Indeed. The counter argument, however, is the suggestion that Jane's higher returns are at least partially due to her ability to extract favours from the govern

Indeed. The counter argument, however, is the suggestion that Jane's higher returns are at least partially due to her ability to extract favours from the government. Perhaps her mis-managed bank was shored up in a crash, while Jo's better managed construction business went bankrupt. Now, some heretics might suggest that it's better to stop the government doing people favours, instead of semi-blindly taxing Jane's gains for Jo's benefit and hoping most of it came from government favours (never mind that Jo is now extracting a kind of favour from the government herself), but such ideas don't get a lot purchase.