> While the L-curve demonstrates how the vast majority of income in your country goes to the few rich individuals, it also shows where most of the taxable income lies. Therefore, I claim that it will not reduce anyone's living standards if you double the tax burden of the filthy rich people and use it to pay for the increased costs. <br> <br>Depends on what sort of income you're talking about and what group of individuals. While the super-rich guy pays more tax than I do, there are a lot fewer super-rich guys than there are guys like me. So the total contribution by the super-rich group, compared to the group I fall into, is almost surely smaller. <br> <br>The super-rich group also earn a much smaller percentage of their income in the form of salary, and a much, much larger percentage in capital gains. The capital gains tax rate is currently flat. So you'd either have to institute a graduated capital gains tax rate (which would be incredibly annoying from a tax compliance point of view) or you'd have to raise the capital gains tax for everyone across the board. That creates a very real disincentive to investment. <br> <br>My whole point in comparing the U.S. to most other European countries w/ nationalized health care is that the demographics are different in the U.S.