Should the wealthy pay a higher tax rate than they currently do?
This is a genuinely contested policy question where reasonable people disagree based on differing values and economic assumptions. Rather than giving you "the answer," let me lay out the strongest considerations on each side so you can weigh them yourself.
Arguments for raising taxes on the wealthy
Fairness/ability-to-pay: Many argue that because wealthy individuals benefit disproportionately from stable markets, infrastructure, and legal systems, they should contribute proportionally more. Some point out that effective tax rates on the very wealthy (especially via capital gains, carried interest, or unrealized gains) can be lower than rates paid by upper-middle-class wage earners.
Revenue needs: Rising national debt, entitlement funding gaps, and public investment needs (infrastructure, education, healthcare) create pressure to find revenue, and taxing those with the greatest capacity to pay is one option.
Inequality concerns: Wealth and income inequality in the U.S. have grown substantially since the 1980s. Higher taxes on top earners, especially if paired with spending on lower-income groups, could reduce inequality.
Diminishing marginal utility: An extra dollar of tax matters far less to someone with vast wealth than to a middle-income earner, an argument rooted in welfare economics.
Arguments against raising taxes on the wealthy
Economic growth/investment: Critics argue higher taxes on capital, business income, or high earners reduce incentives to invest, start businesses, or work additional hours, potentially slowing growth.
Capital mobility: Wealthy individuals and corporations can relocate income, assets, or residency to lower-tax jurisdictions, meaning higher rates don't always translate into proportionally higher revenue (and may encourage avoidance/evasion).
Already progressive system: Some point out that in the U.S., the top 1% already pay a very large share of total federal income taxes relative to their share of income, arguing the system is already quite progressive.
Behavioral/avoidance responses: Historically, large rate changes at the top have sometimes produced smaller revenue changes than static models predict, due to timing shifts, tax planning, and realization behavior (particularly relevant to capital gains).
Spending vs. revenue debate: Some argue the deficit problem is primarily a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and that tax increases alone don't guarantee fiscal responsibility.
Key empirical uncertainties
My take
I don't think I should tell you what your tax rates "should" be — that depends on value judgments (how much you weight equality vs. growth vs. individual liberty) that aren't mine to make for you. If you want, I can go deeper on any specific proposal (e.g., a wealth tax, raising capital gains rates, estate tax changes, or international comparisons) with current data and projections.