[Houshalter]

I think you've vastly confused cause and effect. Rich economies can afford high tax rates because they are rich, and poor economies have to compete for what businesses they can get.

Another obvious confounder is that richer states tend to be more urban, and urban places tend to be more liberal. Which vote for higher tax rates and social programs. Rural states are more conservative which favor smaller governments. This is just an effect of political demographics, not a cause of superior tax policies.

[Nokinside]

Many rich economies started poor.

Systematic investment to education and infrastructure have provided the tools to become a rich economy. Becoming rich country with low level taxation is possible only for countries with lots of natural resources, like oil.

[Houshalter]

Governments in most rich countries today are vastly larger than a century ago. American in particular was basically an extreme libertarian system until relatively recent times. These countries were already rich, or well on their way to becoming so, when their governments bloated up. Rich societies cause big governments, not the other way around.

Additionally, things like education and infrastructure are a tiny fraction of government spending (although they tend to keep growing despite not getting any better.) Almost no one disagrees that the government should fund those things. That's not where the vast majority of your high taxes are going.

[kemerover]

Systematic investment to education provides new enrollees for MIT and Stanford and, subsequently, workforce for Apple and Google. Brain drain is a real problem for developing countries.