Re: Wealth distribution benefits all (and defenatly the rich).
>>By removing my arguement for poverty not being the only cause for crime<<
...What? Are we 5? You had to state that there are more influences on crime rates than poverty? And 2+2 is 4. And water is wet.
>>you yourself created the simplistic view that crime is a direct consequence of poverty.<<
Not only did I never advocate such a position, but it was you operating under this assumption in claiming that welfare reduces crime, which I argued against.
I've stated about 5 times now that I was taking issue with your claim regarding welfare and crime, not poverty and crime.