The Wealth Gap Getting Less… Gappy

Scrooge McDuck not as happy these days

by James A. Bacon

Curse those greedy rich people! They’re making way too much money, not paying their fair share in taxes and grinding the noses of the peasants into the dirt. The wealth gap just gets worse and worse. If only we could close it, life for the “99%” would get so much better!

Wait… What’s that, you say? The top 1%’s share of national income peaked in 2007 and has declined at least two years running? Well, that’s certainly good news. According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of tax returns earned only 16.9% of the national income — down from 20% the year before.

As the Tax Foundation writes in a new paper, “Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data“: “Overall, these data on high-income tax returns appear to confirm that the continued economic stagnation had the same diminishing effect on income inequality that most recessions have, and that it occurred for the same reason: a sharp decline in income at the high end.”

I feel more equal now. I just don’t feel any better off.

On a related subject, the top 1% paid 36.7% of all income taxes. By contrast, at the bottom end of the scale, 59 million tax returns in 2009 either paid no federal income taxes or actually received checks in the mail through the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).

All of which raises an interesting point. Has anyone considered that one reason the reported earnings of the bottom quintile of wage earners has stagnated so much over the years (See “The Great Divergence“) is that after accounting for all the means-tested welfare programs — EITC, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, food stamps, Medicaid, disability, child health and nutrition, public housing and rent assistance, unemployment insurance and whatever else I’ve left out — it’s self-defeating to go out and get a job?

Why bust your butt behind a 7 Eleven cash register making $10 an hour if 50%, 60% or, who knows, even more of every dollar you earn translates into lost benefits? I would love to see a study that shows the effective tax rate, in terms of lost benefits, faced by America’s poor. Then I’d like to see another study on the incentive the tax rate creates for the poor to report less income — thus accentuating the income gap and creating cries for even more wealth transfers. The full story of the income gap has yet to be told.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

25 responses to “The Wealth Gap Getting Less… Gappy”

  1. Groveton Avatar

    Jim:

    Please turn in your “Occupy (insert name here)” badge. You are no longer invited to participate in the highly focused and effective meetings being conducted on Wall Street and other places around the world. You have been charged and convicted of “brandishing facts” by the Central Committee of Occupy (insert name here).

    Yours,

    George Soros.

  2. I’ve become reluctantly convinced that the tax foundation has been infiltrated by the same kinds of folks that run amok in the Heritage Foundation.

    what they are saying is not demonstrably false but it a very think slice of the truth portrayed with little or not context.

    here’s some other assessments:

    Incomes fall for all but wealthiest Americans
    goo.gl/O4nU4

    Income gap between rich and poor grows

    goo.gl/lvyqO

    now, compare that to the carefully worded (and misleading) statement from the Tax Foundation:

    ” : “Overall, these data on high-income tax returns appear to confirm that the continued economic stagnation had the same diminishing effect on income inequality that most recessions have, and that it occurred for the same reason: a sharp decline in income at the high end.”

    Okay – so tell me what the Tax Foundation is really trying to convey …..

    and is what they are trying to convey – an accurate representation of the realities?

    this kind of thing does no one any good.

    it does not inform us on the issue ….

    and ultimately it destroys their own credibility as people start to catch on to their game…

    this is one guy that used to rely on them and now I put them in the same category as the clever propagandists at Heritage….

    by the way- I do not believe the income gap justifies taxing the hell out of the rich… nor punishing them in different ways – no more or less than I would the millions of dollars we know pay for mediocre sports players.

    but I decry the current ” we can lie better than you” approach to the issues these days.

  3. Has anyone considered that ………— it’s self-defeating to go out and get a job?

    ==========================================

    I really hate this line of reasoning. It is descended from the “Let them eat cake.” train of thought that comes from those who have lost contact with reality on the streets, and later lose contact with their heads.

    I do not know anyone who recieves assistance who would not rather have a job that pays more than the assistance. Don’t mistake the fact that they have given up looking, for lack of desire. Insanity is characterized by doing the same thing over an over and expectig a different result.

    And that’s for those that are able to work. The vast majority are unable to work, and many of the rest you really would not want working for anyone you do business with because they are FUBAR.

    Let’s get over this and accept the fact that there are some people who cannot work, some who are incapable or incompetent of working, and some who are ina bad hole for a while but who will recover.

    And there are some who could work, would like to work, and for whom there are no jobs.

    And finally, assistance is designed to support some minimum level of sustainment: There is no reason that anyone whould HAVE to take a job that provides less subsistence than the minimum, that is just slow suicide (or slow murder). If the minimum level of assistance we provide also amounts to a de facto minimum wage that any job offeror has to beat, how is that a bad thing?

  4. this kind of thing does no one any good.

    it does not inform us on the issue ….

    ===========================================

    I agree, and it has become a kind of national pastime to see how thinly you can slice a slab of truth and still claim there is any meat left in the slice.

  5. we have a structural 1.3 trillion dollar deficit that has created a 14+ trillion dollar debt and what are we doing?

    we’re arguing that the rich are not as well off as some think they are …

    this is the narrative that is coming from the folks who characterize themselves as fiscal conservatives.

    there is no attempt to address the realities that we spend way more than we collect in revenues.

    the narrative suggests that if we cut entitlements and tax the folks who currently do not pay federal taxes that we’d not have a problem…

    but I have yet to see a definitive set of data to support that idea – from the tax foundation people – who pride themselves on telling it like it is.

    instead, the’re engaged in the same bomb-throwing rhetoric completely avoids the specifics and so they are not only not informing us – they are playing the same propaganda games that we see from other biased groups.

    when do we get a recommendation on how to address the issue ?

  6. Groveton Avatar

    Hydra and LarryG:
    I give up – what are you two quacking about now?
    “Wait… What’s that, you say? The top 1%’s share of national income peaked in 2007 and has declined at least two years running? Well, that’s certainly good news. According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of tax returns earned only 16.9% of the national income — down from 20% the year before.”.

    Seriously, read this again …

    “According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of tax returns earned only 16.9% of the national income — down from 20% the year before.”.”.

    How on Earth do you two find this to be …

    “it does not inform us on the issue ….”.

    “but I decry the current ” we can lie better than you” approach to the issues these days.”.

    “I agree, and it has become a kind of national pastime to see how thinly you can slice a slab of truth and still claim there is any meat left in the slice.”.

    “instead, the’re engaged in the same bomb-throwing rhetoric completely avoids the specifics and so they are not only not informing us – “.

    Gentlemen … really.

    Your cherished belief that the income gap is widening has been refuted.

    It is narrowing.

    Yet, instead of accepting the facts you ramble.

    It is what it is.

    If you think the gap is till too large – then say that.

    If you think the gap is closing too slowly – then say that.

    But please leave the mealy mouthed, qualitative angst behind you.

  7. If we cut entitlements and tax the folks who currently do not pay federal taxes …………

    what would they have to pay the taxes with?

    Excess income from the job that they cannot get and does not pay as much as the entitlements they used to subsist on?

  8. quacking?

    here Groveton – look at this:

    http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//6-25-10inc-f1.jpg

    now.. I am not of the group that thinks the rich should be punished or taxed the hell out of but I’m a stickler for facts and the fact is that the Tax Foundation people are focusing on a small downturn and ignoring the bigger more important context about the gap.

    and I once again point out that folks like you want to argue more about who is to blame than taking responsibility for dealing with the deficit and debt and this pretty much describes the Republicans now days.

    we are headed to hell in a handbasket and the priority for the Republicans?

    protect their campaign donors… at all costs…

  9. and you know the Republicans have a problem when Pat Robertson is fretting about how far to the right they’ve moved.

    extreme positions could hurt Republicans>

  10. Statistics don’t lie, but liars use statistics.

  11. Not to imply that Jim or anyone else is a liar – sorry if that implication was made – but anyone can pick and choose and emphasize statistics to support whatever position they want. In particular, use of IRS statistics to discuss income or wealth is particularly ridiculous, as IRS income is malleable at least at the upper reaches of wealth – only the wage earner’s income tax return actually closely reflects his or her earnings, wealth, and income.

  12. re: statistics and lying and “quacking”

    I would say that Hydra and I probably disagree on more than we agree on and that actually Groveton and I are more in agreement overall but what I complain about is the more and more typical approach being used to essentially cherry-pick something and to depict it out of context – to imply or directly assert something that simply is not the reality (nor the truth).

    why do I have this “problem”?

    because we are divided on many issues and instead of trying to find common ground anymore – many are actually looking for more ways to open up wedges so that we have no ability to move forward and we ignore the things that we must do something about – the budget deficit, health care and education to name three.

    we choose up sides and then begin verbally throwing mud to derail any possible chance of even some agreement.

    instead of recognizing the serious threat the deficit and health care costs are to us as a country – we argue about who is to blame and let the damage continue.

    we are like a husband and wife in a bitter divorce where both sides are willing to let the house burn down and the kids turn into criminals … as long as they can get even with each other.

  13. Groveton Avatar

    LarryG:

    You chart ends in 2007. It is four years out of date. No doubt it is accuraet but it stops in 2007.

    “According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of tax returns earned only 16.9% of the national income — down from 20% the year before.”.”.

    So, is the IRS (under the Obama Administration) lying here?

    I find this statistic both predictable and believable. The income of the “investor class” rises and falls with the stock market.

    I just don’t understand why you, Hydra and now Richard fall over yourselves to claim that this is somehow deceitful.

    Pessimism in America has become a hobby, I guess.

    And you know what they say?

    When everybody is pessimistic, be optimistic.

    Investment-wise, at least.

  14. the income gap – overall has grown despite the downturns.

    that’s the fact that is most relevant.

    they are focusing on an isolated area that is not representative of the overall reality and what good does it do to do that?

    it does no good.

    it misrepresents the truth and to what end?

    to continue the disagreement,blame and refusal to act to deal with the fundamental underlying budget issues.

    this is what we are doing now days.

    you cannot be optimistic when it is clear it is a war and lying is the tactic of choice because it continues the conflict.

    look at what is going on right now – politically in the country.

    there is no compromise. the goal is to get this guy out and to replace him with someone with the opposite views and no compromise on principles.

    how can you be optimistic under these conditions?

  15. Here Groveton – you wanted better data:

    ” Top Earners Doubled Share of Nation’s Income, Study Finds”

    The top 1 percent of earners more than doubled their share of the nation’s income over the last three decades, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, in a new report

    http://goo.gl/Nu9hl

    Now I want you to go back and justify the Tax Foundation report.

    why are you so quick to believe the things that you want to ?

    that’s the problem. We have propaganda mills cranking out what purports to be data to essentially back up what are people’s biases… that themselves are based on ignorance and their own refusal to fact-check …

    so why did the Tax Foundation do what they did?

  16. Groveton Avatar

    LarryG:

    Your article reports over the “last three decades”.

    Jim’s point (I believe) is over the last year.

    Both may be correct.

    The Tax Foundation (whoever they are) quote the IRS.

    I can think of a lot of bad names to call the IRS. Liars just isn’t one of them.

    The income gap narrowed in both fo the last two years.

    I know that fact impairs Obama’s efforts at class warfare.

    However, it is a fact.

  17. The cost of running government is an overhead in the US economy. What is important is not the legal incidence of the taxes, but primarily the economic incidence of the tax. While I don’t go so far as to believe there should not be any taxes on corporations or that any progressivity in tax rates is wrong, the American economy has a structure that much of the economic incidence of taxation is passed from the top income producers to those below, most especially to those with minimal education or skills or those with skills that are less necessary in the economy. When one couples that with the semi-official tolerance and/or encouragement of illegal immigration of people with little education/skills, is it any wonder that those Americans on the bottom are screwed?
    We’ve also seen compensation for government workers grow much faster than for most in the private sector. Overhead keeps getting larger and larger. Meanwhile, more and more products and services consumed by Americans and their worldwide customer base can be produced at lower cost in foreign nations.
    Wall Street has changed as well. Formerly, an institution that made much of its money by funding businesses, Wall Street has become a significant arbitrageur.
    All of these factors are real and operative in the economy and, unfortunately, ignored or not understood by Obama, his true believers and the MSM.
    Ronald Reagan’s view that the government is the enemy continues to ring true. It looks out for its self preservation and not service to, and protection of, the public.

  18. re: both may be correct.

    in isolation that is true but what is the bigger context?

    here it is: ” The top 1 percent of earners more than doubled their share of the nation’s income over the last three decades”

    that’s DOUBLED and the Tax Foundation data? what does it mean IN THAT CONTEXT?

    it’s just more of the same dishonesty and support for bomb-throwing “class-warfare”.

    there is no attempt here to be honest about things – only to further inflame them. Obama has absolutely NOTHING to do with the income gap.. he did not cause it and what he has advocated for is a return the original progressive tax system which was based on paying more if you earned more.

    there may be a debate on whether we want to retain a progressive system any more but in that same conversation you have a 1.5 trillion annual deficit that has to be made up.

    so what does all of this mean? It basically means we don’t want to deal with the deficit and instead want to blame someone for it instead of – resetting to where we were paying it off and then having a discussion about whether we can change the system AND STILL pay our bills.

    this whole narrative is corrupt and irresponsible -even more so coming from people who claim they are fiscal conservatives.

  19. I do not believe in Ronald Reagan’s principles any more than others.

    The man traded arms for hostages … stood by while the Savings & Loan industry did their version of the housing meltdown….and presided over some of the biggest tax increases in the history of the country – as well as reforming SS instead of abandoning it.

    good, bad, and in between ….

    what we have now is a refusal to pay our bills – from the very people who claim they are fiscal conservatives.

    they say we need to cut spending but they won’t provide the cuts (save for Ron Paul) ..

    We pay MORE for National Defense than we take in in income taxes and what is our response to that?

    well ..of course.. we start a class warfare food fight so we don’t actually have to deal with the fact that 100% of our budget goes for national defense – more than the next 10 countries combined.

    or we say social security is the problem causing the deficit. It’s not and many who make that argument know it’s not but they make the argument anyhow. Why?

    because – they basically are not interested in dealing with the actual problem.

    we’ve turned into a nation of blamers and excuse-makers – and petty ones at that.

  20. Yes, Larry, I saw the CBO report, too. I may even post on it when I get time. Here’s what you, the CBO, Obama and the class warriors are missing from your analysis. When we say that the rich doubled their share of the national income, what we’re really saying is that they doubled their share of the Adjusted Gross Income reported to the Internal Revenue Service. There are two possible explanations of why reported income increased. One is simply that the rich got richer. The second is that the rich reconfigured their portfolios and compensation packages so as to report more income (and put less in tax shelters and non-monetary forms of compensation). Why would anyone report more income? Because the lower tax brackets and tax code simplification of the Reagan administration reduced the incentive to hide income. To some unknowable extent, the increasing share of income of the rich can be attributed to lower — yes, lower — tax rates. That’s why the rich payer a higher — yes, higher — percentage of their income in taxes today than they did 30 years ago.

  21. I don’t think one is a class warrior or Obama lover because they want the truth.

    ideological beliefs should not beget lying…

    I don’t have a particular agenda about the gap or what to do about it.

    All I’m after is honesty in the numbers.

    your last comment Jim… higher than they paid under Clinton/Reagan?

    can you substantiate that?

    bonus question – if their income increased did their taxes keep pace?

    how come the same people who want to protect the higher earners don’t want to cut DOD and instead cut entitlements when doing so won’t fix the deficit?

  22. Groveton Avatar

    LarryG:

    You say you want the truth. OK. Is this true or not …

    Wait… What’s that, you say? The top 1%’s share of national income peaked in 2007 and has declined at least two years running? Well, that’s certainly good news. According to newly released Internal Revenue Service data, the top 1% of tax returns earned only 16.9% of the national income — down from 20% the year before.”.

    You don’t want THE truth. You want YOUR truth.

  23. Groveton Avatar

    “The man traded arms for hostages … stood by while the Savings & Loan industry did their version of the housing meltdown….and presided over some of the biggest tax increases in the history of the country – as well as reforming SS instead of abandoning it.”.

    Reagan presided over some of the biggest tax increases in the history of the country?

    If that’s true I guess I’ve been pretty misguided in my thinking.

    “well ..of course.. we start a class warfare food fight so we don’t actually have to deal with the fact that 100% of our budget goes for national defense – more than the next 10 countries combined.”.

    How can 100% of our budget go for defense? There wouldn’t be anything else in the budget. First, you have me wondering if I correctly remember the Reagan years and now you have me wondering if I remember how percentages work.

    In 2010, defense and security-related international expenditures totaled $705B. Or, about 20% of the budget. This included $170B attributable to the conduct of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    In 2010, Social Security consumed $707B of the total budget. Or, about 20%.

    In 2010, Medicare, Medicais and CHIPS consumed $732B of the budget. Or, about 21%.

    In 2010, safety net programs consumed $496B or about 14% of the budget.

    In 2010, interest on the national debt cost $196B or 6% of the federal budget.

    Benefits for federal retirees and veterans: 7%

    Scientific and medical research: 2%

    Transportation and infrastructure: 3%

    Education: 3%

    Non-security international: 1%

    All other: 2%

  24. this truth Groveton (not mine):

    Nation’s wealthiest 1 percent triple their incomes, according to CBO report

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/cbo-top-1-percent-almost-tripled-incomes-fueling-inequality/2011/10/25/gIQAzbMrIM_story.html?hpid=z2

    that’s not my truth… but it is the truth despite the “downturns” that are being trumpeted here.

    again.. I’m not advocating anything in particular – only asking that we get the context correct.

  25. Groveton – social security does not use any of the general funds derived from income taxes so it is not part of the 1.3 trillion deficit at all.

    Medicare Part B is about 210 billion
    MedicAid (and schips) is about 500 billion

    so that part is correct.

    but here is where you really err:

    the REAL Defense Budget INCLUDES MORE than the base DOD budget (and yes it’s REAL money):

    This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, which is in the Department of Energy budget, Veterans Affairs, the Treasury Department’s payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, interest on debt incurred in past wars, or State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance. Neither does it include defense spending that is not military in nature, such as the Department of Homeland Security, counter-terrorism spending by the FBI, and intelligence-gathering spending by NASA.

    Defense-related expenditure 2012 Budget request & Mandatory spending[18][19] Calculation[20][21]

    DOD spending $707.5 billion Base budget + “Overseas Contingency Operations”

    FBI counter-terrorism $2.7 billion

    International Affairs $5.6–$63.0 billion

    Energy Department, defense-related $21.8 billion
    Veterans Affairs $70.0 billion
    Homeland Security $46.9 billion
    NASA, satellites $3.5–$8.7 billion
    Veterans pensions $54.6 billion
    Other defense-related mandatory spending $8.2 billion
    NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM Classified[22]
    Interest on debt incurred in past wars $109.1–$431.5

    Total Spending $1.030–$1.415 trillion + Classified budget

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

Leave a Reply