About the WW2 tax rates: the effective rate for the wealthiest was not that much higher in that time period than modern tax code. This is mainly due to legal (or perhaps illegal) tax avoidance, which is largely similar to what will happen with this proposal. I suspect that whatever money that she thinks that she will raise to pay for things in reality will be a fraction of it sending us into more debt. People aren't going to pay that money. If they absolutely are forced to (not sure how it's possible to fully enforce it), they will leave the country (along with their businesses) or not work as hard.
Also, let's be careful with the inheritance thing. A family business is perfectly acceptable -- teaching your kid how to run the carpet cleaning business after you get old. Just because it's the size of Walmart, does it make it unfair that he got the opportunity to run it? If he's unqualified, the business will fail or the board will find someone who can actually run it. Still a meritocracy. If you're upset that he inherited a bunch of cash and is sitting on the beach drinking mai tais, well, an income tax isn't going to "get him" either. You'd need to establish a networth tax for that.
"Employment is not a gift bestowed on us by our wealthy betters. Neither is survival."
I invite you to create a list of jobs that would exist without innovation. Farming? Would sure as hell be difficult without all of those tools. If you'd like to be a sovereign citizen, feel free to go live in the woods, kill animals, rub sticks together to make a fire, and crap in a hole. I (a middle classer) am personally happy that there are people much smarter and braver than me that have invented things that created my job so that I can have a peaceful and enjoyable life. I don't give a [dang] what car they drive.