>>>>>>What gives us the moral right to demand such a thing?
>>>>>
>>>>>You ask great questions, Michael.
>>>>>Before I try to answer that one, I'd like to know a bit more about the context.
>>>>>What, if anything, do you think gives you the moral right to demand anything of someone else and if there is such a right, what would be something that you think that you have the moral right to demand?
>>>>
>>>>Very little.
>>>>
>>>>If a policeman demands your automobile because he likes the color, not moral.
>>>>
>>>>If a policeman demands your automobile while in hot pursuit of a kidnapped child, I think we would all agree that is moral.
>>>
>>>By that standard, it's the motive of the confiscator that gives the moral right.
>>>Is that what you had in mind?
>>
>>No. We all know the road that is paved with good intentions.
>
>OK, then what standard did you use to determine that one confiscator had a moral right in your example while another didn't?

What would a "reasonable person" do if he found himself as any of the parties in this scenario?
The car owner: It is just a car, save the child.
Parents : It is just a car, save the child.
Cop : It is just a car, save the child.

Back to the original question about the morality of "soak the rich"

How would you want to be treated if you were that person?
Seems silly to have to say it, but the Golden Rule.

It is downright humorous to hear all the protests that the soak the rich advocates have about how they indeed would consent to giving up their family's wealth if they were in that next higher rung on the ladder.

In fact, they don't.
"The rich" are defined as in higher economic rungs than themselves.
If by luck, they find themselves in that next higher rung, then the only worthy targets for confiscation are in a yet higher rung.
They want different rules to apply to others than to themselves.
On what planet is that fair?
On this planet that is envy and hypocrisy.

Some extremely wealthy people do indeed give up much of their fortunes - at death or before to charities they deem worthy.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet come to mind.

To repeat:
Charities.
And that was after they make generous gifts to their kids.
By choice.
Not by force.

I have heard of poor, middle class, and wealthy people donating their entire estates to churches and other charities.

I have never heard of anybody voluntarily donating their estate to the federal government.
Our federal government is many things, but a charity it is not.