http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/23319.html

More from the article:

Let's not forget the top 1% already pay almost 40% of all taxes.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

What's really interesting is that Warren Buffet endorsed Obama. Strange.

Correct me if I am wrong, but what you are saying is that by increasing taxation on the rich and reducing it on the poorer, redistribution would hurt the economy because of a keynesian economy?

To be meaningful, this analysis needs two details that aren't provided:

1. What share of *income* do the top 1% pull in?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29tax.html

In 2005, the top 1% of earners pulled in 21.8% of reported income, according to the IRS. And that ignores the fact that business and investment income is harder for the IRS to see, because it relies on honest self-reporting by each individual -- whereas wages are reported separately to the IRS and thus hard to dodge. So the wealthy's share of national income is actually higher than reported. As such, their share of income taxes isn't outrageous.

2. A look at total tax burden. Income tax is but one part of the total tax picture. Traditionally, when you throw in payroll and sales taxes and the like, the total tax burden shifts away from the wealthy a bit. They still pay a higher percentage, but it's not dramatically higher. It's an example of a mildly progressive tax system.
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2008/...-quintile.html

__________________
Man up.

what I see is punishment for being successful

__________________
Aint but three things in this world thats worth a solitary dime,
But old dogs and children and watermelon wine.
Tom T. Hall
http://www.politicalforum.com/group.php?groupid=43

Top 1% pay 40% of income taxes...not all taxes.

Not unless the top 1% is picking up the tab on sales taxes, paying an inordinate share of payroll taxes or such.

The top 1% pay most of their taxes in capital gains--buying selling stocks, businesses or properties. The income tax is not a big tax to them since they do earn their fortunes in capital gains and not earned income. What are the capital gain tax rates? Generally 15 or 25%. That's comparative to what the middle and lower middle class pays in income tax.

The middle and lower class pay most of their taxes in payroll taxes. That tax rate is the same exact tax rate paid by the top 1% (except for the medicare portion).

I actually like Obama's tax plan. It's a lot like the incredibly successful Clinton tax plan from the '90s.

I am only saying that Obama's plan is socialistic wealth redistribution. I do not believe so few individuals should be paying for hand outs to the rest. I equate it to buying votes. (*)(*)(*)(*) off a small percentage of the country to buy the rest.

On a side note, the Keynesian model believes in redistribution due to having more money in the hands of those that typically spend and not save, is that correct?

Are you saying that the data is flawed because we don't know if individuals are reporting their taxes correctly? Previous year's data tend to show the same correlation that the top 1% of earners are paying about twice the amount of total income taxes to total income earned.

Agreed.

Yes of course, I meant income tax, thats for the clarification in my post.

Sort of.

I'm saying that "share of income taxes" is only meaningful when compared to "share of income." If one guy pays 50% of all taxes, you might think he's exploited -- until you find out he earns 50% of all income.

The top 1% pay 38% of the income taxes. They earn 21.8% of reported income, according to the IRS. So you have a case that the wealthy are taxed at a slightly higher rate than their share of income would suggest -- which makes sense, because we have a mildly progressive tax system.

But the IRS also estimates that while it captures 99% of wage income, it only captures 70% of business and investment income, because those numbers aren't reported separately and basically rely on honest self-reporting by business owners and investors. And business and investment income is the primary source of income for the wealthy.

So in reality, the top 1% earn *more* than 21.8% of reported income -- probably quite a lot more. Which makes their 38% share of income taxes even less outrageous. Think of the higher tax rate as helping to compensate for their tax cheating.

__________________
Man up.

Interesting. That sounds a little iffy though, as everybody is being punished for the dishonesty of a few.

__________________
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy...the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. ~John Kenneth Galbraith

Some men change their party for the sake of their principles; others their principles for the sake of their party. ~Winston Churchill

The Christian Right is neither

Where's the punishment? The higher tax rates are there b/c those people have the ability to pay. That's just sensible.

Everybody pays the same income tax rate.

The graduated scale of rates increases with the amount of income earned.

The top 1% do not pay 35% income tax on all income earned.

They pay the same rates at the same grades as everybody else: 10% tax for dollars earned btn 0-$8,025 and so on for grades 15-35%.

The more you earn, the higher the tax on those dollars earned at that particular grade.

If we had a flat income tax of around 23 or 24%, the poor would see their taxes go sky high while the rich, who have the best ability to pay, would see a substantial income tax cut.

True. The point remains, though, that if we view the 1% as a group, they're not being squeezed dry relative to income share.

__________________
Man up.