[datatan]

No that's just hyperbole without any basis in reality. Those poor and underprivileged can already find aid when/where needed. Poor people in the USA aren't even poor by world wide standards.

You do not have the right to rob Peter to pay Paul.

[arrosenberg]

It's absurd to say that "because there are poorer people in (I'm assuming you are referring to) Asia/Africa/Central America, we should make no further effort to help". We should help them because they are our neighbors and it's our moral imperative.

It's not robbery, it's the cost of being part of society. Those billionaires rely on the laws, created and enforced by the government, to maintain their status and possessions. If it's a government of and for all the people in the country, then the government absolutely has moral authority to tax citizens relative to their ability to contribute, and to aid citizens relative to their need for aid.

[falcolas]

> underprivileged can already find aid when/where needed

Mostly via the government, through food stamps, medicare, medicaid, welfare, etc. So the precedent is already there, and already consumes somewhere near 2/3 of your taxes today. Charity provides comparatively little for your average poverty stricken family.

If Paul got his wealth off the back of Peter and the government they both keep in power, is it theft to want Paul to help Peter when he can no longer work?