&gt; This is backwards.<p>Only because I copied your phrasing.<p>I dare say there are people around who want to tax rich people just because they don&#x27;t like wealth, but that&#x27;s not what&#x27;s being proposed by the OP and it&#x27;s not what most people advocating higher taxation are calling for. E.g., from the OP: &quot;So by taxing the wealthy and spending it on services, we can better ensure that the level playing field you allude to continues to exist.&quot; (In case it isn&#x27;t clear from that quotation, the &quot;level playing field&quot; isn&#x27;t about equalizing wealth or income, it&#x27;s about providing public services to everyone.)<p>&gt; equating wealth and evil<p>Who&#x27;s doing that? Here&#x27;s the OP again: &quot;No one believes that there should not be rich people.&quot; &quot;No one wants to take the money you have away.&quot; You may think the OP is insincere, but he is very plainly not equating wealth and evil. I don&#x27;t see <i>anyone</i> here equating wealth and evil, implicitly or explicitly. I&#x27;m afraid I think you&#x27;re just imagining it.<p>Here are arguments I see actually being made by people in this discussion advocating more tax. I have italicized the only one of these arguments that is on the same continent as the ballpark of &quot;equating wealth and evil&quot;, and it&#x27;s still a fair way away. Governments can allocate capital more effectively than most billionaires. Taxation may incentivize wealthy people to invest more. Taxes are low right now compared with what they have historically been, so raising them might be a good idea. Inequality itself causes social problems. <i>No single person can really be so much more productive than others as to justify billions in wealth; so if someone is that wealthy, they got that way on account of others&#x27; work, so they don&#x27;t deserve it.</i> Economists are saying we need to reduce inequality to avoid disaster.<p>&gt; Will it be ok if wealth from developed nations were transferred to poor nations, every year?<p>Yes, that would probably be a good thing. Is it supposed to be obviously not? Most developed nations <i>do</i> in fact transfer some of their wealth to poor nations every year. So do citizens of those developed nations. We call the first of those &quot;aid&quot; and the second &quot;charity&quot; and while it&#x27;s possible to argue about how effective they are it&#x27;s certainly not obvious that they&#x27;re a bad idea.