The people who pay the most taxes also tend to be the same people who use the most resources. So in a since, they are paying more because they use more and have more that's being 'protected' by the govt. (e.g. police protect public property which the wealthy own, more federal disaster relief and insurance regulations are designed to protect the wealthy who own homes etc. versus the renters etc...)

There is no perfect democracy, the masses usually have a different set of issues, needs and wants than the wealthy. So should the few be able to make the decisions that impact the many - or should the have not's be able to control and redistribute wealth from the haves? I don't have a clue as to how to answer this.

In my home country, the wealthiest 2% control the government and all the resources. This has resulted in extreme violence, political instability and continued lack of health and welfare for the masses. Many of my homes and several business operations were destroyed in 1995 due to rebellion (which in large caused me to bring my family to the U.S.).

Our Democracy was and is so much flux due to the wealthy versus poor, few versus masses concept that I don't know the 'right' mix of decision making power any group should have. But I do understand why so many different views exist about controls, wealth distribution etc...