If it's an analogy, what is it an analogy for? I've dissected the bejesus out of it, while you just keep saying "you're wrong." You further say "the purpose is to demonstrate the role of coercion, yet the closest the author gets to this is "Yet for some reason, Warren acts as if the "social contract" always means we can take more from rich people, regardless of how much we're currently taking." The whole crux of the issue is that the majority of people without wealth feel that the majority of people with wealth aren't paying their fair share - and Warren's take on this is "You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea -God bless! keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along" - nowhere does she say "the government is entitled to your wealth" nor does she say "you need to pay for a welfare state so that the indolent can continue to suck off the public teat." Yet the mises.org article includes the following statements:

- If it weren't for the prior existence of language (not to mention the discovery of mathematics and electricity), then the current members of the Forbes 400 list would be living like savages.

- Yet for some reason, Warren acts as if the "social contract" always means we can take more from rich people, regardless of how much we're currently taking.

- Warren simply asserts that the government should be the recipient of this understandable urge for the wealthy to share.

- Here again, we see Warren injecting the government into the mix, without any justification.

- It's not as if a factory has a choice between getting products via government highways or privately run highways.

These are not valid points of discussion. These are the rants of a Libertarian mindset so far removed from logic that they see "big government" in every statement. The idea that taxes should be optional because public roads are not is preposterous on the face of it - yet this idea, and ones like it, are typical of mises.org.

And that's why I gutted the article and walked away, rather than bludgeoning through the whole "the rich pay more taxes so pay no attention to the fact that as a measure of wealth they pay less" aspect of the part you want me to discuss. So if you would really like me to talk about that more,

apologize, asshat.