It's because the argument comes not from rational thought, but first from ideology - that the richer person _should_ bear a higher burden (which they do, but ju

It's because the argument comes not from rational thought, but first from ideology - that the richer person _should_ bear a higher burden (which they do, but just not percentage wise compared to their total wealth or income). Then they find examples of such, and use it as evidence. Buffett pays less in %, because he is not earning wage labour. That's not tax fraud, nor is it illegal.