The UBER Rich NEED TO Pay their FAIR SHARE of TAX Burden.

[Tigress DEM]

1% of the population has 57% of the money in the US. For them to be paying an "unfair portion of the tax burden" they would have to be paying 58% or more of the tax burden.

They pay (according to a rethug on FAUX rebutting Rev Lowery today with Chris Matthews) 30%. Really? How is that anywhere near fair to shift 27% of THEIR tax burden onto people who struggle to keep things together and provide for the needs of their families?

Those of use who split the smaller portion 43% of the pie 99 ways are expected to pick up the UBER Rich slackers 27% shifted tax burden, so that those with 43% of the money pay 70% of the tax burden, while those with 57% of the money pay 30%.



Since the data gathered below was in 2003 there have been 2+ years of increased tax cuts, so I wouldn't be suprised if we look back in 3 years and see that the UBER Rich have at least 70% of all wealth in this country RIGHT NOW.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/national/29rich.html?ex=1296190800&en=784822e4b0735ee5&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Corporate Wealth Share Rises for Top-Income Americans
By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON
Published: January 29, 2006

.........
In 2003 the top 1 percent of households owned 57.5 percent of corporate wealth, up from 53.4 percent the year before, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis of the latest income tax data. The top group's share of corporate wealth has grown by half since 1991, when it was 38.7 percent.

In 2003, incomes in the top 1 percent of households ranged from $237,000 to several billion dollars.

For every group below the top 1 percent, shares of corporate wealth have declined since 1991. These declines ranged from 12.7 percent for those on the 96th to 99th rungs on the income ladder to 57 percent for the poorest fifth of Americans, who made less than $16,300 and together owned 0.6 percent of corporate wealth in 2003, down from 1.4 percent in 1991.

[Double T]

1. The uber rich need to hang on to as much of 'their' money and......

wealth as possible so that it can eventually tickle down to the rest of us peasants, peons and serfs. The bush plan for redistribution of wealth is right on track, while the rest of us pay for the governments that create these inequitable policies.

[Yupster]

2. Very odd wording

The uber rich own 57 % of the "money" in the US?

The source looks like it's saying the top 1 % own 57 % of the "corporate wealth" in the US.

Well those two things would be very different indeed.

Then it talks about the top 1 % making from $ 237,000 and up. Now we're talking income which is completely different than either money owned or corporate equity owned.

Now we're comparing at least three different things. We've got apples, oranges and bananas.

So what this study is actually attempting to say is that the uber rich own an overwhelming percentage of the stock in corporations in the country. Corporate stock would be corporate wealth. And it is also making the point that the number has skewed even more toward the very wealthy over the last 15 years.

I'm very skeptical of this conclusion as I know that in the last 15 years a much larger group of middle class and even lower class people have begun to fund 401(k) or 403(b) plans through work where they would be buying corporate stock in mutual funds every month many times without them even realizing it.

Well WTF. I get about four paragraphs into the source article and it tells me the study excludes purchases made through retirement plans. Well now we've just gotten ridiculous. That's like Bush saying inflation is down if you exclude oil and gas while oil and gas prices are surging.

Yes I guess it is very true that if you exclude mutual funds purchases by qualified retirement plans, then for sure most families buy very few stocks. That makes good sense since most families buy their stocks overwhelmingly through their qualified retirement plans. What would be the point of that point though other than to confuse people?

If you exclude the plays where he touched the ball this year, then Sean Alexander didn't have a very successful 2005 season. Okay.

____________________________________________________________________
Anyway, on a different topic, the problem with taxing the uber rich is the difference between wealth and income. The uber rich families like the Rockefellers or the Kennedys have incredible wealth, but they make relatively little income. So, if you increase the income tax rate you won't hit their wealth which is in trust funds and land and tax free municipal bonds. In order to hit the uber rich you'd need a "wealth tax," not an income tax, and no one ever seems to talk about that possibility.

It's probably because many don't understand the difference.