Irony
Someone want to tell me what occurred the last time we had an income disparity this large in our nations history?
Here, take my hand and let’s look at the facts. It won’t hurt. I promise, facts are good things. There, there, stop crying. Shhh, it’s ok, I know, you aren’t used to reading facts. I promise, you can get used to them if you just learn to accept them….
…academic research suggests the rich last had this high a share of total income in the 1920s.
The richest Americans’ share of national income has hit a postwar record, surpassing the highs reached in the 1990s bull market, and underlining the divergence of economic fortunes blamed for fueling anxiety among American workers.
The wealthiest 1% of Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service. That is up sharply from 19% in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8% set in 2000, at the peak of the previous bull market in stocks.
The bottom 50% earned 12.8% of all income, down from 13.4% in 2004 and a bit less than their 13% share in 2000.
The IRS data show that the median tax filer’s income — half earn less than the median, half earn more — fell 2% between 2000 and 2005 when adjusted for inflation, to $30,881. At the same time, the income level for the tax filer just inside the top 1% grew 3%, to $364,657.
I know, I know deep down in your heart, you want to scream, “screw the research done by academics in those fancy North Eastern cocktail drinking colleges gosh darnit!” But don’t say it. It’s ok to start to question everything you are told by your masters. It’s ok to not believe everything they tell you. It’s ok to think for yourself.
We just finished the neo-gilded age and we’re entering the neo-depression.
As the rich get richer, there is less money left for the rest of us
Is this true?
The process of the rich getting richer reduces opportunities for the rest of us
Having very rich people around make the rest of us feel bad
The rich are only getting richer because the rest of us are subsidizing them through tax policy
Does it matter that the top 1% pay more taxes than the bottom 90%? Probably not.
No, it doesn’t Duffy. The retort isWarren Buffet’s realization that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Also, he benefits enormously from the benefits of living and working in the US.
That’s a BS stat. Look at “tax burden” as % of total income.
Middle class Republicans like you are getting hosed – and you seem to love it.
Indeed burden and total taxes paid are different but the picture is incomplete w/o either of them.
No, it is not. Even the freaking flat tax attempts to apply tax rate equally across the board. In fact, an argument can be made easily that the upper 1% should pay even more of a percentage of their income than the rest of us. They often are wealthy precisely because of the stability and security of the US.
Plus, wealthier Americans benefit more from spent tax revenue.