Progressive taxation is more fair from the standpoint of society at large. You're being myopic in only considering it from your point of view. How is it "fair" to force someone who is barely making ends meet and struggles to sometimes put food on the table to pay the same exact tax rate as someone who is rich, and whose biggest economic struggle is wondering whether to upgrade to a bigger yacht this year or next year? That extra $1,000 you'd be forcing the poor person to pay in tax would feed their kid for a year, but the rich guy doesn't even notice paying that much extra. Money does not have constant utility across all people. Maximizing the total utility across society -- now that's fair.
Not directly, but usually their labour is generating the value that produces the income that gets transferred to the rich person (eg via return on capital) allowing the payment for luxuries and the taxes on them (though more usually, it seems, the costs of avoiding said taxes).
Is that a joke? None of those are even real taxes. Sure, you pay sales tax on a yacht, but the poor person is paying the exact same percentage on their everyday items. That's regressive.
Also, don't you see how callous it is to worry about how a rich person has to pay country club dues, in the context of talking about poor people who struggle to afford food sometimes? Why would your sympathies lie with the person who has all of their basic needs met and is "struggling" only to utilize as many luxury goods (yachts, country clubs, sports cars, box seats) as possible?
