This thread is already a nightmare, but let say that a lot of these policies are feel good, but ultimately would not be good ideas in practice. I think a lot of wealthy people earned it through hard work and intelligence (not all of them, obviously), and they see that. Not that I'm saying the general public isn't, but I think a lot of people are drawn to the feel good.
You're right that parts of this could be measuring greater cynicism, utilitarianism, or understanding of the practical limits of the US government as currently constituted rather than lesser compassion as such, but I really don't know that one can in good faith disagree with principles like 'Government should provide a decent standard of living for the unemployed' (qua principles, obviously, rather than in instances of specific policy proposals) unless ones think that the state's duty to ensure the relative safety of its citizens doesn't extend to any sort of proactive measures at all.
The government should not take from some, with the goal of lowering their standard of living to give to others, even if the goal is to heighten their standard of living.
'The goal of lowering their standard of living'? What is wrong with you? This is like the time the otherwise very wise John Irving said that rich people in Vermont were a persecuted class.
If you're goal is to lower economic inequality, then you have two goals:
a) To make one part of society poorer.
b) To make another part of society richer.
Unless that isn't the goal?
Ou're goal is indeed to lower inequality, but part a) of your formulation isn't so much an intentional aspect of that as a side-effect that w'e don't find much cause to care about, since in the case of the current American power elite there is nothing that any sane human being could possibly need or want to do with that amount of money. Additionally the money isn't really 'the'irs' in a full sense (although it's obviously partially 'the'irs', otherwise the concept of money is useless), since (in non-radically-individualist worldviews, traditionally conservative and socialist alike) the'y owe a debt to the society that allowed the'm to make it in the first place.
You're the sort of person who, if Buddhist, would be an unreconstructed Theravadin arhat who sneered at bodhisattvas for having too many attachments. Coming from somebody studying Japanese religion, that isn't a compliment.
