Your argument is simplistic at best, and facetious, intellectually dishonest, and disingenuous at worst. Anyone introducing a philosophical, mathematical, or scientific proposal strictly based on the writings of 2000 old philosophers and scientists would be out of their mind and laughed off the killing floor. Apart from basal theories, the sum of philosophical, mathematical and scientific knowledge is the result of centuries upon centuries' worth of cumulative work.
This is in contrast to those that derive their morals strictly from the Bible, disowning or disavowing the leaps and bounds in moral and philosophical thought over the centuries to get us to where we are now. In fact, if one reads the Bible, you'll find we, as a society, have disallowed most of the so-called "morals" the Bible espouses in favor of a more fair, democratically decided and logically thought out philosophically competent moral system, complete with (in contrast to the bible) racial rights, anti-slavery amendments, women's rights, religious rights, LGBT rights, and sectarian/secular rights.
The rest of your argument is so incredibly simple and mathematically naive it wouldn't be worth getting into, but, in a perfect world, I'd have to agree with your idea that rich people should pay flat tax and wallow in their dividends. We do not, however, and our economy is volatile, our people greedy, and our capitalists miserly, so let's not indict our fellow NS members for simplicity just yet when the majority of NS can barely form an argument, let alone a coherent and mathematically competent thought.
