Below is a graph that shows what percentage of the total income in the U.S. is earned by people in the top 0.1%, by year (source: Piketty & Saez, 2003). It shows that income inequality is now at the highest level since the late 1920s, with the richest 0.1% earning greater than 10% of all income.
The next graph below shows the expected percentage (%) change in after-tax income in 2009, adjusted for family size, if the McCain or Obama tax plans are implemented (source: Tax Policy Center). Values above the dotted line indicate an increase in income. For people in the first 4 quintiles of the income distribution (i.e., the poorest four-fifths of the population), they would have more income under the Obama proposal. On average, people in the highest quintile (i.e., the top one-fifth, or those making more than $111,000 a year) will have less income after taxes with the Obama proposal and do better under McCain. However, that is largely driven by the very wealthiest individuals, those making over $600,000 a year. 
This graph also displays (on the far right) the after-tax income for the richest 0.1% of Americans. Under McCain, those people would have about 5% more after-tax income, whereas under Obama, they would have about 11% less. (Keep in mind the richest 0.1% of americans make more than $2.87 million per year.)
With income inequality at historic levels, Obama is asking the wealthiest to pay a little more, and is giving bigger tax breaks to the poorest. McCain, on the other hand, is giving the biggest tax breaks to the wealthiest. The other thing to note is that our national debt is also at a record level (in real dollars, adjusting for size of GDP). As mentioned in a previous post, McCain's plan will increase the debt by $1.5 trillion more than the Obama plan.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment