I'll draw this out as simply as I can.

You view taxes as justified - I view them as the theft, because when you take money from people without their permission under threat of government violence... its theft..

You want a "progressive tax" that funds a government by taxing (robbing) wealthy people more than it taxes (robs) poor people - I don't want people robbed.

I want the government to do FAR FAR less - and suggest funding those few services with more voluntary market based taxes or by simple agency of cooperation - agency that doesn't require force.

You have this notion that government should do less, but advocate for its collection of more revenue (which progressive tax codes are always aimed at) - further that it should do more things with more of the things you think are "redistributive" and less of the things you don't like. This is where we fundamentally disagree. Because:

1 - You are describing the system we already have, you are just disappointed it doesn't do more of what you want. - I know it doesn't do what you want, because its not designed to do what you want.

2 - You think if the tax code was just a bit more progressive - they'd be able to finally do all that stuff you want - I know that the feds pull in about 3 Trillion dollars a year and could do all the wonderful things you want ... if they actually wanted to. Further, when they don't have money to do the things they want to, they just print more of it. They don't provide those redistributive services you want... not because of revenue, but simply because they don't actually care to do them.

3- You have faith in a system that has done nothing to prove itself. - I understand its working exactly as designed to exfiltrate money from you for its own growth and profit.

We may agree on whats fundamentally broken - but our fixes are polar opposites. I don't need to insinuate you're liberal to make that determination.