[RobertoG]

The issue is far for being so white and black.

Not all the growth come from free markets. More efficient use of resources and the discovery of new technologies come from improving our knowledge. Sometimes this is done by business, sometimes no.

Also, there are economic theories (even mainstream economic theories) that express the view that some kind of redistribution is necessary for keeping the engines of growth working.

[tn13]

As a free market guy, I don't think free market ideas are anti-redistribution. They are against redistribution through the coercive power of government as moral principle and utilitarian argument.

I think private charity is far more effective in helping people in need. The government redistribution is merely a ploy to steal our wealth in the name of fighting poverty. I am totally surprised to see the amount of money US government wasted on Iraq war for which no one ever got punished.

[RobertoG]

Redistribution and charity are very different things. Redistribution comes from the idea that societies have goals, and that those goals are better served by thinking about where to spend resources instead of leaving it to blind markets.

I can see that you think of the government as 'them' instead of 'us', instead of something that we do as a society. We differ there.

Also, it worries me that you think (maybe I'm reading you wrong here) that is the spending of money, of all the things, what is the main problem with the war on Iraq.

[tn13]

We do disagree on the definition of redistribution. I do not accept that government=society. I also do not accept that society should have any goals and I would put individual liberty over everything else.

I do think spending money on Iraq war was bigger problem for Americans.I think you are referring to destabilization of middle east as another problem. We have essentially borrowed money from our children to simply waste it or rather on creating even huge problems for our children.