It goes further than that, it is the exact argument made by wealthy people as to why we shouldn't tax them more aggressively. Parroting that argument is ludicrous unless you're considerably wealthy yourself.

Just look back to the promises made before the election, how many were never fulfilled?

The left or right are the same side of the coins that the rich will support no matter what.

They shun people like Bernie Sanders, Picketty, etc.

In USA, social programs = socialists = commie.

That's how bad the brainwashing is.

Although, to be fair, also in the west there has been the Lastenausgleich which required owners of land to hand over 50% of its value (but it could be paid over 30 years).

Even people who want to tax the rich are skeptical about empowering / funding the IRS because there are many studies showing that the IRS disproportionately audits the poor.

If that’s true, then why would more funding help new enforcement against the rich rather than multiplying the current problem? Generally cash/support fixes material resource issues but cannot fix policy issues

We have gotten used to Congress being dysfunctional and not passing laws that we think the current laws are some unchangeable state.

I don't think further funding the agency is a completely nutty idea. Although if you truly believe the agency is broken, and that being broken isn't related to their funding, then I could understand your perspective. I lean more towards the idea that at least some, maybe even most, of the issues they have might be due to a lack of funding. That makes more sense to me than most of the criticisms I've heard of the IRS, which seem to mostly be on partisan idealism framed as otherwise.