No, that is not what has happened. Wages for the top 1% have grown substantially over the last few decades, while wages for everyone else have stagnated:
Our country has suffered from rising income inequality and chronically slow growth in the living standards of low- and moderate-income Americans. This disappointing living-standards growth—which was in fact caused by rising income inequality—preceded the Great Recession and continues to this...
www.epi.org
Is this your pitch for a government run confiscatory and forced wealth redistribution?
MYTH 1. Inequality Has Never Been Worse
MYTH 2. The Rich Didn’t Earn Their Money
MYTH 3. The Rich Stay Rich; the Poor Stay Poor
MYTH 4. More Inequality Means More Poverty
MYTH 5. Inequality Distorts the Political Process
Five Myths about Economic Inequality in America
September 7, 2016 • Policy Analysis No. 797
A government run confiscatory and forced wealth redistribution founded on a myth, apparently.
But, again, referencing the tables at the links I provided, it is the middle class that is paying most of that increased revenue. That means the middle class is paying more from the same income, which is what explains the rise in revenue.
Isn't the 'middle class' the most populous of all socioeconomic segments?
Again, this is obviously not the case. You're ignoring the possibility that a greater percent of income is withheld from those earners' paychecks, and more is kept at the end of the FY when middle class folks file their returns--and that's what the data indicate has happened. That's certainly what has happened to me since 2018, my colleagues who have talked about it say the same.
The 2017 bill did not affect 2017 taxes. It affected 2018 taxes, which would have been accounted for in 2019. As I recall, something pretty big happened early in 2020 that zapped a lot of people's income pretty hard, and there were a number of options to delay payment of taxes owed. We didn't return to normal until late 2021.
Fair, that's be the COVID pandemic.
If it is, then you should be able to say what is wrong with it and post facts that the interpretation cannot handle. Have at it, if you can. That said, there's not much interpretation going on in what I posted. It's a fact that to be included in the top 50%, you only need an income of about $50k. You can look at that table and calculate a difference in revenues paid in by income bracket and quickly see where the biggest increases were coming from--it's in the earners who are making between $50k to $90k.
Back in the 70's and 80's, that'd have been upper middle class. Now, it's just middle class.
This I attribute to the the devaluation of the currency by inflation, by the fed, forced by the US federal government spending and debt and paying that debt with devalued currency.
You miss the point--DOGE had an ostensible mission to investigate "waste, fraud, and abuse" in federal spending, and they seem to have--again, pretty recklessly--done just that. What they found that could be cut was pretty small in comparison to total federal spending. When you have a bunch of zealots for cutting spending try to cut spending and manage to do only a little, that's a really good indication that cuts aren't nearly as easy as advertised.
'cuts aren't nearly as easy as advertised' because congress is not, and has not been, and refuses to be, fiscally responsible with the public's money.
Its high time that they active do so, the question remains if the present office holders have the political will to do so. I'm rightfully skeptical.
