On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 23:20:01 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 19:25:24 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

wrote:
snip
Like most leftists, you simply assume that it's a bad thing
/per se/. Your assumption is baseless.
snip

Actually I am far more of a rational rightist.

Please excuse the long reply, but I don't think or write in
"bumper stickers."

One of your avatars asked about specific actions to correct
wealth mal-distribution / over concentration, which results
in the over-concentration of income, assets, and
political/military power into too few hands and the
resulting threat to the state/economy/society/culture.

snip

follow up to my follow up.

Additional information on why income mal-distribution /
over-concentration and the resulting contraction of the
middle class is dangerous to a viable and growing economy,
at least in the US mega urban areas. Most likely holds true
world-wide.

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/job...e-not-it/6790/


Interesting. So big cities are bad, small cites are good.


"The socialist movement takes great pains to circulate frequently new labels for its ideally constructed state.
Each worn-out label is replaced by another which raises hopes of an ultimate solution of the insoluble basic
problem of Socialism, until it becomes obvious that nothing has been changed but the name.
The most recent slogan is "State Capitalism."[Fascism] It is not commonly realized that this covers nothing more
than what used to be called Planned Economy and State Socialism, and that State Capitalism, Planned Economy,
and State Socialism diverge only in non-essentials from the "classic" ideal of egalitarian Socialism. - Ludwig von Mises (1922)