::::::I used the term "enforced equality" to refer to wealth redistribution that is not the result of a free market, aimed at equalization of wealth. In other words, redistribution by rule of law - e.g. thru taxation, etc. as opposed to private transactions between consenting individuals. If you can suggest a more appropriate term which you think is less POV-laden, I would be glad to use it, as well as any low-POV term for "anti enforced equality". I think it is wrong not to question the funding mechanism behind any research, on either side of a question. Not only wrong, but negligent. There were plenty of articles proving that cigarette smoking did not cause lung cancer, funded by the tobacco companies. It is absolutely true that this does not imply that their methods and conclusions were wrong, but any research that arrives at a conclusion that is pleasing and profitable to those who funded the research needs extra scrutiny. As for being controversial to obtain funds, I have seen this in action many times. You go to a doctor who says you are completely healthy, you go home happy. A doctor says you need an operation, you get a second opinion, and a third. Anyone who writes an article that reaffirms the current wisdom, is not going to get funding for a followup. Someone who rocks the boat, creates an uproar, will definitely find funding, particularly if their article fits in with the agenda of the people funding them.