Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDon’t think Obama has reduced inequality? These numbers prove that he has.
Dont think Obama has reduced inequality? These numbers prove that he has.By Zachary A. Goldfarb at the Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/23/dont-think-obama-has-reduced-inequality-these-numbers-prove-that-he-has/?tid=rssfeed
"SNIP..........................
Today, the average after-tax income of a member of the top 1 percent of earners is $1.12 million. The average after-tax income of someone in the bottom 20 percent is $13,300. That means the average person at the top takes home 84 times the income that the average person in the bottom takes home.
Now, consider what it would be like if none of President Obamas tax policy changes had happened: not the upper-income tax hikes negotiated at the beginning of last year, not the upper-income tax increases imposed by the Affordable Care Act, not the low-income tax credits enacted in the 2009 stimulus and later renewed.
In this alternative universe, the average member of the top 1 percent would take home $1.2 million, or 6.5 percent more in income, according to a new analysis. The average member of the bottom 20 percent would bring home $13,100, or 1.2 percent less in income. As a result, the average member of the 1 percent would take home 91 times what the average person in the bottom would bring home.
If you've wondered whether Obama has made any headway at reducing income inequality, here's evidence that he has. Based on tax policy alone, he has slightly increased the income of the poor and more significantly reduced the income of the rich. That's according to a new, exclusive analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, conducted at the request of The Washington Post, that compared today's income distribution with what it would look like if President George W. Bush's tax policies were still in place.
.........................SNIP"
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 632 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Don’t think Obama has reduced inequality? These numbers prove that he has. (Original Post)
applegrove
Jul 2014
OP
Wouldn't it be nice if they took home less than that? And those at the bottom took home more?
Louisiana1976
Jul 2014
#3
That doesn't count inheritance tax, I suspect, which is still far lower than before Bush.
MannyGoldstein
Jul 2014
#5
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)1. What an incredible difference!
I feel so much better knowing that the plutocrats, on average, are only taking home 84 times as much, not 91 times as much!
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)3. Wouldn't it be nice if they took home less than that? And those at the bottom took home more?
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)2. 91 times down to 84 times? Big deal.
The real issue isn't reducing income at the top; it's lifting income at the bottom and that hasn't happened to a meaningful extent.
applegrove
(118,023 posts)4. I agree. Much, much more needs to be done. But Obama has tried.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)5. That doesn't count inheritance tax, I suspect, which is still far lower than before Bush.
There are likely some other issues with these numbers, but I don't have time to review them now.