jeez
I really must learn to save my fucking work before closing the damn page. Must have done that at least half a dozen times in the past couple of months and it's extremely annoying. Unlike any half decent word processor, the phpbb software doesn't ask if you want to save your last couple of hours work. When you close that page, it's dead and gone!
/rant off
"even ground" doesn't quite do it. Sounds like your groping for "level playing field" which, in the vernacular, means (roughly) "fair competition". I think what you're trying to say is that "we're singing from the same hymn sheet" which, despite its quaint religious overtones, captures the notion of "agreement".
I like "timbered together" but, again, that isn't a phrase we would recognise. Until I read the book "Kluge" I always spelt it "cludge" which is how it's pronounced. What does it mean? I think "patched rather than fixed" just about covers it. As a programmer, I write frequent cludges into my own software (and I've identified thousands in other people's software). Typically I use them when someone identifies a bug and I don't have time to trace the root cause, so I write a trap to deal with it, in the hope that, at some later date, we'll undo the cludge, allow the system to fail, trace and fix the real cause. But we all know that many hundreds of popular commercial programs are, even today, "timbered together" with thousands of cludges...
Nope, I don't think I've seen the ET video. Remind me of the url...
Distribution of Wealth v Distribution of Income
Meanwhile, back on topic, one thing I'd add to my previous, in case it's not obvious. I draw a major distinction between distribution of wealth and distribution of income. The fairness issue arises, for me, on the latter rather than the former.
Most of us rely on income to keep the wolf from the door and Society has a vested interest in ensuring that none of its members are forced to "prey" on their neighbours to obtain whatever it is they need to survive. Not only does such behaviour damage communities, it necessitates a high economic cost in policing, prison and other punitive systems, which, in turn, justify higher taxes and, thus, like the American system, turn out to be a dramatically "false economy"
This constitutes both a pragmatic and ethical basis for a minimum wage (or, more generally, "provision of minimum survival resources").
Given that baseline, however, my own ethical view is that you cannot reasonably justify valuing the social and economic value of any human being as being hundreds of times greater than another. (with one notable exception) Not only does that imply a huge distortion in social values, but allowing one individual to withdraw from the global income pot, the equivalent of what several hundred less valued individuals are permitted must also, inevitably, reduce the size of the pot available to deal with the lowest valued individuals. Which then forces us back into the need to prevent the poor stealing from the rich with expensive policing and so on. What constitutes reasonable differentials, however, is a classic democratic issue because there is and can be no obvious "right answer".
The notable exception is "show biz". When a rock star or footballer is attracting 100,000 fans to their "performance" and those fans are paying voluntarily, then one cannot make an ethical argument against the star benefitting from those voluntary contributions. Their "donations" are as democratic as it comes.
But, quite separately from income, we have wealth - which can arise from various sources including, of course, income. Wealth obtained by seizure or theft, is indefensible (despite which most of our property laws defend it - try getting America back to it's original owners and see how far you get!)
But if you and I both earn, say, the average wage, for the duration of our working lives. And you manage to survive comfortably on 2/3 of it, saving the other 1/3 for your retirement; while I spend every penny I get, then when we get to age 70 and you're able to move to a comfortable villa on the coast and I'm forced to live in cheap urban social housing, there are no ethical grounds on which I can complain about your greater wealth!