> This is the biggest reason for equality. Sorry, that was very poorly worded in retrospect. What I meant was this is the biggest reason for trying to keep ine

> This is the biggest reason for equality. Sorry, that was very poorly worded in retrospect. What I meant was this is the biggest reason for trying to keep inequality in check. Because to abandon keeping it in check is to accept (at some point in the future) being a slave to the god overlords. Just because.. human nature.. does not mean you cannot individually, and as a society, try for something a little more stable and productive. As I said, it depends where you draw the line, everything is a grey area. There are real dangers to inequality, just as there are dangers, as you point out, to forced equality. And yes, you can fix inequality by re-distributing wealth back to the poor. That is the fucking point. But it brings up other problems of its own doing. Imagine though if this fix is not absolute, just about degree. And perhaps a small one just to keep the power balanced between the rich and the masses, and the corporate and the political. Perhaps it needs to swing back and forth occasionally to prevent a monoculture. And really, if someone does not agree with you on precisely where that line is, doesn't mean they are automatically some kind of dystopian socialist. Most people largely agree with each other on most things in principle, just not in implementation. I mean I fully agree with some of your points, even your main point that equality sucks (which is not to dissimilar from mine), but then who wouldn't? Your comment just contains so many wild projections it is hard not to be incensed. Not one sane person ever has ever suggested to lift everyone up to wealth and high society. I think your wording also betrays your prejudices... "there's a reason they are poor", "rewarding the poor." Seriously, where do you think wealth comes from? This is exactly the problem I was describing. People with wealth believe they deserve the wealth they have (and sometimes a little more), so of course it follows that the poor do not, otherwise they would have some more. Anyway, I give you the benefit of doubt, that line of mine was poorly worded (but still quite clear I think). But I really find it quite annoying that everyone constantly evaluates other peoples arguments by starting from the assumption the other is wrong and then making up all the straw arguments to suit their own point of view.