Nice ad hominem attack, accusing me of being a different species and all that. What about compassion for those who toil and labor and feel preyed upon by fraudsters, looters, and those whose sense of entitlement causes them to covet more than they are contributing to society? I am not against social safety nets, but you cannot declare things to be basic human rights that require the fruits of the effort and creativity of others to be coerced from them in order to guaranty such "rights".
Compassion is an individual trait. It is not something that can be compelled by government fiat, no matter how much some people may wish that were so. I personally have given far more to charitable causes than my peers in my tax bracket. I would be able to give even more if the (U.S.) Federal government would actually respect its constitutional bounds and not try to do all sorts of things that were meant to be state and local concerns.
A bureaucratic centralized government is simply not very good at being a respecter of persons. As a result, it is very susceptible to fraud and abuse, thus denying those who are truly in need the help they deserve. Communities should be the ones helping their own, not a bureaucrat in a distant capital deciding that only one solution is the "correct" one.
I am not asking for taxes to be lowered (at least not initially). What I would like to see is that the Federal bureaucracy be slashed and the revenue returned to the states and localities based on demographics in the form of block grants. I certainly do not advocate, for example, that local school districts suddenly face financial crises because they are abruptly weaned from the Federal government teat to which they have become addicted.
But, communities are small groups of people who form social bonds and look out for each other. Having an overbearing central government dictate solutions to what are ostensibly local problems from "on high" does not have a very good track record of success.
So, I suppose my "ideal society" is to return control of matters to the smallest locus of responsibility of the group that is affected. This doesn't advocate suffering. On the contrary, it advocates communities bonding together and forming their own solutions that are tailored to their unique problems.