As to this, the first portion of your statement is essentially correct. I'd covered this earlier. The top 1% isn't really making "far" more than 39% if you're going by percentage since they are about 42% of the financial wealth.
If they possess 42% of the wealth, but are only 1% of the population, that means that on a per person basis, they are really make FAR more IMHO.
Also, the lower tax rate is more of a statistical anomaly than a reality. While I am in agreement that "the wealthy" should have to pay their fair share, simply raising taxes on them is not the answer.
True, we need an economy based on wealth creation rather than services, but given where we are, we have to get the money from somewhere. Earlier I cited a stat that 80% of the population of the US possesses a mere 7% of the wealth. People can be mad at those people for being in their predicament if they like, but getting them to pay for multi-trillion defense outlays and decade long wars ain't gonna happen.
The tax system itself needs an overhaul.
I agree. I think Neil Bortz is a moron, but he was right about one thing, converting our tax system to a consumption based (Fair Tax) model is the single best thing we could ever do.
Reasons it will never happen:
1) Individuals will hold power over their tax rates by their own consumption decisions.
2) Politicians will hold no sway over any constituency because there would be no deductions, you spend X dollars, you pay Y tax on it, end of story.
3) It would put a lot of people dependent on the complexity of our tax system out of work.