I'm not against taxation, and I'm pretty sure I always will (and have) voted in favour of it; however, I've always been skeptical of how far it can go in terms of mitigating disparities in wealth. The income gap and wealth gap surely have some kind of correlational relationship, but I think the stronger explanation as to why many at the top remain there and those closer to/at the poverty line (or even those who are lower middle-class/"house poor") has to do with generational difference.

While it's obviously true many are wealthy due to their annual earnings, it seems to me that a good chunk of people--and especially those with ridiculous amounts of wealth--are particularly so because (i) they incur little debt in life in virtue of having their education, rent, etc. paid for until they make their own serious salary and (ii) get a swath of "gifts" and properties passed down to them which they can then turn for a profit.

Taxation slows things down, yes. But how far does it go/what amount of difference does it really make? Still, there is also a body of data suggesting that higher taxation leads to further economic growth, which would be foolish of me to deny. There is, of course, another sense in which there are concerns more fundamental then economic efficiency (e.g. people's integry and livelihood).

UBI would be awesome.