I can accept both that some people get just returns _and_ that weird market failures sometimes distort things. I'm untroubled by any contradiction there. The b

I can accept both that some people get just returns _and_ that weird market failures sometimes distort things. I'm untroubled by any contradiction there. The best piano player in the world may capture 95% of the album sales for Schumann's Concerto in A minor, without being twenty times better than the sadly impoverished second best. Stuck with number two, the empire would hardly crumble. Some markets, including patent races, just funnel all returns to first place. Aside from first past the post effects, we also have a market containing inheritance, unregulated monopolies, and the swings of fortune to name a few others. Not all of wealth is luck, but some seem to insist it never plays any role. Thomas Gilcrease comes to mind. Great philanthropist and wonderful businessman, got his start by essentially winning an incredible lottery. Progressive taxation can serve as a headwind to correct some of these excesses without scrutinizing desert[1] on a case by case basis (a monumental judicial task with suspect gains). The downside of a blanket solution is that you end up mixing the sheep of deserving rich in with your goats. To protect the noble wealthy that end up unfairly persecuted by such a headwind, we should just fight to make sure that tax policy doesn't suddenly beggar anyone, make sure that the ranking of wealth isn't significantly shuffled, limit how much markets are distorted, ensure a simple code that's easy to comply with and difficult to cheat, and make sure government expenditures are constrained wherever feasible. These areas could use significantly more work even if our tax structure went largely unchanged.[2] We can also take some comfort in the knowledge that a rich man in a progressive society is still, at the end of the day, a rich man, and may somehow muddle through. That's not to be too dismissive, I do think social justice is important for every individual. But I admittedly struggle to give equal weight to the problems of the rich when thinking of other social issues, like racial disparities in incarceration, or the treadmill to homelessness for those without access to mental health care. It's hard to rank "rich people don't have the tax rate they like" exactly among other problems we're confronting, but that's a bit of a separate discussion. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_(philosophy) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_(philosophy) [2] While my ideal would include a postcard sized return with higher rates for those pulling in millions, I'd gladly take, even prefer work on these other areas first.