@pthenq1 @NurseRatched it is a good question but often drastically exaggerated in terms of how much change it would make as it makes good headlines. Also, I think his point is coming more from a "Big-O" point of view. Meaning, if currently the spending factor of our current government is O(2^n) for example (hypothetical), where this represents the amount of tax money spent as a function of, say, number of government officials then it doesn't make much sense to complain because of a small number of people, say, a 200b factor to account for the few billionaires in society multiplied by how much tax they pay on average + 150,000,000p to account for the number of "average" tax paying normal citizens then we get that 2^n> 200b + 150,000,000p for values n=50, b=1,000,000,000 , p= 25,000 so even if the billionaires pay their fare share the government spending would still outpace it

Of course, this is a hypothetical scenario there are many simplifications and variables not taken into account. But ultimately the point is to showcase that the more fundamental question is how to lower the spending rate of government compared to the tax on citizens.