By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 31 May 2012
Edit Thread
rocketpig said:
Kasz216 said:

Of course, that's also ignoring things like Payroll tax, state taxs, sales tax, gas taxes and the dozens of other consumption based taxes that exist that are likely regressive in nature.

Medicare too, depending on whether or not you consider that a tax.

 

Either way, said graphic is laughably inaccurate.

Laughably inaccurate, yes. But there is an underlying truth to the concept that over the past 30 years, the rich have been able to minimize their paid taxes while the burden for the middle class has remained relatively consistent.

But graphs like this are no better than Romney replying to a commenter "all money ends up going to an individual!" On the surface, they're true but they lack the nuance and maturity needed to enter into complex conversations about difficult problems.

Is that so?  I somewhat question it if only because i've never actually seen any REAL data on it and generally when taxes are reduced they are reduced for all groups, and have a higher percentage of drop in the lower brackets.

Of course, as previously stated, the rich people also benefit from the drop in the lower rates as well since it's a graduated system.  Though dependent on the drops, you'd expect they'd get less of a % in savings over your average middle class person.


Really it's a compliacted issue to disect due to current structural changes in our taxbase/society.


Household gini coeffficent is rising, however Individual ginicoeffecent has actually remained unchanged.  Outside a few outliers, the rich have largely been getting richer through marriage... not tax breaks or just getting a bigger piece of the pie indvidually.

This is caused by the (positive) development of women moving higher and higher up in the workforce.  Rich successful people are marrying other rich successful people, at a time where it seems like the poor are more and more splitting up and living in single parent households.

The whole thing makes it rather hard to tell what the hell is going on tax burden wise, and nobody seems interested in studying it because it's not something that liekly would be particularly useful to either side as a number.

 

I'd have to see actual numbers before i'd be willing to claim that was absolutely the case. 

Honestly i don't think it's so much "The rich have found ways to lower there tax burden" as it is  "How people get rich has shifted towards areas in which tax burdens are lower.".

Way more people in the top .1% now a days are making money through investments because the investment market is huge compaired to say... the 1960s.  Few are making money via owning walmart, or a oppressive oil trust or whatever.