economic inequality

I am interested in people who are against hunting regulations.  Is it that they disagree with the number of deer allowed to be taken and the extent of the hunting season or are they against regulations period?  Anyway my point is that being against all regulations, is stupid.  You can choose to be against certain ones, but to be against all of them is crazy.

Haven't heard anything more about Dumbo's idea for eliminating two regs before you can put a new one in place.  He recently has claimed that he lost because three million illegal voters voted against him.  No proof, no citation, no nothing, none of that is needed in the post truth world. You guys haven't noticed I'm sure, because you don't obsessively watch it like I do, but even now when one of the Trumpists are being interviewed and asked something like what about all those business connections running afoul of national interests, they reply how about that Hilary.  They know how to be against something, but not how to be for something.

Public schools where all kids are expected to attend are only like a hundred and change years old.  Back in the day they had those McGuffy readers which were pretty Christian, but then so was the country back then, or at least it gave it lip service.There was no religion in my subbing days.  There was a push for diversity and for ecology, but no distinct political indoctrination.  General things like fair play and courtesy were encouraged, but those are the sort of things that you need whenever you get a bunch of people together.  Individual responsibility is a vague term, and I don't know how you would teach that.  Do any of my colleagues want to expand on the concept so I would be surer of what they mean?

I came across an interesting article in The Reader yesterday.  What the guy was saying was that the liberals are making a mistake by concentrating on diversity and letting economic equality slide, and is that why they lost that working class white vote and the election.  The idea being like women breaking the glass ceiling and becoming CEOs and this being applauded, while what we (liberals) should really be concerned about is the obscene salaries CEOs get vis a vis the saps who scrape the gum from the marble floors of their lavishly appointed restrooms.

Well is economic inequality an evil?  Is it something we should try to narrow or something we should shrug off as just something that happens?  A certain economic inequality is to be expected, but is there a point when it becomes a problem?  I'll leave that for discussion while I do my internet research on who that article was written on and economic equality during recent history.