Economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman found in their book-length study "The Triumph of Injustice" that the average tax rate paid by the richest 400 families in the country was lower than the rate paid by the bottom half of American households in 2018, The Washington Post reported.
The wealthiest 400 families had a 23 percent tax rate, compared to the bottom half of households, which had a 24.2 percent tax rate.
The richest 400 families had a 47 percent tax rate in 1980 and a 56 percent tax rate in 1960, while the working class's tax rate has remained relatively stable, according to the Post.
Saez and Zucman, economists at the University of California at Berkeley, analyzed Americans' effective tax rates since the 1960s, including federal income taxes, corporate taxes, state and local taxes, and "indirect taxes," which refer to licenses for businesses and motor vehicles, the Post reported.
The economists decided to examine the top 400 families because they have more money than the bottom 60 percent of households.
The wealthy's taxes have declined over time from various actions by lawmakers, but the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act significantly lowered taxes for this group.
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/dome ... -for-first
I'd point out these other things too:
CEO pay has increased 1,008% between 1978 and 2018, while typical worker pay has edged up 12%......
Left-leaning economists, politicians, and other commentators frequently use the soaring CEO-to-worker pay ratio as an example of why capitalism is inherently flawed and always leads to the rich getting richer, but my research has found that it is a byproduct of central banking and fiat (i.e., “paper”) currency rather than capitalism. To make a long story short, the Federal Reserve has excessively inflated the financial markets in its attempt to create an economic recovery from the Great Recession. This excessive asset price inflation has pushed U.S. household wealth far out of line with its historic relationship to the GDP, as the chart below shows. The wealthy have been the greatest beneficiaries of this asset price inflation because they own a disproportionate share of the assets that have been inflated by the Fed, which are stocks, bonds, and high-end real estate.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... -much/amp/
An excerpt from Keynes' 'general theory':
“For my own part, I believe there is social and psychological justification for significant inequalities of incomes and wealth, but not for such large disparities as exist today. There are valuable human activities which require the motive of money-making and the environment of private wealth-ownership for their full fruition. Moreover, dangerous human proclivities can be canalised into comparatively harmless channels by the existence of opportunities for money-making and private wealth, which, if they cannot be satisfied in this way, may find their outlet in cruelty, the reckless pursuit of personal power and authority, and other forms of self-aggrandisement. It is better that a man should tyrannise over his bank balance than over his fellow-citizens; and whilst the former is sometimes denounced as but a means to the latter, sometimes at least it is an alternative. But it is not necessary for the stimulation of these activities and the satisfaction of these proclivities that the game should be played for such high stakes as at present.”
Somewhat Related: Friedman, Hayek believed in a 'UBI'. Apparently, Nixon did too..