Pretty much the same idea, I guess. All of that said, I support democratic socialism, the equitable distribution of wealth, and every effort to ameliorate the plight of the poor.

The trouble with that is that with democratic socialism in operation, there will soon be no wealth to distribute, and all that will be distributed will be poverty and scarcity. We have already had our experience with democratic socialism in all its incarnations.

Later: The present state of the Greek economy (Debt, nearly 14 percent of its gross income) is a testament to democratic socialism. Greece is going bankrupt, with Portugal soon to follow. And that is because they spend excessively on social programs, and people are retired at about the age of 50 with full pension benefits from the government, which, of course, is a disguise for the few people who actually work and produce. You may be in favor of democratic socialism, but is democratic socialism in favor of you, or the country?

but then, is the alternative standing by and watching the wealtheist three percent garner an ever-larger share of the natural wealth while the middle class and working poor work harder and harder for less and less? Allowing Wall St to pay itself enough money for its bankers to own their own islands while takings risks than send billions of people further into poverty? Is that a good alternative?

but then, is the alternative standing by and watching the wealtheist three percent garner an ever-larger share of the natural wealth while the middle class and working poor work harder and harder for less and less? Allowing Wall St to pay itself enough money for its bankers to own their own islands while takings risks than send billions of people further into poverty? Is that a good alternative?