If you are taxed at about 35% and the guy with a whooole bunch more money gets taxed at 25%, who has the advantage?
If an income-producing property comes up for sale and you can't buy it but the guy with the already huge tax advantage bids against you, who has the advantage.
Not saying that your points are valid, but only to a point.
What really builds wealth in this nation is owning assets, mostly in the form of property. Here is an example that Iowans can get.
Used to be that inheritance taxes were much higher. Now they are really quite low and financial vehicles have been legalized to help protect assets. Sounds good. But, a certain amount of farmland used to be sold in order to pay inheritance taxes. Now it is really not needed. As a result far fewer farm acres come up for sale. The market is priced out of most everyone's ability to buy farmland except for.....those who already own sizeable amounts farmland, those the owners are bigger and bigger in size of ownership. I know plenty of hard-working farmers that in no way can buy land. The young guys have to only rent on very low margins. With the current slide in corn and bean prices, who is going to get clobbered? Those who mostly rent or those who managed through hard work to scrape enough together to successfully compete with the big boys who likely also have a lower income tax/business tax bill.
Go back to WW2. Mennonite communities are quite big in a few Iowa communities. While many non Menno young men were fighting wars, Menno's had more labor available and bought up land in these areas'.
Politics/politicians do have a lot to do with wealth.
To the extreme you likely hear about this:
https://fortune.com/2020/03/20/sena...tock-coronavirus-threat-briefings-in-january/
Who has the advantage in this?
Not just the senators, but DONORS. You think these senators would also pass laws to help real donors? maybe.
It's just human nature. Not Dem/Repub.