well, in principle it seems like it would be possible to construct a representative median household, by weighting these things according to their frequency.
But to keep it simple, let's say married filing jointly - isn't that probably the mode at that level of income? with two kids. Share: the most useful number would be a fraction, relative to what it would be if the distribution of income were uniform and each taxpayer paid the same federal income tax. Then, you could multiply that fraction by $56, or any other per capita expenditure, to find the median individual's share. Otherwise, a share of the total federal income tax take, which one could then multiply by say, the total number of adults. If it's true that "A couple with kids at median household or family income pays little income tax," then it's true that for such a person $56 is an overestimate of their share, right? So on average, if you're polling a bunch of random adults, you're overstating their share, if you divide the burden by the adult population. On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Max B. Sawicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Share relative to who? Or what? > > Tax burden at the median level (again, individual, family, or household) > varies sharply depending on filing status and the number of dependents. > A couple with kids at median household or family income pays little > income tax. For a given family structure and income level, it's easy > to figure tax burden. > > IRS data is in terms of filing units. A unit could be individual, head of > household (usually single parent), married filing single, or married couple. > > > > > Robert Naiman wrote: >> >> Does anyone know or know how to quickly find a rough answer to the >> following question: >> >> If you make the median income in the United States, what's your >> relative share of the federal income tax burden? >> >> I ask because of the following important poll result... >> >> The Program in International Policy Attitudes at the U of Maryland >> recently did a poll of OECD countries asking if people were willing to >> pony up the money the UN says is necessary to meet the UN MDG of >> halving world poverty. >> >> In every OECD country, the majority said yes, usually by a wide >> margin. In the US it was 3/4. >> >> PIPA took the money the UN says is necessary and divided it up among >> the OECD countries according to share of GDP (a standard thing to >> do.) Then, in each country, they divided by the adult population, >> getting e.g. $56/year for the US. >> >> So, reading the result, I wondered how much the PIPA number overstated >> the median person's contribution, given that the median person has a >> less than average share of the federal income tax burden. >> >> Here is the PIPA poll: >> >> http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/554.php?nid=&id=&pnt=554&lb= >> >> This poll is particularly germane at the moment given Biden's comment >> at the VP debate that Obama/Biden would slow down the US commitment >> to increase foreign aid as a result of the Wall Street bailout. >> > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Robert Naiman Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ambassador Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment http://youtube.com/watch?v=kGZFrFxVg8A _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
