> I now I see what you're saying regarding inequality: that prior to redistribution, inequality is more or less universal. Actually, no. I was saying what I act

> I now I see what you're saying regarding inequality: that prior to redistribution, inequality is more or less universal. Actually, no. I was saying what I actually said, that US pre-tax inequality wasn't exceptional. Sorry I mis-paraphrased you. I note that you ducked the discussion of revenue and spending per GDP, not to mention GDP per person. I ignored them because they aren't relevant to the questions we're discussing, which are: 1) Is the US tax structure more progressive than other industrialized nations? 2) If so, then why do conservatives criticize the tax policy in places like Western Europe if they are in fact less progressive? These are questions about taxes. Not spending, not per-capita GDP. We're talking taxes. You can have a progressive tax structure and spend all the money on free limos for the rich, the tax rates are still progressive. The term has a specific meaning, which is that the tax rate increases as income increases. You answered question #1 in the affirmative, but you've never directly answered question #2. Your response seems to be that conservatives think the higher European taxes are ok, but they don't approve of what the money is spent on. (If I'm mis-paraphrasing again, feel free to correct me with a more explicit answer.) In conclusion, after looking over the sources and arguments you've offered, I'm satisfied that the US tax system is actually not more progressive than most industrialized nations, and that conservatives criticize European tax systems precisely because they are more progressive, in the belief that disproportionately taxing the rich disincentivizes productivity (which is the traditional conservative explanation for the lower per capita GDP).