(http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1941.html) Source: Internal Revenue Service, Tax Foundation calculations.
Many reporters have settled on $200,000 as the income threshold for being “rich.” Whether this is true or not, it turns out that the $200,000-and-over crowd is the only income group to have its share of the nation’s income shrink while its share of tax payments grew.According to this (http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0), the top 1% makes 15% of the nation's income. Wealth matters less to me, because much of it (at those levels) isn't liquid. Of course the top 1% has more, by definition. But the dynamic that worries me works no matter why it has it, or how much more vast it is (as long as the bottom 10% lives the way it does, rather than in abject poverty).
no subject
Source: Internal Revenue Service, Tax Foundation calculations.
Many reporters have settled on $200,000 as the income threshold for being “rich.” Whether this is true or not, it turns out that the $200,000-and-over crowd is the only income group to have its share of the nation’s income shrink while its share of tax payments grew.
According to this (http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0), the top 1% makes 15% of the nation's income. Wealth matters less to me, because much of it (at those levels) isn't liquid.
Of course the top 1% has more, by definition. But the dynamic that worries me works no matter why it has it, or how much more vast it is (as long as the bottom 10% lives the way it does, rather than in abject poverty).