Does anyone else avoid sharing their libertarian beliefs to avoid conflict?

I'm quite interested in politics and economics, and I also enjoy a spirited debate. But I've largely stopped sharing my libertarian beliefs with my progressive friends - not just because I rarely change anyone's mind, but because I seem to get written off as an unempathetic, callous person whenever I engage in these discussions.

For instance: I don't think that billionaires should be taxed out of existence so that we can expand the welfare state. When I share this belief with progressive acquaintances, they often accuse me of being a "bootlicker," or suggest that I must not care about poor people as much as they do -- if I did, wouldn't I want to see money transferred from the least needy to the most needy? They think that their view is moral and mine is not, because they want to help poor people in the most direct way possible.

I try to carefully explain my reasoning, because I do care about poor people - I just think that their approach to reducing poverty is short-sighted. Going with the above example, I would say that most billionaires achieved their wealth by providing goods & services that people find valuable - i.e., wealth accumulation isn't a zero sum game, those billionaire didn't steal from anyone - and their companies provide jobs to thousands of people, generating tax revenues and supporting those workers' families. Taxing these productive individuals out of existence would hurt the overall economy, which would negatively affect poor people, too.

I'd also point out that money in the hands of private individuals is often more productive and beneficial to society than money in the hands of government. The extremely affluent have used their wealth to establish universities and charities, or to fund important research. That same money may have been wasted by the government, or used in corrupt ways, or spent on evil things like war. We get SpaceX by letting Elon Musk use his wealth as he sees fit, while NASA stagnates as a less innovative institution because it's run by the government and not subject to market forces. Likewise with Bill Gates using his wealth to meaningfully improve public health in countries that our government largely ignores.

I don't mean to rehash a debate about tax policies towards billionaires - I'm sure that many people here disagree with me, and for good reasons.

What I'm trying to point out is that libertarian beliefs appear less sympathetic than progressive beliefs at face value. And when I try to explain my reasoning, I find that I've already been written off as a mean, selfish person.

This dynamic often makes these debates a bad idea. Many people use their political opinions to broadcast how virtuous they are in the simplest way possible, while my beliefs require a more careful & unemotional consideration of boring things like incentive structures.

But most people don't want to have that discussion. They'd rather take the easy route and assume that I'm an asshole or ignorant, and they're the ones who really want what's best for society.