Two of the richest on the lists that we have seen, decided not to take their earned wealth and build mausoleums to themselves, but to rather donate a large percentage of it to the poor... Guess which affiliation they are, liberal or conservative? Take the pledge? Think The Donald would take the pledge? http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/08/04/40-billionaires-sign-the-gates-buffett-giving-pledge/
I don't know how those individuals came into their money, but my experience is that those who earned their money tend to be more resistant to higher taxes. There are exceptions to every rule, but that's just my experience. People that I know that have done well financially are resistent to giving the government more money because the results are so bad. In California, where I live, taxes have gone up and the number of government workers has increased by over 30% during a time when the population has only increased by ten percent (1998-2008). During that period of huge spending increases by the state, schools got worse, roads got worse, sewer and water systems got worse (during the period from 1998-2008 state government spending increased at twice the rate of economic growth in the state). The only group that "earned" their raise was the police. Crime went down. And that's really the issue when it comes to taxation. What are we getting for our increased taxes? In California, nothing. That's the real issue for me. I would gladly pay more taxes if I thought our country would be strentghened by it. In the last 40 years, California has gone from the 27th most heavily taxed state to the 6th highest. And during that time, by every measure, government services (except police and fire) have declined. There's no accountability in California government. Failure after failure by government workers is met with a littany of excuses and the demand for more funding. The federal government's track record is not much better.
Giving money to charities is very different than paying higher taxes. My wife and I give a lot to charities, too. But we carefully select organizations that have a proven track record of helping people improve their lives. That's very different than giving money to the governnment where much of it gets pounded down rat holes.
Please note that you're full of shit - as usual. Seven out of the top 10 richest congressmen are hypocritical democraps.
The problem plaguing the charity model (if it worked, would we have this inequality?) is the same problem plaguing orthodox socialism and laissez faire capitalism, ie. freeriders.
And they're often within the charity itself. Someone once said words to the affect," Americans can be philanthropic, you just have to pay them first". I can atest to some truth in that decades ago I worked in a phone bank where solicitors could make a grand a week if they were given repeat donor lists. I often wonder how much boomeranging there is within the great cross section of American, or any charities which would make claims to greatest generosity suspect.