I completely agree that as presently structured the income tax is not truly fair or progressive. I only used that anology as a paradigm or general principle of application.
In fact, as presently structured the income tax falls disproportionately on the working middle class.
Part of the problem is that the volumes of the tax code are too complicated. Even tax lawyers and accountants can have different understandings and interpretations of the same article.
Even though the top 10% of wage earners pay more than half the TOTAL revenue collected they have the means to exploit the various loopholes and protect assets from taxation. A perfect example of that is Warren Buffet who supports the infamous "death tax". What he doesn't say is that his millions are shielded from this by trust and deferred shelters.
On the other hand, the lower incomes pay virtually nothing but, as you indicated, payroll taxes.
I think the most equitable tax program I've heard is the Steve Forbes flat tax. But I think the 16th Amendment should be repealed as a sine qua non before any alternative tax goes into effect.
By the way, a basic principle of traditional common law is that the people should be able to comprehend any laws to which they are subject. The tax code egregiously violates that principle. In any case, no matter what the future brings, it's utterly disgraceful not to simplify the present code which looks like it came from a Kafka novel.
Fair Taxes. I generally agree with one caveat. The most effective laws are laws that have no exceptions. I'm not a fan for taking a hard line on taxes, whatever, and then making 'exceptions' for 'this' group or 'that'.