Quote:I would start with The Bush Tax Cuts explained which is erroneously attributed to David R. Kamerschen, or to T. Davies. The allegory is still useful to analyze. While the wealthy did experience tax cuts, the heaviest cuts to rates were in the middle, while the lowest 2/5 of wage earners pay zero already and with earned income tax credits on their tax returns actually get more back than they paid. Be sure to read through some of the animated and useful commentary below it.
That thread makes me want to gouge my eyes out. "Animated and useful" indeed.
Quote:The mistake that most liberals make is in thinking that capital gains affects wealthy people more than middle or lower income people. The reality these days is that most people have their retirement savings invested in a market account, so that capital gains in terms of percentage of wealth affect all classes almost equally
One might suggest that liberals make this "mistake" on the basis that capital gains do not even exceed 1% of income until you cross above the 80th percentile, but is over 10% of income for the top 1%, and nearly half of the income of the top 0.01%. You may even be right that in terms of wealth it is a similar amount, but in terms of income, it's not even close. Rich people grow their money through investments, poorer people make their money through wages. The "interest and dividends" category tells a similar story.
Regardless, the easiest way to deal with this is an exemption for low-level capital gains in the form of retirement savings, which nearly everyone is in favour of. Repealing a capital gains tax cut benefits the wealthy, and if it benefits anyone else, it is almost entirely as a side effect of that.
-Jester
Afterthought: Why start measuring tax burden at 1984? The chart goes back to 1979.