So when exactly do you accept "inequality"? When do you stop in your efforts? So you take the money of those that have it, no matter how they came by it, and

So when exactly do you accept "inequality"? When do you stop in your efforts? So you take the money of those that have it, no matter how they came by it, and give it to those that don't, regardless of any individual virtue or merit. But you haven't solved inequality. People that live in the cities arguably have access to greater resources (opportunity/leisure/health care/etc) than those that live in rural areas. Perhaps we force some people to live in work in places that they might not otherwise choose to in order to create greater equality? Or do we say we accept the inequality of the urban vs. the rural? The list goes on and the measures to achieve an egalitarian outcome become more draconian. Certainly, with a sufficient use of physical force (or the threat thereof) you can achieve all sorts of "equality"... and all the proponents of such egalitarian proposals here are suggesting is that using brute force against those that wouldn't voluntarily play along is OK. Nothing more intellectually sophisticated than saying, "don't agree, we'll take it." But in all of this, once you accept that force is a legitimate means to enforce "equality" in this way, you have a hard time keeping those that have appointed themselves lord protectors of the poor (or other victim class) from becoming the new elite. Oh well, here's to the pursuit of egalitarianism! http://www.seasite.niu.edu/khmer/ledgerwood/Khmer_Rouge.htm http://www.seasite.niu.edu/khmer/ledgerwood/Khmer_Rouge.htm