So proud of this response to a Romney supporting friend of mine....

[valerief]

32. Excellent, excellent response.

On a different tack, the issue of "taking from the rich what's rightfully/legally theirs" is usually presented by the billionaire apologists as a matter of principle--of ethics, you might say.

What is ethical about a person born to privilege who acquires more wealth in a year than he needs in a hundreds, maybe thousands, of lifetimes while another person not born to privilege does not have basic needs (adequate shelter, nourishing food, accessible and decent healthcare) met? Let's say both people are slackers. Why is the person of wealth more deserving of taxpayer dollars (tax loopholes, tax breaks, defining taxes) than the person of poverty?

Practically speaking, the person of poverty will recycle the tax dollars into the economy while the privileged person will hoard it.

And what about the working person who has basic needs met? At any given time, that person is subject to transition to poverty (at the whims of the privileged) while the privileged person will never meet that fate.

So how does personal risk play a role in the billionaire apologist's "principles"? It's ignored. Only property rights matter. Or, as we used to say when I was kid, "It's my ball so I make the rules of the game."