"1. Government generates zero income, all wealth they redistribute is confiscated from individuals who earn it."
Wait, I must have missed something:
Do those indivuduals drive on roads?
Do they have a national defense that protects their wealth?
Do they have a legislative and judicial system that establishes a rule of law?
Unless those "individuals who earned it" live like Ted Kaczynski in the middle of the woods, they rely on a SOCIETY to help them generate their wealth.
"2. The top 10% of American taxpayers pay about 70% of the income tax burden"
See previous: if the top 10% want a functioning society to protect what they have, they shouldn't mind paying for it. Spend some time in Somalia and see what a lawless, Darwinian society produces. I certainly don't see many Wall St. types running off to anarchistic places. Sure, some countries will offer the wealthy havens from taxes, but it's unsustainable in-and-of itself in the long run.
"Rich or poor, regardless of your political leaning, Government has spent too much of our money and the current course is unsustainable. We have been forced to support a massive program of deficit spending that we won't be able to continue in the future. How that money has been distributed is about as important as the proverbial deck chairs on the Titanic."
Hey, you finally made sense. What you're saying is that spending on war in Iraq is equally as dumb as throwing money down black holes anywhere else; it's all a question of deciding what's worth it. I guess, to you, sending tanks, bombs, guns, and young kids over to the desert is more desirable spending that investing in healthcare, infrastructure, energy, and job creation?
Wow, when you're king I'd love to come visit your kingdom. Good luck.
PS - Ayn Rand's philosophies weren't much different than the game of Monopoly - remember - that game that ends when one player has all the money and the others have none? Sounded fun for two hours on a rainy night, but it's a sh1tty way to go through life.