You're making it sound like the work won't pay. It will, just less. Care to quantify "kingdom come"?
This argument is effectively:
"I will work my arse off if the tax rate is 5%, but not if the tax rate is, say, 45%. It's only worth it if I can become hyper-rich; super-rich just isn't good enough for me."
Where is the evidence that increasing income/wealth taxes from, say, 20% to 40% causes people to work less hard? And where is the evidence that, even if this were true, it outweighs the other economic benefits of wealth redistribution?
"Kingdom come" is the tax rate at which the risk of entrepreneurship is much greater than the potential after-tax reward.
To your other question: whether nor not it outweighs any supposed benefits of wealth redistribution is irrelevant to the individual entrepreneur. Someone willing to work his ass off to start and run a successful venture isn't likely to think "I'll lose the majority of my profits to taxes, but I don't mind because at least it's being redistributed fairly."
This argument is effectively:
"I will work my arse off if the tax rate is 5%, but not if the tax rate is, say, 45%. It's only worth it if I can become hyper-rich; super-rich just isn't good enough for me."
Where is the evidence that increasing income/wealth taxes from, say, 20% to 40% causes people to work less hard? And where is the evidence that, even if this were true, it outweighs the other economic benefits of wealth redistribution?