Steal from the poor and give to the rich. Did I miss something?

A regressive tax system is defined by a tax level which increases as the wealth or ability of an individual or business to pay decreases. This mere definition sounds biased to favor the wealthy within a population. I completely agree with David when he states, "If we were to adopt a more progressive tax system, taxing the wealthiest Texans a much higher percentage than the paltry 3% they currently pay, while reducing the disproportionate tax burden on the poor, the benefits would be endless."

Texas is depending on regressive taxes, such as property taxes and a one-cent sales tax, along with fees to provide a great portion of funding for important state functions. When we look at inequality as David talks about it seems obvious to me that we are taking money from the poor to provide for the poor and likewise money from the rich goes right back to the rich. This money gap causes the issue David addresses of poor socio-economic mobility. If only there was a tax which could solve this problem; perhaps an income tax? Texas is one of only seven states which do not impose an income tax. 

An article on WiseGeek breaks down basic advantages income taxes would have over consumption tax including a progressive system which would adjust to individual incomes, consumption rates, and deduction qualifications. Income taxes would better measure an equal and fair amount of taxes each individual could be expected to pay. An income tax could also be used to distribute the wealth evenly so that districts or state functions which currently do not receive sufficient funding could be on the right path to receiving a more even disbursement of funds. Texas is currently attempting to solve funding issues but we are not looking into all of our options, especially those which seem more fair and beneficial.