No Obligation for the 1% to Give Because Nothing Was Taken

The point that the article was trying to make is that in a capitalist economy, the people who make money only make it by provided a valued good or service (criminals obviously not included here). We point at the 1% with their cash hoards but they only received that cash by selling something in a voluntary transaction that benefited both parties.

E.g. I sell you a coke and get a dollar. You now have a coke and I have a dollar. No one complains that you should share that coke but bc I made a dollar (or several million dollars from selling millions of cokes) I am vilified for not "giving back to the community". The reality is I have already given back to the community -- millions of cokes! I provided a good or service that benefited the community! People like Cokes!

Now the author makes a hyperbolic point about them not paying any taxes or giving them congressional medals of honor which I take as humor.

I agree that the rich should pay taxes to pay for "Police protection, employee education, etc." I suspect most people believe this as well.