Cornfedboy, I am not sure who you are talking to, but it is safe to assume that I must be one of your audience. It does not take Marxism to talk about morality. Charity is still morally superior to, say, spending extra money on yourself even in our society, isn't it? But, nobody will blame you for not rising above the norm of capitalistic instincts in our society. But, we will congratulate you for rising above the norm, though. In other words, good thing is good thing is good thing. No need to lean on ideology for morality. Not to feel too badly if you have not done a lot of good things with your money. I have not. Nobody has to in the US. But, sharing still is a good thing. Robbing is bad. And, neither is neutral in our society. In your context, morally neutral. That is how I see it, and my moral stance with money has been mostly neutral. Still, sharing is morally fulfilling as someone said here, and I do admire people who does that. Nonetheless, that is not to propose how much is "morally acceptable." Only you can determine that in the US. Are you materially affluent enough to buy your gears, so that the opportunity cost is minimal (that was the argument of mine)? Then, that is it. If you want to go into "morally acceptable" figures, that is about it. No ideological issues here. Who is trying to take the gears from your hands? By the way, there are rich Democrats and even rich Socialists. I am not sure why you are assuming so much here to put forth an argument nobody has hinted. If interested, we can talk some more tonight..
