>>I advocate a 95% tax on estates valued over $10 million.

The UK imposed death duties that impoverished aristocratic families that had maintained stately estates for centuries. Some were ceded to the National Trust that pays no tax, others were saved by marriage to wealthy US heiresses in exchange for nobility, some were cleverly sold into perpetual entities that avoid estate duties, many were deliberately pulled down to escape liability, and a few fell into rack and ruin. Eventually the tax was removed. These days, new money from parasitic London financial services is scooping up and renovating stately homes as the pendulum swings again.

>> 90% tax rate on income over $10 million.

Yes, but the same people will be driven around in the same Bentleys as they purportedly earn $250K/year "working" for Canary Islands companies with jets and luxury accommodation.

>>I'm flexible on the brackets, but one thing is certain - no Dupont, Rockefeller or Johnson and Johnson heir should have the kind of leg up they now have on other kids when starting life, just by virtue of being born.

People like Bill Gates and Richard Branson agree with you. The idle rich truly are appalling.

>>And Medicare is SOCIALISM and don't trample on my second amendment rights!

Not so long ago there was an infamous UT poster who would repeat Thatcher's quote that the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend. Medicare has just about reached that point and if the young ever can be distracted from Trump hate or Confederate statues long enough to realize what Medicare represents for them (a $47T bill and no realistic expectation of similar benefits for themselves) then there's big trouble a-brewing as the rich voluntarily forego their Medicare rights so they're not part of the problem.