> "It's a major reason why taxation should focus on the rich (as opposed to the 'well off' e.g. high incomes). They really will not notice it aside from ideological opposition."

I don't understand what the srawman you think I was making is supposed to be. The quote is what I was replying to. He was referring on taxation focusing on the rich (not the well off). My original reply was commenting on that.

Is the strawman supposed to be that 1% is too high a bar of entry to be considered rich? Or something else?

Financial security is a much higher bar than 1%.