I don't know if I'd go that far. I think it's less malicious, and has a better analogy with the way people would rather take from someone else than work to impr

I don't know if I'd go that far. I think it's less malicious, and has a better analogy with the way people would rather take from someone else than work to improve both their lots. We see that all the time in American politics: poor people railing against government job benefits because "why should they have it so good?" instead of asking themselves why their employers, who are generally much wealthier than the government, can't provide similar benefits. Same thing here. I don't see why we have to diminish our living space to the standard of Europe (for example). We have more land, first of all. Second of all, restricted land area isn't the only reason for Europe's relatively smaller dwelling sizes: they have their own class problems and NIMBY problems.