--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" > <shempmcgurk@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" > > <shempmcgurk@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The so-called rich pay almost all of the income taxes in > this > > > > country. > > > > > In fact, the top 1% highest-earning Americans pay a whopping > > 37% > > > of > > > > all > > > > > individual income taxes collected. The top 10% pay 67%. In > > > other > > > > > words, 10% of Americans pay two-thirds of the taxes. Half > of > > > all > > > > > taxpayers those in the bottom 50% of earnings account > for > > > less > > > > than > > > > > 4% of income tax revenues. This means no matter how taxes > are > > > cut, > > > > > it's nearly impossible for those cuts to primarily benefit > > lower- > > > > > earning taxpayers. > > > > > > > > Actually, it sounds like it means you can > > > > give the bottom 50 percent a hefty tax cut > > > > without reducing tax revenues much. > > > > > > > Considering the bottom 50% only account for a measly 2.8% of the > > > wealth in this country, we could eliminate taxes for them > > > altogether. I don't think its a good idea, but since we're > playing > > > with numbers...:-) > > > > > > > > > Where do you get your "2.8%" figure from, please? > > > http://tinyurl.com/3oqhy >
First of all, thanks for the link...fascinating stuff. I am, however, trying to reconcile the stats from the link with those found on Table F on page 11 of http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p70-88.pdf which gives interesting MEDIAN net worths (which, of course, are different than average net worths). However, the source for the first graph on the link that you gave uses, primarily, the Forbes 400 list for its figures.
