Statistics?

[Lokrian]

http://www.lcurve.org/

There will be some heat generated here I think, but fundamentally these numbers do not seem to lie, and they speak volumes.

The real myth is the poor, harried, overtaxed upper class carrying the white man's burden of having to shuffle the lazy masses towards productive work. The second biggest myth is the "middle class". Professionals have traditionally always been a few times higher in income than the working class but still well below those who own the means of production. For whatever reason, they tend to think themselves above the working class, but the fact is they are not. They just drive slightly nicer cars.

When you wonder why things like healthcare or a combined educational/employment system that focuses on getting people into stable carrers and keeping them there seems mysteriously absent from the national debate, remember this graph.

[Aristotle]

Originally posted by Lokrian

When you wonder why things like healthcare or a combined educational/employment system that focuses on getting people into stable carrers and keeping them there seems mysteriously absent from the national debate, remember this graph.

More like remember a graph made by a random, flamingly liberal idealogue nitwit with absolutely no training in economics. Um. No thanks.

From that website:

I am not an economist,

The guy who created that is a web designer named David Chandler. He is hardly an authority on ANYTHING related to economics.

Other web sites created by him:

Organic Gardens Bed & Breakfast

South Valley Peace Center

Migrant Photography Project

Thinking about Conscientious Objection

Progressive Writers' Bloc

Notice a trend there?

Remember that "Progressive" is the 21st century code word for socialist.

Furthermore, his curve demonstrates nothing other than the fact that Bill Gates is extremely rich. So what? Bill Gates is one guy.

Keep in mind that the company Bill Gates started and built has created tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of high quality jobs. Microsoft has also created enormous wealth for millions of Americans as it is one of the most widely held stocks in the US. His company has played a role in making our country the dominant force in the computer industry.

Here are the actual FACTS about income and taxes (source: Department of the Treasury, IRS):

            % of Taxes Paid    % of Income Earned
    Top 5%:     53.25%               31.99%
   Top 10%:     64.89%               43.11% 
   Top 25%:     82.90%               65.23%
   Top 50%:     96.03%               86.19%
Bottom 50%:      3.97%               13.81%

Less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Nope. The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Keep in mind that the bottom 50% includes high school kids, part-time workers, etc.

[Lokrian]

Interestingly, your statistics bear out precisely what he said. The upper 5% is getting fully a third of the income in the US. From there, the point remains, that one person with millions is more powerfull than 10000 people with thousands. Also, he points out that a further breakdown of what the top 1% make would be necessary to make real insight, and such statstics are rather conspicuous in their absence in government documents. Wonder why?

I don't know if this makes me socialist, but I have no sympathy for the ultra rich - period. Anyone who would even want to live that way while others struggled to get by makes me start to get steamed. Such wealth simply can not exist without skimming more than ones own share from others labors and using gimmiks lies and tricks to do so. No one, but NO one does so much good work that they are worth hundreds and hundreds of average, honest workers. No one.

And while we're extoling the virtues of Bill Gates, let's not forget he essentially took a program developed by government assistance, hacked at it a little, and took it to town like it was his own. I'm also of the opinion that a large part of his present success is due to illegal activities for which Bush has let him off more or less scot free.

One cannot deny that Apple and others fucked up royally and gave the market to him in the late 80's and early 90's, but I think we have all paid quite enough for that in the form of faulty, crash-prone and virus ridden operating systems over the last few years. People in the industry tell me it is getting back on track now, but I do not see Bill Gates as some sort of hero. He's just another greedy egotist in my book, and really attributing all these jobs to him, as if he were to die tomorrow the jobs would all just dry up! Those jobs are a result of an ongoing market that existed long before Bill Gates and will last as long as there are people to buy and sell things. Bill Gates just found himself a niche and ran with it. That's more like a lotto mentality than anything about honest work and integrity.

[Salimar]

Originally posted by Aristotle

            % of Taxes Paid    % of Income Earned
    Top 5%:     53.25%               31.99%
   Top 10%:     64.89%               43.11% 
   Top 25%:     82.90%               65.23%
   Top 50%:     96.03%               86.19%
Bottom 50%:      3.97%               13.81%

            % of Taxes Paid(T)    % of Income Earned (I)
    Top 5%:     	53.25%               31.99%
   Top 10% - 5%:	11.64%               11.12% 
   Top 25 - 10%:        18.01%               22.12%
   Top 50% -25%:        13.13%               20.96%
   Bottom 50%:           3.97%               13.81%

Lets call the Income Earned for the whole country, I and the Taxes paid, T. I am not sure what is the amount of money that the U.S collects on tax gets. For the example I am going to assume that from the money earned, the 20% collected in the tax. For the example, we consider that the Income Earned is $100 and therefore the tax collected in $20.

The net income earned after tax, N, is calculated as
N = 100*I - 20*T

The table below shows the Tax Paid (T) for this example against the Net Earned (N).

                     Taxes Paid        Net Income Earned (N)
    Top 5%:     	$10.65               $21.34
   Top 10% - 5%:	$2.328               $8.792 
   Top 25 - 10%:        $3.602               $18.518
   Top 50% -25%:        $2.626               $18.334
   Bottom 50%:          $0.788               $13.022

If we have a group of 100 people who make 100 dollars and pay 20 dollars in tax.
The top 5 people earn $21.34 out of $100: $4.268 each
The next top 5 (from top 10% to top 5%) make $8.792: $ 1.7584 each
The ones from 25% to 10%, that is the next top 15 people make $18.518: $ 1.23453 each
The ones from top 50% to top 25%, that is the next top 25 make $18.334: $ 0.73336 each
The bottom 50 make $13.022: $ 0.26044 each.

So after tax, a person of the top 5% makes in average more than 16 times more money than a person in the 50% of the bottom. The important fact is that they are only 5 people sharing $21, while there are 50 people sharing $13 dollars. Does it sound fair to you?

Salimar

[Aristotle]

Originally posted by Salimar

The important fact is that they are only 5 people sharing $21, while there are 50 people sharing $13 dollars. Does it sound fair to you?

This is getting silly. Trying to break that down into 5 people vs. 50 people is quiet absurd. I'll humor you for a moment.

When someone goes and gets a job at McDonalds, how many additional jobs does it create when that person works there? How much technology does that person create that spins off to create new industries?

How many Americans buy stock in "Random McDonald's worker" (RDM for stock ticker symbol??) and as a result are able to share in the wealth earning of this McDonald's worker?

Answer to both questions: Zero.

When someone like Bill Gates founds Microsoft, he creates hundreds of thousands of jobs. He creates technology that spins off to create entire INDUSTRIES that create millions of jobs.

Microsoft fluctuates between the most widely held stock and one of the most widely held stocks. Tens of millions of Americans are benefiting from owning shares of Microsoft and improving their savings for kids' college funds, retirement, etc.

Do you really want to compare Random McDonald's worker to Bill Gates as far as the economic value they provide to the country and to other people? And any discussion MUST be confined to economic value since the issues are income and taxation.

The entire group of people in the top 5% earns approximately 2.31 times as much as the entire group of people in the bottom 50%. Since there are 10 times as many people in the bottom 50%, that means individually, a member of the top 5% earns approximately 23.1 times a member of the bottom 50%.

The people in the top 5% pay approximately 13.41 times as much taxes as the people in the bottom 50%. Again, since there are 10 times as many people in the bottom 50%, that means a member of the top 5% pays 134.1 times as much taxes as someone in the bottom 50%.

So members of the top 5% earn 23.1 times as much income and pay 134.1 times as much taxes when compared to members of the bottom 50%.

And you want to cry about unfairness?

The reason the top 5% makes so much money is because they are WORTH that much and because what they do generates trillions of dollars of benefit to the country.

The bottom 50% makes less because their work is just not worth anywhere near as much. There are many factors for this. The main reasons are: determination, effort, intelligence, inspiration, ingenuity, and dedication.

Basically, the opinion of the radical left is that the rich are fine when they're paying 53.25% of all taxes, but when they are earning 31.99% of all income they are scum. What hypocrites.

That brings us back to this idiotic lcurve. The funny part is if that radical whacko made a curve of taxes paid, it would be even MORE extreme.

But of course, he doesn't bother to do that. Why let reality get in the way of good propaganda?

[Salimar]

The problem Aristotle is that houses, cars, food, shoes, doctor, education cost the same for everybody. If the country for instance, needs a 20% of the money made to support the state (army, police, education, transportation, basic health, etc) then that money has to come from the citizens. Who is going to pay? Clearly, poor people cannot afford to pay 50% of their salary and still survive. They already have problems paying what they do. So the burden is shared amongst the citizens and everybody pays in relation to their possibilities.

Why are there poor? you mention that the hard working, smarter, in general fitter for this society make it up. Imagine you make a country of all good people. All Harvard, Yale, Princeton.... graduates wanting to eat this world. Would they all earn the same?

If you divide the group two halves, after tax the top 50% makes 2/3 of the income. A big part of that bottom 50% might not be able to afford a good education, housing ,health insurance and therefore won't go out of the gutter.

I believe capitalism could work if there was no protectionism. Because not everybody has the same opportunities. If there was no frontiers, if there was a real free trade (then Africa would have the cheapest products). However, capitalism combine with conservadurism only creates big gaps. The U.S. is the second country after the E.U. in economical protectionism.

If all the babies had the same education and started from zero together like in a race then as you said: the smarter, hard working, etc would surpass the others. Let me tell you, I don't think Bush would have made it to Yale then. That is why this world is unfair.

Salimar