Tbh that's not even an interesting view like it's counter-intuitive, just interesting that no one else has the same view.

Like duh, in the 1950's, widely regarded as the golden age for America, the super rich were taxed like close to 90% and society was thriving. Small businesses could operare with margins that were effective enough to buy a house and support an entire family.

To avoid tax, the wealthy would spend their money instead of hoarding it, and when that money was spent it had to go somewhere. That keeps the economy flowing, with money going to either small businesses, or to the government through tax who then spend that money on infrastructure upgrades.

And since Reaganomics (trickle down economics) that all went away. "If we tax them less then they will have more money to spend, so they will spend more money which goes to everyone." But they already were. Now, without tax reduction influencing their spending decisions, the rich can just keep the money that they were goihg to spend, removing those dollars from circulation.

Super wealthy individuals pay the same amount of money they would have paid anyway to avoid tax, but instead it's spent on lobbyists whose sole job is to make sure the government never increases the taxes on the super rich ever again.

Like this is pretty much square goes into the square-shaped hole level problem solving and it's astonishing that no one really takes any steps to just solve this very simple issue.