relativity

SOCIALISM

What a hard thing to understand - or so it seems. If something is at its current position and a change is proposed, what is the best way to quantify the change? The relativists like to smear reasonable differences so they make G91(relative) comparisons. Absolutists would prefer a comparison based on an G90(absolute) scale not some flimsy qualitative emotional one. So if (hypothetically) the current tax rate is 90% on the rich and the proposed change is to lower it to 35%, the relativists declare that as unjust if the working poor only get a tax cut from 25% to 15%. In their glass half empty world view, they see the bulk of the cut going to the rich irregardless of the fact that the tax rates were absolutely not fair initially (see the 1980's and 2000's tax cut debate). Progressives are dogmatic relativists. A perpetual election machine worked for them for a wide middle portion of the last century. Progressive pop history reads that the new deal solved the depression when it actually made it worse. The great society battled poverty but in reality it remained at the same rate. Now they like to cite stagnant wages to argue for increased government health care and tax credits, even though the calculation they use to calculate wages does not take into account the very things they are advocating for, and therefore could not increase wages. That way, conveniently for them, we will need more socialism that definitionally can't fix societies supposed problems. Its a turn left - turn right - mentality that gets one lost when north, south, east west directions are needed. How is one to know if humanity is making progress if its all relative?