a deeply unfair system? Why do we even have religion on this planet if we aren't going to strive for some sort of divine path of love and hope for all?

I know you see a problem with 1% owning the wealth, being in charge of policy, basically rigging the system for themselves. To speak against that system, does it have to be out of jealousy?

If you look at a nation, many low in poverty, and you see a single tall spire of incredibly wealthy, and on closer examination you see laws passed that say money is free speech, corporations are people--- Do you not see a horribly corrupt system taking advantage of so many? Enslaving people.

Don't despair in jealousy. See the truth.

If all you got out of my post was that I've put your idea down to simple jealousy, then you've missed the point entirely, and that is the real problem with this entire discussion.

I zeroed in on that last paragraph because at the end of your story I felt sad.

I too grew up on welfare. My mom was raising two kids because my dad left. My dad made really good money as a lawyer, but somehow he never paid child support. So my mom raised us, and we were on welfare for many years. She went back to school, got a degree, and a few years later a job. It was a point of pride for her to finally be off welfare. I will always remember how excited she was when she came home, telling me she got the job. I was too little to understand all the details of the benefits, but she was so happy. We never went back on welfare.

So my point of view is very different. I have seen the system work exactly as it's meant to and I believe every family should have the opportunity.

What happens after the wealth is redistributed?

notice how they call it greed, even as our lifestyles slip farther and farther into the abyss. we are greedy for not wanting to be driven into the same poor house as the people we are trying to help when we donate and pay taxes, in the first place. the people who already own pretty much everything already, are the driving force behind the viewpoint of taking from the middle and giving to the poor and notice, this is always how it ends up. now that they own us all, they want to play god and decide which of us should continue breathing. basically, it's went from--- we reserve the right to take your energy by force and use it however we dang well please, to--- we reserve the right to just kill ya dead if you don't agree with everything we say, including our decision to steal your labor, your energy, not compensate you for it in a substainable way, and call you a greedy bastard while executing you for saying WTF!

Perhaps the easiest way is to have a tax system that actually works that the super rich can't dodge. In the UK the poor seem to be the main tax resource whilst the rich are there if they can't stash it away elsewhere.

Were we to have a living wage that one could actually live off and then start the threshold of paying tax abover that figure it would save a lot of waste in tracing low wage earners who move and change jobs etc.

It seems pointless to have a situation where the super rich cannot even count their actual money so it sits stagnant or stashed when circulating it would stimulate the economy and make people's lives easier.

Stashed money doesn't help provide for health research, better education, living standards, a healthier planet or create a society that can provide for itself. Stashed money retards society.

reply to post by defcon5

Medicare and Social Security are billed separately, and are NOT part of welfare. I have yet to see anyone agree with you on this topic, and you really should consider not posting it that way anymore. For one thing, its misleading, and you know it. Also its debt that the government owes back to those who paid into it, the same as a Treasury Bond

No it isn't as per the definition:

wel·fare (wĕl′fâr′) n. 1. a. Health, happiness, and good fortune; well-being. b. Prosperity. 2. Welfare work. 3. a. Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need. b. Corporate welfare. Idiom: on welfare Receiving regular assistance from the government or private agencies because of need.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

Neither social security NOR medicare pay for themselves other people are paying for it:

1. Them evil rich people
2. Employers ARE.
3. The rest of us
4. Printing Money
5 Borrowing money.
6. Other taxation as per the capital gains tax.

WHY ?

BECAUSE people are getting more out than they ever paid in which is where this comes in :

diom: on welfare Receiving regular assistance from the government or private agencies because of need.

Once again there is nothing 'misleading' stating the facts.

People pay a pittances and the difference is made up by other means.

That in my book is WELFARE.

Its supposed to be covered by the employee and employer, the government is supposed to invest the rest to make up the difference.

Suppose doesn't have anything to do with it.

I have stated HOW IT currently is being.

No they are not, that is why they don't have the same name nor are administered by the same organization. You are posting false and misleading information.

There is nothing FALSE about my comments.

thesaneone
reply to post by spiritualzombie

 

So is your problem with the people with all the money or the corrupt government?

The problem is greed. Greed is an illness in peoples minds. When you have a single towering spire of greed over a land of poverty, and this towering spire dictates money is now free speech, corporations are people, and people can give unlimited free speech to campaigns.... What we have is an illness of greed dictating policy.

So the answer is both. Greed creates a corrupt government.

beezzer
What happens after the wealth is redistributed?

Like water, it flows back to where it would have flowed in the first place.
2nd.

reply to post by Shiloh7


If bread was twenty-five cents a loaf and everyone made five dollars an hour, that would be fair too, right?

This is basic Robin Hood philosophy:

To simplify the entire process well simplify the population to 4 people.

Paul, Mike, Richard, and Robin Hood...

we start them ALL off with 5 dollars each...each person ends up in a financial status that reflects their perspective mentality on finances...

Richard is an investor...he sees potential value and potential opportunity where others don't because of this he gets to purchase opportunities inexpensively because others don't see the potential value...

Mike is a little less certain and even less opportunistic...mike likes a guaranteed deal...he likes the idea of settling into a stead living income...so instead of searching for opportunities he searches for guarantees...

Paul is a spender...he likes the fact money can buy stuff...and he buys a lot...if someone offers him a loan he snatches it up in a heartbeat...the only problem Paul has is hes wasteful...he uses the stuff he buys then tosses it aside never to be seen/used again....sometimes Richard will come buy some of Paul's "trash" for cheap...Paul always accepts because he was going to throw it out anyway...

over time...Richard is creating the guarantees for mike and products for Paul....Mike is working for Richard and Paul is hustling to feed his desire to buy stuff...from Richard.

Inherently all men are truly equal...but the mentality and actions have different associated properties...THIS is what creates the class system we see today...

In comes Robin Hood...Robin hood sees that Richard is in control now...hes the employer with all the money and all the resources...resources Paul gladly threw away and Mike didn't wan't to risk owning.

Now Robin hood is a metaphor for a wealth distribution process...so lets apply that process and speed it up. You will notice Robin hood stealing money from Richard...giving it a lot to Paul and some more to Mike...They are all back to 5 dollars...but they are all still also the same people...so Richard spends what is left from the theft to buy more assets from wasteful Paul and security Mike...Mike still wan's his security and guaranteed income/salary with little to no risk. Paul still loves buying the stuff Richard sells that he originally bought from Paul as trash...

etc etc....so on and so forth...

Robin Hood...sets the process back to the beginning its kind of like a reboot to a economics simulation...

The X-factor here is this simulation is the MENTALITY or perspectives that each individual has...
*Richard is opportunistic and envisioned with willing to take some risks...uncertainty excites them rather than scares them...

*Mike is searching for security and guarantees...he is pretty skeptical of good deals and everything comes with a catch...he likes the comfort of knowing what tomorrow is going to be like.

*Paul buys for entertainment and luxury...he isn't too well antiquated with opportunity and thinks liabilities are assets and isn't too big on recycling. Paul is a hustler to a degree and does whatever it is that needs to be done to get the next entertainment or luxury. Often time Paul will sacrifice living necessities for pretty toys...

Now there are exceptions to ever rule...(standard deviation) but generally this is how the economical situation arranges itself...I find the mental factor of the population involved plays the largest role in what part of that economic system they land in...

Robin Hood = wealth redistribution = restart to the system = doesn't solve the problem...

As far as the drastic number differences population wise that land in each class...The best bet would be to look at the dominate cultural perspective and the predominating educational system...

Once you do that you will find some interesting parallels between the lack of finances, asset management, and entrepreneurship oriented education and the abundance of people who don't know how to function in a world built around that...Its not uncommon for those who ditch the education system and drop out of high-school or don't even go to college to become very successful financially...

At least this is my personal take on how the financial game is self-organizing according to mental framework...

reply to post by beezzer


Then people would find something else to be jealous about.
Why does he have green eyes and I have brown so unfair.

Its sad knowing Americans where once a proud people who kept their heads up no matter of there situation.

reply to post by spiritualzombie


Everybody has that chance, you just said it with your mom so whats the problem if your mother did it so can everyone else.

totallackey

spacedog1973

totallackey
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

Does my writing lead you to believe i have done otherwise?

Your post speaks for itself.

Yes it does. And your reply to that post:

You would've done well to have taken your father's advice and applied 5 minutes thought to it.
Because everyone who has money now, earned it through their own hard work, right? And everyone who is suffering deserves it.
Some people.
smh

...also speaks for itself.

In other words, it is always the other guy...

It is a fact of life that pain and suffering are the norm. How you deal with the pain and suffering is the measure of success.

While there certainly are people who get their kicks from the practice of schadenfreud, I think you have the culprits misidentified. The culprits are easily identified...it is the ones loudly demanding the removal (forced or otherwise) of things so mundane as money or property from others. Once this practice starts, then who/what is next?

edit on 30-1-2014 by totallackey because: clarity

As I mentioned earlier on in this thread, its not the system, or any system that is at fault - a fascist system could be benevolent even - its the people themselves that make it predictably dire.

The OP's desire - to spread wealth, doesn't address the people themselves - to this extent I will agree with you. However, my point is that people are here arguing systems as though, they in themselves are the problem, when it is the people's way of thinking.

I believe people have been trained to believe the things they do. When people talking of systems as if they are older than the hills and intrinsic aspects of human nature, I think they overlook the thousands of years of human history were this obsession wasn't so pronounced.

Some here, are talking about how the current form of capitalism is akin to human nature. This is a fallacy, as is the history of the US, which was founded on free labour, affirmative action and many other social 'programs' in which government was needed heavily for these practices to occur. They continued effectively until the 60s - so I sometimes wonder what people here are on about.

The reality is a very different foundation than people seem to acknowledge, like this history did not occur and somehow all benefits from these systems are due to simply hard work and those who did not benefit effectively failed personally in some way. This is very revisionist.

spiritualzombie
The 1% is a problem.

The 1% are simply capitalizing on a system that affords their wealth to grow.

There is nothing inherently wrong with being wealthy or becoming wealthy.

When the system is properly designed, wealth, is the reward for hard work and/or innovation.

When the system is corrupted, like a warped roulette wheel, eventually, over enough time the money will pool in one place.

I have no animosity for the 1%...I have animosity for a system that allows a Mitt Romney to pay an effective tax rate of 14%, while someone making 1% of what he earns pays 25%.

I also don't think any system that disproportionately rewards "Renters Income"...Income for parking your money, while burdening "earned income" through work is going to lead to anything other than extremes in income distribution.

98% of the economic recovery since the financial crisis has gone to the top 5%. 95% of the USA population has lost or stayed stagnant in income during this "recovery".

We are in bad shape and on a bad track.

beezzer
What happens after the wealth is redistributed?

After people are educated on the detrimental effects of greed? After an entire generation of kids see the society we live in now as one that put greed on a pedestal, used general judgments against poor people to make policy that only benefitted the super rich? And then, after many years of policy changes that result in a more balanced distribution of wealth... I would imagine at that point, we all live and struggle and survive together, like we do.

Beezzer, you do understand that there are many degrees of middle ground between a utopian society that I would like, and 1% ruling all that exists now.

The point is, 1% is a failed system and that wealth needs to be redistributed somehow back into society.

Caring about people needs to be a priority.

spiritualzombie

ProfessorChaos

spiritualzombie

ProfessorChaos
I think that no matter what "system" is put in place, there will always be injustice. There will always be a privileged few as compared to the under-privileged many; it's human nature.

The only thing I know for sure is that when I get up in the morning to go to work, I don't do it to make the world a better place, I do it to try to improve my family's situation. Is that greed, or personal responsibility?

I grew up very poor, living on welfare and all sorts of government assistance. Do you know why? Because my father was a shiftless layabout drug addict and drug dealer, who couldn't hold a job because someone was always "holding him down". He and my mother were the reason we were poor, not because someone else was rich. They didn't try to make a better life for themselves and their children, and got what they'd earned; nothing.

We lived in the projects in the Boston area and everyone around us were living the same way; there was no effort on the part of any of them to change their lives. Why? Because they didn't have to; the check came every month.

I've resented my childhood and the life I was born into ever since I could work (I began working at 14), and I do not intend to allow my children to have the same example that I did, so I work.

I don't make much, but I'll be damned if anyone's going to take my earnings and give them to someone else's kids. I didn't make them, and I have no intention of supporting them. Does that make me cold-hearted? If so, then I guess that's what I am.

This entire argument of taking from some to give to others is complete and utter B.S. Is the current system messed up? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean that ideas like the one espoused by the OP of this thread should ever be considered.

I have to admit, this discussion and the tenor it has adopted, not only makes me physically ill, it fills me with contempt for what would appear to be a very large group of people who appear to have nothing better to do than to ogle the lifestyles of others, and to desire it for themselves, but are unwilling to attain for themselves through work.

edit on 1/30/2014 by ProfessorChaos because: typo

That last paragraph is so sad. Does it really have to come down to jealousy for you? An ogle of lifestyles? Could it be a disgust in a deeply unfair system? Why do we even have religion on this planet if we aren't going to strive for some sort of divine path of love and hope for all?

I know you see a problem with 1% owning the wealth, being in charge of policy, basically rigging the system for themselves. To speak against that system, does it have to be out of jealousy?

If you look at a nation, many low in poverty, and you see a single tall spire of incredibly wealthy, and on closer examination you see laws passed that say money is free speech, corporations are people--- Do you not see a horribly corrupt system taking advantage of so many? Enslaving people.

Don't despair in jealousy. See the truth.

If all you got out of my post was that I've put your idea down to simple jealousy, then you've missed the point entirely, and that is the real problem with this entire discussion.

I zeroed in on that last paragraph because at the end of your story I felt sad.

I too grew up on welfare. My mom was raising two kids because my dad left. My dad made really good money as a lawyer, but somehow he never paid child support. So my mom raised us, and we were on welfare for many years. She went back to school, got a degree, and a few years later a job. It was a point of pride for her to finally be off welfare. I will always remember how excited she was when she came home, telling me she got the job. I was too little to understand all the details of the benefits, but she was so happy. We never went back on welfare.

So my point of view is very different. I have seen the system work exactly as it's meant to and I believe every family should have the opportunity.

All I can say is that I grew up in a microcosm of the world that your idea (if fully implemented) would create, and it is not a very nice place; I know that I don't ever want to go back to it.