Too much Redistribution?

President Obama's budget proposal will raise effective taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year, to raise around 1 trillion over ten years.  That's 100 billion a year.  About 2% of American taxpayers are in this category.  Assuming for round numbers that 100 million tax returns are files (I think the real number is more like 60 million), that's 2 million filers.  By my math, the average tax increase will be $50,000!  Of course, the median will be lower, but I'm still seeing numbers in the $10,000 range for that.   (Sorry, I need to find that link again)  For the very top 1%, the tax increase will average $100,000.

And that's just the feds.  Already cash strapped state governments are planning to follow suit.  Oregon may hike taxes on those earning more than $250,000 by 2%, which is another $5000.  Plus reduce medical deductions for higher-incomes.

Roughly half of this money will be returned directly to lower income Americans as a median tax break of $800.  They will also benefit from a slew of new social programs, such as in health care and education.

As a slightly rightward-leaning centrist, I wonder if this proposal is too much redistribution.  I can accept increased taxes on the wealthy.  And accept some increased funding (and hopefully improvements!) in social programs that benefit all, though they tilt to the non-rich.  But, in a time of fiscal problems, to spend a substantial amount to lower taxes on the poor and middle-class may be a step too far.  If paying taxes is "patriotic", especially with current budget deficits, why do only a few percent of Americans get to be patriots?

In my opinion, if you want to reduce income disparity, especially extreme high CEO pay, do something with the corporate tax codes to discourage this.  

On the positive side, Obama proposes to reform Medicare for cost efficiencies.  A great idea, echoing some of the "sabremetrics" ideas of Billy Beane et. al.