About the intro: how many more people (since Karl Marx) will rediscover the Pareto distribution and come to the conclusion that it should not be the case ... It's perfectly natural, so many systems follow Pareto. From Wikipedia: - The sizes of human settlements (few cities, many hamlets/villages) - File size distribution of Internet traffic which uses the TCP protocol (many smaller files, few larger ones) - Hard disk…
Given that you feel like the Pareto distribution can never be wrong I propose that we model all taxes accordingly. After all it should be natural that very few people pay most taxes while most pay almost nothing. Nothing about wealth distribution is natural. With the help of the Pareto distributed political power that installed the system in the first place wealth is controlling itself.
Also taxes are a very successful way of dampening the inequality: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/04/13/american...
It's just that the top 50% or top 10% or top 1% or top 0.1% will always hold disproportionate amount of wealth, and no system will change that. Under USSR the select few in the communist party had that wealth, although it wasn't expressed in dollars (or any other currency), but in the power and unquestionability of their decisions.