[Todd D.]

What laws "favor the rich overwhelmingly" that couldn't be overruled fairly easily? I don't know of any systemic law central to our society that "favors the rich overwhelmingly" in US society at least.

[Jeff in Kentucky]

We have to make the tax system as complicated as possible, or thousands of accountants will be out of work.

I voted for Perot and his flat tax ideas. Here is some info about Perot's campaign in 1992, from Wikipedia:

"In the 1992 election, Ross Perot received 18.9% of the popular vote - approximately 19,741,065 votes (but no electoral college votes), making him the most successful third-party presidential candidate in terms of the popular vote since Theodore Roosevelt in the 1912 election.

A detailed analysis of the voting demographics revealed that Perot's support drew heavily from across the political spectrum, with 20% of his votes coming from self-described liberals, 27% from self-described conservatives, and 53% coming from self-described moderates. Economically, however, the majority of Perot voters (57%) were middle class, earning between $15,000 and $49,000 annually, with the bulk of the remainder drawing from the upper middle class (29% earning over $50,000 annually). Exit polls also showed that Ross Perot drew 38% of his vote from Bush, and 38% of his vote from Clinton, while the rest of his voters would have stayed home in his absence on the ballot.

Perot remained in the public eye after the election and championed opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), urging voters to listen for the "giant sucking sound" of American jobs heading south to Mexico should NAFTA be ratified."

[Bosnjak]

The Scandinavian state have the highest rich taxes and this states perform well.

[Dr House]

Rich people don't actually pay said high taxes, and regulation is lighter in the region than anywhere else in Europe. The state also invests extensively in the economy, as far as I know.

[Okonkwo]

Rich people don't actually pay said high taxes

Pray tell.

regulation is lighter in the region than anywhere else in Europe.

That's true. Scandinavian countries have almost no barriers to trade, this includes virtually no market regulation, neither in the product market, nor financially. Denmark for example ranks extremely well on the Index of economic freedom. Swedish corporate tax is at 28% and set to fall further.

The state also invests extensively in the economy, as far as I know.

Sweden and Denmark spend more than 50% of GDP publicly.

[Dave]

Pray tell.

The top income tax rate in Scandinavian nations is not all that high and the effective rate ends up being more or less comparable to other OECD nations. Wealth taxes have been eliminated and capital gains taxes are moderate. Financial planning which furthers tax avoidance is, like everywhere else, common place. There's a reason these nations have a 25% VAT.

That's true. Scandinavian countries have almost no barriers to trade, this includes virtually no market regulation, neither in the product market, nor financially. Denmark for example ranks extremely well on the Index of economic freedom. Swedish corporate tax is at 28% and set to fall further.

On the other hand, all of these nations, particularly Sweden (the most industrially advanced Scandinavian nation), utilized extensive strategic protectionism to industrialize contrary to the free trade industrialization myth popularized by the Scandinavians themselves today.

Sweden and Denmark spend more than 50% of GDP publicly.

Most of which is spent on transfer payments. Aside from typical roles like infrastructure and education, Scandinavian states largely do not invest in the productive economy or compete with private business, although they do invest and take stakes in corporations for investment purposes--not different from most other countries. The major exception to this is StatOil.

When examined closely, one sees that Scandinavia is in fact quite a bit more ordinary than people realize. The main difference I can see is that Scandinavians love their welfare states more than anyone else. In the Anglosphere welfarism is more of a standing joke (and something to be despised in America), and on the Continent it is protected but based on contributory (rather than universal) principles and subject to regular debate.