>>My point? "Reasonable" is always defined relative to your own position.
>>
>It doesn't have to be one's own financial position that drives a position though.
>This fella and people like him are finally begin to understand what excessive wealth does:
>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/pope-francis-car-korea-_n_5677956.html>
>
>Whatever one's motive, that's why we have elections, courts, etc.
>If things work well, and now and then they do, we come to a consensus on a definition of "reasonable" that will prevail until it is changed again.
>Tamar and I are advocating one definition, you're advocating another.
>Advocate away!
>Meanwhile, I'll hand out pamphlets and sport bumper stickers for candidates who agree with my definition and I'm tickled silly to finally see a Pope, after all these years, who understands what his job REALLY is.
You seem to be arguing against capitalism.
It is certainly an unfair system.
So what?