[rg111]

It's not inequality that is a problem to me. It is- people of our country not being able to afford the basics. They are renting more than ever where land is owned more and more by faceless capital. They are having to work more shifts to get by, and they can barely afford healthcare.

I see it this way- a poor guy and a rich guy both get cancer. If they can get the same medicine and the same/similar doctors, then I am fine. The poor guy might be sharing the cabin with three other people, and he is going to go home on public transit. I am okay with the rich guy having a room to himself, 8k UHD TV on the wall, and driving home using a Porsche.

I am okay with inequality, as long as all the people have the basics fulfilled.

I don't want everyone to be equally wealthy. What am I? A Communist?

[ProxCoques]

I think what you're talking about is a system which doesn't use wealth to determine the provision of things like education, health, housing or arguably energy and transport. It may use it to determine non-essential aspects of those things like first class or a private room, but the service itself is available to all regardless of income. People can be independently wealthy in such a system, but what they spend their wealth on is not those things.

To an extent this system has existed in the UK, but is being dismantled by those who assert that the rich should not pay in taxes for things that they do not benefit from because if the poor wanted those things badly enough they would become wealthy enough to pay for them. In a weird way, you therefore are a Communist - since that is what this logic demands: that everyone achieves the wealth necessary to pay for everything while the state steps back from this role.