[alloysteel]

"Wealthy" and "rich" are apparently two quite different premises, not at all synonymous. There is a widespread belief that the "rich" could somehow be taxed into a rough equality with "middle class" or even "poor". The wealthy, however, manage to continue to be wealthy, no matter what the political circumstances, except in the very special case of total confiscation, under force of arms. Apparently the wealthy do a decent job of defending their wealth, while the merely rich may be easily plucked of all the acquired money in their possession, as this acquired money has not been converted to wealth.

Am I the only one, or is there something wrong with this picture?

[headsonpikes]

...is there something wrong with this picture.

No, it looks like you're getting good clear reception to me! ;^)

Consider the possibility that the 'wealthy' generally have their interests well-served by their representatives, both hired and elected.

Why on earth do you suppose tax-codes are thousands of pages long?

It serves an interest.

[Verginius Rufus]

Obviously the problem is that rich people have too much money, more than they need.

What needs to be done is to decide how much is enough for anyone...say, $150,000 a year. After that determination is made, anyone who makes over that hands the excess over to the government. That should solve, at one stroke, most of the problems facing the country.

Of course, they would have to make a few exceptions, people who could keep more than $150,000--members of the U.S. Congress, trial lawyers, lobbyists, professional athletes, basketball coaches, abortion providers, ex-Presidents. Everyone else, hand it over. The government can make better use of the money.