DanM,

You are defining "benefits" very narrowly. As in, "what services and goodies do I directly get in exchange for my taxes?"

That leaves out all the intangible benefits derived from taxes and equitable income distribution: stable markets, protection of private property, consumers with enough disposable income to buy products, low crime. Even such things as bus service and homeless shelters.

Without stable markets, you could not run a business without fear that the instability could wipe you out at a moment's notice. That benefits the rich more than the poor.

Without protection of private property, the rich (who have much more property) would have a lot more to lose than the poor.

Without consumers with money to spend, no one would be able to buy your products.

Low crime — which is linked more to economic opportunity than to enforcement — allows you to operate your business with minimal security costs, and also allows you to enjoy the fruits of your labor without undue fear. That benefits the rich more than the poor.

Bus service allows your lowest-income workers to get to work, where you can employ them for those low wages. That benefits the rich even though they don't use the service themselves.

Homeless shelters provide a place for the homeless to go, which at a most basic level means they're not sleeping in your bushes, breaking into your home in search of shelter, etc. That benefits the rich even though they don't use homeless shelters.

Public education improves the economic prospects of those who use it, reducing their potential burden on society — a major benefit to the rich even if you send your own kids to private school.

Even if you believe in and accept the existence of a permanent underclass, and even if you don't accept my arguments above, transferring a certain amount of wealth from the rich to the poor should still be accepted — simply as self-defense. Major wealth inequities are at the root of most revolutions. Western democracies are stable, in large part, because of the large middle class and the availability of economic opportunity. If the rich are allowed to concentrate their wealth through some misguided definition of "tax fairness", that model will be broken — and the guillotine could get a workout again.