>No it doesn't and yes it does. How about that? :) > >The disparity of wealth aggregation between top tiers and bottom tiers >is not constant in time nor is it an immutable feature of a particular >economic system.
Actually the disparity between the richest 1 and 2 % of the population and the bottom 33% been growing significantly over the last 20 years, from the intra-ocular test (eyeball), it would appear that this disparity has increased the most since 1996 when the Republican Party first controlled congress in 40 years. > >And yes, it absolutely changes the "the fact" which is not a fact at >all but rather a politically slanted supposition on your part that it >is a hugely disproportionate share. I'd like to presume that you know >enough of statistics that you would understand that there are many >ways of looking at the same situation through the eyes of statistics >and come up with different conclusions. > >A very large share of the total outlay of tax dollars? Yes, most >certainly. A very large share compared to the share of the total >wealth they have? Not at all. Quite the opposite in fact. >From what I've seen of the Census data the proportion of taxes the wealthiest >1% pay has significantly declined during the analysis period. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:276128 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
