I was actually afraid to come into this thread (although I saw it on the sidebar a few times) because I was afraid it would be rich-bashing. I feel very strongly that if someone works hard, they deserve to have control over the income they therefore bring in.
That is, some friends of mine think there should be a top income cap (say $100,000) and that all money earned after that should go to the government to distribute. But my argument is that 1) people would just stop working if that were true, and we would lose a lot of productivity, and that 2) why in the world would we feel the government would do a better job of distributing the money better than a skilled, talented person would? I would MUCH rather trust the average high end executive to make the right decisions than I would trust the average government worker who is "spending someone else's money".
Look at all of the amazing foundations which have been set up by wealthy people which do FAR more good than the government could even if the government had 10 times the money. The people who earned the money have an incentive to spend their hard-earned cash in a way that makes the most effect. The government has no incentive at all.
I feel pretty strongly about this
But I am libertarian and feel individuals tend to decide best about their own lives. I don't feel the government does as well. I always try to balance my bills so I can donate as much to charity as possible - but *I* choose my charities and I work hard to choose them wisely. I would not want the government choosing for me.