But a few points, the rich class have always subsidized the rest of the country, they have always contributed more tax money. Even if they work the loopholes to reduce their percentage paid, their total money paid to the government is much more than the middle or poor.
I am not one of those people who think that people should be "punished" for being wealthy. I still believe that it requires a lot of hard work and dedication to get successful, and I also believe people deserve the money they've worked for.
But a certain percentage of taxes has a much bigger impact on people with a low income. Relatively speaking, the poor lose more money to taxes than rich people because their financial situation just isn't as good.
Why should those with the least have to tighten their belts while those who can afford way more keep getting fatter? It is not exactly beneficial to the rich class either. For instance: if you have less to spend and get to pay money you don't own, you are more likely to appeal for support like medicaid and welfare (which are payed by taxes) and will cost the rich eventually more.
People like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, the two richest men in the USA (correct me if I am wrong), think that people, and I quote, should "stop coddling the super-rich". Warren Buffet says that in 2010 he paid a federal tax bill of $6,938,744 - including the income tax as well as the payroll tax, which is only 17.4% of his taxable income and a lower percentage than was paid by the other people in his office whose tax burdens ranged from 33% to 41%. And Warren Buffett's secretary shouldn't pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett himself.
Some think that the idea imposing higher taxes on the super-rich as a measure to control fiscal deficit is of much debate and controversy. Some argue that this approach is counter-productive, leads to volatile revenues, and isn’t an effective measure to raise revenues as it takes resources away from job creators in the private sector, which will deter investors from starting new enterprises.
On the "job creators" thing, I'd like to note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. And what ha been happening since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
it has also never been a problem getting them to buy health insurance, and as a group they are generally healthier than the middle or poor class, thus they use less benefits, or they purchase the catastrophy plans and pay out of pocket for basic health services (the upper middle class usually does this as well).
You have a point there, and I agree. But you specifically name services that are more beneficial to the poor than the wealthy. For instance: infrastructure, transportation, education, research & developments are examples of things that are more useful the more you have. Airports benefit more from business people and those who can afford to travel, than people who don't have the money to do this.
There are also people who compare the rich paying more taxes to people with a big car paying more insurance. You have more, you pay for more.