" For reasons others have highlighted (and that the article highlights), I agree that NOBODY, no matter how "rich," should claim that it's possible for all members of society to obtain meaningful wealth through dedication and hard work. A society takes all kinds, and it cannot support an entire population of fat cats. People get paid what the market will bear, and I'm mostly alright with that. White collar people with the attitude that they work harder than everyone else and thus deserve more should be shot. Despite their massive collections of possessions, they do nothing more for the benefit of society than the lowly ditch digger. In many cases, I think it's safe to say that more people benefit (in real ways) from the work of hard laborers than from high wage earners. "

Not bad, in fact rather well done. The last sentence is a weak link though. High wage earners ( not inherited wealth ) in business and primarily small business make the jobs that laborers utilize. You can plow up stats and crap pro and con but it is a relationship that has been around a long time.

Now as a union pensioner I say the discussion should not be about how much you snatch from the high wage earners but rather what is the fair share of the profits from the businesses that hire the laborers. I give a bloody whack less if the CEO of the corporation I worked for made millions a year. No big deal, well that last SOB was a idiot and nearly sunk the boat, as long as our wage package reflected a reasonable division of profits between share holder / labor / management.