I actually agree with the premise and many of the conclusions, and if it popped up on Drudge or Breitbart or whatever I'd be fine with it, but why here? Why must every popular site devolve into either a virtual political cage match or another addition to the echo chamber?
The question isn't whether to "tax the rich" or not - it's "How should we tax the rich" and How much should we tax the rich?" that we need to answer.
Meanwhile the correct answers are:
- Bring back heavy estate ("death") taxes to prevent wealth from being passed from generation to generation,
- Create heavy wealth taxes so that persons who are merely lucky don't monopolize the wealth.
Both the above should be done b/c goverment needs the money. Of course the other thing we need to decide is how much should the government spend, but that seems to have no limit these days.
Instead, we simply have a demographics issue: Too many older folks with unpayable entitlements and not enough younger workers to pay for the bill.
We weren't, but since a week turned out to be longer than needed and I was worried about the cost of continuing, we ended the experiment early: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251. So it's back to the normal guidelines now.
(The worry about continuing was because there was evidence that some people thought the change was permanent, and that was not the intention.)