[fnptkqhs] Money = speech

Embedded within the Citizens United and McCutcheon Supreme Court decisions is the idea that money is speech.  Consider then using those decisions to argue against income inequality: government actions (and inaction) which cause people to have less money than others, and in particular, less disposable income (which could become campaign donations), is tantamount to a restriction of speech, so should be prohibited. The government has a First Amendment obligation to reduce income inequality, especially poverty.

The inspiration is that the two court cases supposedly increase freedom of speech, which we assume is a good thing.  The challenge is to figure out how everyone can exploit, and ultimately benefit from, this increased freedom.