Wow. Three separate articles, one from the somewhat liberal side, one middle-of-the-road, and one a conservative voice, (and it happened they were the three top hits from my search--no need to spend countless hours sifting through propaganda to find supporting evidence). It's very convenient when a person wants to arbitrarily dismiss valid evidence when it doesn't support their unfounded theory.
The simple fact is, people have the duty to pay taxes. Those taxes pay for basic services enjoyed by all Americans (and enjoyed by some immigrants like Saverin). The goal of taxation should be fairness, and the goal of providing services should be need based. Typically, people define 'fair' as "You should pay more; I should pay less". The irony in our country today is we have lower-income and middle-income people advocating for the super-rich, in essence saying, "I'll pay a much higher percentage of taxes so Bill Gates can protect his billions".
And, I'll answer my own question about why a person would revoke their US citizenship: the reason this is done, in the great bulk of cases, is for tax avoidance. Revoking one's citizenship is a very grave, monumental, and drastic action. This is akin to disowning your child, abandoning your family, permanently disengaging from your mother, or a state seceding from the Union. This isn't a light-hearted, "I think I'll vacation in the south of France for a few months" kind of deal. Besides tax ramifications, people have threatened to revoke their citizenship over extreme and bitter political policy disagreements (especially when the US has a sympathetic position for a country at war with the person's family homeland). US citizens who have strong connections to either Israel or Arab countries have made rumblings about revoking their citizenship when the pendulum of US foreign policy swings to a position they do not support--but I don't know of cases where people have actually taken this step. By far, the most common reason people renounce citizenship is to avoid paying taxes--every other reason falls into a tiny minority. Using the analogy, above, if a person disowned their brother it is highly unlikely the brother would welcome them into his house some years later. So, Saverin takes his billions (of which he is avoiding paying his full share of taxes on) and hangs out in Singapore. It's unbelievable that any working class individual would support this and say, 'he's not paying his share, but he's paying enough...' When a person (like Saverin) takes this drastic pathway, he's effectively demanding a divorce from the country. And, the US should allow him back??? Saverin has unrealized investment gains; he may have paid taxes on the gains realized to date, but by renouncing his citizenship, moving his assets offshore, then selling his stock when he's no longer subject to US or Brazil's taxation.
When else in the history of the world did commoners side with the privileged and defend the wealthy's rights to hoard gold, diamonds, and cash--when the direct consequence is that the poor and middle classes pay more taxes, receive less services, and are at an even greater financial disadvantage? Sure, go ahead and advocate for and subsidize the hedge fund managers, the CEOs of companies, and those who made a fortune on investments, surely they appreciate your efforts on their behalf.