This link recently posted to Google Plus, what are some good rebuttals?

[GOTV]

http://bit.ly/XZvLv

It's one of those articles that try to excuse big tax cuts for the wealthy by pointing out that the top X% actually pay >X% of the income taxes.

I assume someone's already put together a good dissection of these kinds of articles somewhere. Anyone have a pointer to such a thing?

[The Magistrate]

1. Three Lines Of Attack, Sir, That You Should Be Able To Hunt Up On Your Own Readily Enough

First, compare percentage paid to income distribution, making sure to include capital gains in addition to salary received. You will find the proportion of income taxes paid by the wealthy tracks below the percentage of income they receive.

Second, compare percentage of tax paid to percentage of real wealth held. Again, you will find the percentage of income taxes paid by the wealthy tracks well below the portion of society's wealth they own.

Third, compare cumulative rates of taxation paid by all persons, including state and local taxes, excise taxes, and the like. You will find that persons who may pay no Federal income taxes pay a substantial portion of their income in taxes, frequently a portion higher than most wealthy individuals do. Rightist propagandists attempt to present 'federal income taxes' merely as 'taxes' to obscure this, and pretend that federal income tax on salaried income is the only tax paid, or the only one worth considering in discussing the tax burden.

[GOTV]

2. Some good points

The article did make the claim that the "The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax." hoping that it seems sensible that if you earn 19% of the income you should pat 19% of the taxes. But the article doesn't go into what actually counts as income. That's a good one.

On the 2nd item, do we want to start taxing on wealth held?

On the 3rd, that's also a good point but I assume the focus is on federal taxes because that's what the national discussion is about. Presented with this argument it would be easy for one to say "Obviously state tax structures should change to be more equitable" knowing that such a thing is not likely to happen.

[gratuitous]

5. The discussion focuses on federal income tax for one reason

And that's because that is the ONLY area where a defensible case can even begin to be made for the "plight" of the overrich and their burdensome tax burden that burdens them so burdensomely. Wealthy people also shoulder a greater share of the cost of domestic help in the country, but that statistic doesn't mean they're headed to penury, either.

[GOTV]

6. "Wealthy people also shoulder a greater share of the cost of domestic help in the country"

That is awesome!

[The Magistrate]

10. The Point Is Not Whether Wealth Is Or Ought To Be Directly Taxed, Sir

It is that possession of much wealth indicates ability to pay without difficulty, and that the proportion in which wealth is held is a fair measure of what a burden taxation might be, in fact a better one than income.

Taxing wealth does not strike me as poor policy personally, Sir, but it is a separate question you need not wade into in such arguments.

[Xyzse]

3. Well...

When the wealth and earnings are concentrated up top.
Say 80% of wealth and growth in earnings, everyone collectively has less money to go in taxes.
You can't really bleed a turnip now can you?

Sad to say I lost a link detailing the current wealth distribution but of course 30% of taxes come from up top, but that is also because there is not enough money from the bottom to pay in to taxes. I am surprised they don't pay even more of a percentage in government revenues, when that concentration of wealth is above 70%.

Give me a little while, while I try to find it.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Easy. The top pay xx% of the income taxes because they have XX% of the income.

If you want to make everybody pay the same in taxes, then let's make sure everybody has the exact same income.

[GOTV]

7. Well, except the article says they pay a greater share of the taxes than they get in income ...

.... which I think is how it should be. But when you're talking fairness it's an easy way to make a progressive tax LOOK unfair.

[sinkingfeeling]

8. The article is quoting from the Tax Foundation and is Adjusted gross income.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html#table6

Don't you wonder what the gross income percentage is? What kind of deductions did they take for all there 'investments'? Last week somebody posted the 10 top schemes for avoiding taxes that are used by the wealthest among us.

Whereas, the top 1% control 42% of the wealth.

http://www.mybudget360.com/top-1-percent-control-42-percent-of-financial-wealth-in-the-us-how-average-americans-are-lured-into-debt-servitude-by-promises-of-mega-wealth/

[karynnj]

9. Point out that rates have become more favorable for the wealthiest, but

their share of the country's wealth has expanded at an even faster rate. The reason they pay such a high percent of taxes is that the top 1% now has 42% of the wealth of the country! http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five-wealthiest-one-percent/

When you look at histograms that showed the income distribution for various income groups, what you see is that the wealthiest are gaining at the expense of everyone else and that many who were "middle class" are now living with incomes that can no longer afford a middle class life style.