I'm not entirely certain that "working for a living" and "understands economics" are meaningfully correlated. "Working for a living" and "being able to understand the basic concept of fiscal policy", maybe, but full-blown economic policy is something rather different.

So he would be better educated if you took away his money?

Isn't that kind of his point?

That's more of an argument for an estate tax than a tax on the rich in general.

I'd have to check my dad's portfolio before I could take a principled position on this issue.