The post goes out of it's way to mischaracterize the strategy (and purpose) of wealth taxes being proposed.

> Each 1% of wealth tax is equivalent to 20% of income tax.

Mathematically sound.

> Politicians understand that an additional 20% income tax would be a lot. And indeed a US state that added 20% to its top income tax rate would have extraordinarily high taxes.

That's the point.

> In the median case, US state politicians talking about adding a "mere 1%" wealth tax are talking about causing the residents of their state to have the highest taxes in the world. That's not the sort of decision you make lightly.

Not "all of the residents". Specifically the ultra wealthy that have a billion dollars. 20% at that point, is 20% of lots. You still have lots left over.

Mathematical fairness isn't the point, which is one reason there isn't a flat tax rate.