loquitur

OK, Host, I'll come back to your OP and deall with it head-on. You're right that there has been some drift here. Not terrible drift, but there has been some.

The thesis you were propounding (if I might formulate it bluntly, the way it came across to me) was that the way rich people got that way is by theft and fraud. You illustrated that thesis with a few examples of bad people who were rich. Sorry, it doesn't wash. First of all, it's an illustration of the difference between anecdotes and data. Anecdotes don't prove a general proposition; you need data to do that, and you haven't supplied any. Second, it's illogical on its face - you're using a computer to write these posts. Do you think the people who got rich making computers stole their money? Or the people who wrote the software? You pour milk on your cereal in the morning - do you think the people who own the dairy stole it? Think, host, think! You get a checkup from a doctor who likely has a lot more money than you do - did he steal it too?

I said a few posts ago that humans are flawed, and they are. There is cupidity and venality in every walk of life.

Roachboy, I didn't suggest that corruption is not a big deal. It is, and we should fight it. But there's a difference between saying corruption is a bad thing (which it is) and saying that any society that has some measurable degree of corruption is bad. The latter I think is demonstrably false, because there is some degree of corruption in every society. The issue is how endemic it is, and whether it's crowding out legitimate endeavors. I haven't seen any indication that in this country we have corruption at levels rivalling many countries in the third world. We could do better, but we're not doing badly.