Why on earth would taking wealth from everyone (and it turns into everyone – There are non-executive wage earners working mundane jobs who pay 50% taxes on their last bit of income and basically pay that on any overtime they work) and concentrating it in the hands of a few insanely powerful government workers ever result in less inequality? You’re literally making an overclass of super-powerful people a little bit stronger.
We’ve done that before – we gave all the power to people based not on their amount of money but instead their ownership and effective use of horsies and horsie accessories, hard clothing, and pokey sticks of varying descriptions and materials. It wasn’t a more equal society back then. The pokey stick hard clothing horsie people still got the nicest houses and could get a bunch of slaves to build big pointy buildings for them.
You’re just taking money from the super powerful (and everyone else) and giving it to the ultra mega powerful.
That’s not really true though. You can choose between the blue uniparty and the red uniparty (and occasionally an orange or light blue or purple uniparty)
Its a false choice. You get to choose between different colors of corrupt establishment who become rich off of their time in government because it turns out when you give someone that level of money and power they’ll definitely find ways to get some of it for themselves.
Yeah but the two-party system is a US thing which is ranking relatively poorly when it comes to democracies and is classified as a flawed democracy according to the Economist Democracy Index.
Your post makes it sound like increasing taxes for the rich will never lead to better circumstances for poor people but it absolutely does.
In a real democracy you can run to be elected. And if enough people like your policies you will be able to enact them.