Im no socialist, but I see nothing wrong with tax legislation that addresses extreme wealth polarization. The 2% live lives of unbelievable luxury, raising their top tax rate a few percentage points is not going to crimp their lifestyle all that much. Implementing a death tax on the very wealthiest will hopefully help reduce the deficit (and not simply used by Dems for more spending) as well as alleviate concentration of wealth at the top.
The problem you need to see with that is such a solution assumes that uneven wealth distribution has nothing to do with individual choices and everything to do with a system that somehow arbitrarily hands out varying amounts of money to people. That is simply not reality. Again, you can not come up with a solution if you have not correctly identified the problem.
I have absolutely no problem with wealth accumulation, in fact I celebrate it. I do have a problem with ensconced wealth, as we have here in America, when it gets in the way of long term prosperity and the survival of America. The primary problem is that when too many people believe the system is unfair they want to transform it, and you have social instability and a lack of loyalty to the country. The Democratic party has become radicalized because too many people feel that they are being unfairly left out of the bounty this country has to offer, and to some extent their complaints are not unfounded.
This massive income inequality has little to do with individual choices, and mainly the deck being stacked. The powerful wealthy class selfishly erects the system in a way to perpetuate their position, and stave off potential competition from below. A perfect example is illegal immigration. In 2009 half a million illegals took up residence in America to satisfy the demand for immigrant labor. Demand for immigrant labor? Last time I checked we have almost 10% officially unemployed, and 17% real unemployment, so what do we need to import labor for. If politicians represented middle class interests, they would end illegals working in this country tomorrow, which they could do it if they really wanted to. This would cure the unemployment problem overnight as unemployed Americans would fill those positions. Why does this not happen? Because it would transfer wealth from the aristocracy to the middle class with a sharp rise in the cost of labor. No question, the elites knowingly permit illegal immigration to insure a surplus pool of labor to keep labor costs down and their share of income higher, and screw the middle class.
Making the right choices makes you rich? If this were true tens of millions of middle class would be rich. You cannot reach middle class status without making good decisions. But the vast majority of people cannot become rich for many reasons. Factors such as where they live, opportunities they may or may not have, how much money they start out life with, whether they are attractive ( studies have shown this influences income), and so forth come into play. The biggest factor is the natural distribution of intelligence among the population which relegates the majority to no higher than middle class status because they are not smart enough to invent, manage, or otherwise offer something to society that would bring them riches ( read The Bell Curve).
The picture changes if you are fortunate enough to be born into wealth. George Bush was a bit of a playboy and made many a bad decision in his youth but still became rich and President. I happen to believe that Bush is intelligent, but no one would ever go so far as to say the man is a genius. He never struck me as a workaholic either. The extent of his success is almost entirely attributable to being born into privilege.
I don't see any need for the government to cut taxes for people like the Bushes, and many other family names that could be mentioned who are part of the 6 million wealthiest 2 percent. If it were up to me id take 50% of the wealth of anyone with assets exceeding $5 million upon death and apply it toward the national debt. Two generations ago the average ceo earned 40 times that of the average worker, today its a factor of many hundreds to one. I think we need to get back more to a 40 to 1 ratio so we don't end up looking like Mexico, or worse, 17th century France.
