When you say effect is that the rich get a bigger piece of the pie, you forget that it is their pie.
There was a time when Democrats and Republicans alike could talk sense about tax rates, in terms of what is best for the economy, without demagoguery about "tax cuts for the rich."
Democratic presidents Woodrow Wilson and John F. Kennedy spoke plainly about the fact that higher tax rates on individuals and businesses did not automatically translate into higher tax revenues for the government. Beyond some point, high tax rates on those with high incomes simply led to those incomes being invested in tax-free bonds, with the revenue from those bonds being completely lost to the government -- and the investments lost...
"Today, the uncertainties generated by an activist and anti-business administration probably have more of a chilling effect on investments than the tax rate does."
What is "a little bit," exactly?
Year after year, we see that the top earners not only pay more in federal tax dollars, but they pay a higher percentage of their money in federal taxes. And, not only this, they pay a higher percentage of total taxes.
It's absurd to imply, which you have, that the rich in the U.S. don't "give back."
Personally, I find the notion of one "giving back" absurd, especially when that one already pays plenty in taxes.
I think we forget how lucky we are to be born in the US. If BIll Gates or Mitt Romney were born in Sri Lanka, I don't think they would be as successful no matter how hard they worked. They were as successful as they are partly because they were born in the USA. I don't think it is unfair for them to give a little of that back to the country that helped them make it in the first place.