asked wolfgang puck to make frozen burgoo dinners

"Ours is a permanently repressive society. You have to consider, Yell, to what extent is the system designed STEAL from the poor so that an elite few can get ahead?  When a government swimming in debt has no choice but to sell its mineral rights to a corporation or face bankruptcy; face having its people starve, face riots and perhaps civil war; when elites have connived to orchestrate evens and manipulate markets so that nations would be in this position, it becomes THEFT by the elite against the poor."

No it is not permanently repressive.  The example of "repression" is progress you ass.  When a country finds mineral wealth, sells licences to foriegn corporations, employs its people extracting the wealth from the ground, the economy of the country grows.  YOU sigh and wish they went back to eating antelopes and berries.  NOBODY. WANTS. THAT.

I will volunteer to lead this colony.  I won't live to see it but my grandchildren would have developed effective asteroid mining, come back to Earth, slam rocks into that bitch, kill off 90% of the human race and then use the survivors for labor to get raw materials to orbit.

Hunter gatherers dont produce much of anything.  They hunt. They gather.  When you start doing things like digging dirt berms to channel water onto grass and kill all the weeds and grind the dry seeds into flour and then hope somebody else will give you stuff for your flour that's worth all the trouble, then you are stuck with the producers sense of his value.  Unless you'd rather vote away his flour. 

If it were up to 21st Western society we'd have banned agriculture as wasting communal resources and disrupting the environment.  It's a proven fact that efforts spent farming are not spent building comfier palaces to the top hunters.

You are talking about a permanently repressive society that will impose taxes, not to fund government operations, but simply to steal from any citizen who gets "too far ahead".  I say permanently because as we see with Apple and cell phones and computers, any innovation that results in broader services and goods to a massive number of citizens will create "unfair" distribution - as you define it, because you wrongly measure the price of goods as relative to the purchasing power of the customer, so that fruit, coffee, housing, utilities provided at a set price to all consumers is relatively harder on the poor -- necessitating "distribution".

There is no distribution from those who never had the money to begin with.  You are complaining when any individual through their own efforts secures more wealth through services or goods to a broad enough spectrum of customers, or acquires ownership interest -- with millions of other lower class people! -- in ventures that do so. 

Every person who owns stock, directly or through a pension, in a company traded on the NYSE, owns part of a company worth $75 million, cause that's one of the requirements to get listed.  is that more exploitation?

If you see the need for temporary high taxes until the playing field is levelled then you are for big government since it collects the taxes.  Also if you call for things you don't support because you like their effect you can stop taking offense that everybody seems to assume you call for things you never supported.  You did call for them; you invent a line between calling for a coercive system of wealth distribution and SUPPORTING such as system.

Once you invest the moral authority of the government with the duty to rob Peter to pay Paul it will soon become "immoral" to argue that it's time to stop robbing.

Somebody who provides 10 minutes of service to one person gets some value back.
Somebody who provides 10 minutes of service to 100 people would expect 100X the value.
Somebody who takes the trouble to learn how to  use the internet and provide 10 mins of service to a million people will have 1 million times the value back.

It is pointless to say "that man is rich, he has opportunities we don't, the price of a new car or a house compared to annual earnings or lifetime income is horrific to us and insignificant to him, share his wealth, give back to us"

what happens in such a society? There's no point taking the greater trouble to serve more people.

you seem to be playing games with language.

You insist you don't have a problem with accumulation of wealth -- just how wealth is garnered and spent; it should be consumed with taxes.

You say you don't want a caring, progressive egalitarian state - you just want government to "transform society into one whose economy rewards cooperation, egalitarianism - a free market system without anti-trust activity"

I do not know what is the difference between a caring progressive egalitarian state, and one which transforms society into one whose economy rewards cooperation and egalitarianism.

you made it separate posts.

""The caring, progressive, egalitarian state is not a vehicle for progress."

I TOTALLY agree.  Where do you get the idea that I am calling for a progressive, egalitarian STATE?  Give your head a shake.  I AM NOT.

I am calling for the values of progressiveness, egalitarianism, cooperation - those values which were rewarded in hunter-gatherer societies, those which provided for the evolution of our sentience to begin with, to be by fostered and rewarded by civilization rather than PUNISHED.  For let's be clear, we do currently PUNISH, breed OUT of our species those traits which originally led to the evolution of our sentience.  In fact, we, by how we have constructed our civilization are DE-EVOLVING."

If you don't want an empowered STATE then why talk of coercive means like TAX?  Do you expect us to form a voluntary association of forcible donations?  We take it in turns to act as chief executive, but all decisions of that executive must be ratified by a two-thirds majority?

Apart from the British Royal Family, what ogliarchy of today existed in 1899?  Oil came in around 1910, I would have said "IBM" but they're not an ogliarch. Apple isn't much older than you, the telecommunications satellite was THOUGHT OF in 1957 let alone BUILT, Disney was started in the 1930s and didn't become a sure success until the 1950s...

The "repressive giants" you say are holding us back are the innovators moving our tech forwards, as their products become useful to more and more of the human race.

Fine.  Explain to me how I become a billionaire in your just, sharing, egalitarian society.

Didn't you mention the albedo of sea ice in your post?  Where do you think the sea ice is at, the poles, or off the coast of Kenya?