The World of Warcraft analogy is particularly bad I have to say. Firstly, I am not saying that people who got rich unfairly should keep what they have, so you are arguing against a straw-man. Secondly identifying people who exploited a bug, is usually very easy, in real live it is usually hard. Following on that, if you say that everyone above some level has to be severely taxed, then you are punishing also those who aren't guilty and setting up a bad precedent, both very bad things, instead of waiting until a proper solution, instead of a band-aid, is developed.
I didn't say you can'd draw a line, I said it was a bad solution (actually not even a proper solution). You came up with another bad analogy, because unlike owning the products of your labor, driving at any speed you wish is not a right almost all people agree on (even if some agree to trade part of that right for more of another right).
Regarding the public services and resources I definitely agree that their usage should be properly compensated by their users, and that is what should fund them and things like social security net. (I never said otherwise)
You are right that success is in part due to luck! What I don't understand is why people feel it is fine to suppress (even if slightly) freedom of other people, in order to make it easier for everyone to achieve success as is portrayed by mainstream media - fame and money. That is not considerate at all, as there are other concepts of success, multiple of them not requiring much money, with philosophies valuing things like freedom and compassion as ultimate values. That is why I cannot accept band-aid "solutions" instead of addressing the true problems in a proper way, which respects presumption of innocence.
> What is wrong, Mr. Graham, with REDUCING income inequality by taxing EXCESS wealth, and spending it on public services to maintain or even (gasp) improve social mobility?
Not Mr. Graham, but it would be hard, probably impossible to find a definition of "EXCESS wealth" which could be considered as just. This is one of the cases where majority opinion doesn't work as everyone has a significant stake in the outcome (is biased in another words).
The way to solving issues surrounding economic inequality should be to planned with a goal of as meritocratic society as possible. The ideal is a state that everyone can say whatever they own and made has has been acquired justly, without society taking part of it away, often just because it was the first practical idea, on how to fight a disease, many of them could comprehend and campaign for.