Nobody rationally proposes to "give more" to the richest people; but as long as you characterize the idea of taking less
from taxpayers (including the very wealthy) as being a "gift" to anyone, you are buying into failed doctrine. Time has proven to us that government does very little well, and is best limited to that narrow category of things which it must do. Even then, ineptitude is the order of the day.
At this stage in my life, I am confident that I will never be a "wealthy" person (although by the standards of most any third world country, I certainly am - but by those standards, I was when I was 20 years old, and had no money in the bank but did have a job, and a roof over my head). Notwithstanding that reality, though, I do not resent those who are m ore successful than I, so long as they accomplished their success without criminal activity.
The painful reality is that, the more produced wealth is extracted from those responsible for producing it, the less wealth (for everyone) produced. It is inevitable, as certain as death, gravity and inertia.
Suggestion (directed at no one in particular): if your first impulse when you read an opinion with which you disagree is to disregard it because of the source, rather than evaluate it for possible merit, you're choosing ignorance over enlightenment. When I read opinions, I neither disregard nor credit them based upon the age, race, social station or other characteristic of the person sharing them; I try very hard to read and understand them. Over the years, I have often found my views on issues change from those I held at a younger age.
By way of illustration, I have concluded, for a lot of reasons, that the negative aspects associated with the death penalty substantially outweigh any hypothetical benefit it might convey, and I no longer favor it. This is a change. I can describe this change in my thinking to friends who are, by any account, "conservative," and had discovered that even where they disagree with my conclusion, they don't seem compelled to call me an idiot, to yell at me, or to say that I'm not qualified to have that opinion based upon some irrelevant demographic reason.
As for the new Representative from New York, I'm amazed at much of what she proposes, and regard it as profoundly misguided. Not going to call her an idiot, though - after all, she has managed to elevate herself, at the ripe old age of 29, to a position which, if properly managed, will relieve her of the burden of actual productive work for the balance of her natural life, something I've never managed to accomplish.