Robin Hood

What about the issue of haircuts at the bank that waive huge debts? Are you actually saying that not everyone deserves the same? If so, on what basis? They say that the rich create jobs, many people could create jobs if they were allowed to, maybe an equal economic base level for everyone, which would give you the value of freedom, and then whoever wants to grow up from here can, in my opinion the state should not fund anything, only what is necessary, roads and such, not yeshivas, not football stadiums, and not theaters, whoever wants it should pay, and then the content will be of high quality. But in the end, our world of values is probably different, so maybe we don't have a point of debate at all. And it's not that I'm in favor of stealing from the rich. I asked what you think and thank you for that. And it's not that I'm against freedom, but not at the expense of the other because in the end it's one plate and everything is at the expense of the other. After all, without the poor, the rich wouldn't get rich. If everyone didn't agree to a minimum wage, then the equation would change. In fact, the poor or the ordinary class are the power, the majority, if that were also the direction of the majority of Knesset members, then it would happen.

The haircuts at the bank are no different from the consideration I raised. No one is just patronizing them.
These are the prevailing arguments in favor of communism/socialism, and in my opinion they really don't hold water. But I see no point in going into that here.

Well, maybe if they didn't get haircuts they would move to another bank and the bank has an interest in such fat customers,

Moishik, you also assume (explicitly) incorrectly that one person's wealth comes at the expense of another. It is true that the amount of money remains constant (if not printed), but there is certainly productivity that produces resources. Do you think a farmer who invested every moment and harvested food should share everything with someone who did not work at all for no return? Of course, it does not come at his expense!. Regarding things like haircuts - it is clear that there are things that can be discussed and you cannot let money decide everything (like oppressing the poor), but even if there are injustices that need to be corrected, it does not mean that everything should simply be divided equally. It is not related at all.

Y.W. You say things that are tasteful. I still need to digest and think. But you need to remember that manufacturing profits from the little people who buy without them. All manufacturers are nothing and nothing, and not the other way around as they paint us.
By the way, that's why I also wrote between the lines about another option for a basic economic level, for example, housing, car, phone, clothes, all the basics that are needed, and whoever wants to grow, let them grow. You can also argue about how much to grow and how much of a gap you want to create, but that's for another discussion. Again, I'm probably a communist. My value world is different from yours, and again, I may have had some logical failures, I admit, for example, that not everything comes at the expense of the other. I need to examine things. And I'm not talking about equality without logic, for example, a parent who divides pizza among children should not give everyone exactly the same amount, but the same amount that they need, considering their age, size, need, etc. So this belongs to the first option. And not to the one with a basic economic level.

And let's say the farmer received a decent wage for his labor, shouldn't what's left be distributed to the citizens, i.e. the state?, and not just remain with the government, what they call the state.

And furthermore, a lot of people want and can produce a lot and are not given the opportunity for various reasons as I mentioned. It is not wise to be a "successful" son of a good starting point and then call them good producers. If you give equal opportunities and ease of entry into the business world to everyone, then many who have not produced until now will produce, and then the distribution will also be more just in your opinion. You at least agree that there are injustices and that the tightening of measures is illegitimate,

But the country is not his, it belongs to the citizens, it is actually the home of all citizens. And it is what allows him to work in it, so what's your mind in such a situation, he will be able to work less. They will have to recruit more labor or something