comments_image Comments

Workers' Share of US National Income Plummeting

 
 
Share
 
 
 

 This might not come as a huge surprise given the widening distance between the wealth of the ruling class and the lack of it at the bottom, but it somehow seems starker in graph form. Frum has posted, with virtually no comment, a federal graph illustrating the share of non-farm laborers in the national income, and it's pretty devastating. Starting above 110.0 at the latter half of the 1940s, the percentage varies commensurate with recessions, but it has never been as low as it is now in the past 70 years, dipping to about 95.0.

As one commenter pointed out, the decrease really starts around 2000 after a decade-long high, and completely disproves the concept of "trickle-down economics." Says "Condere":

 

Anyways, here is my take on things after being a long-time trickle down economics person. Awhile back, I came across tax data that showed while Reagan cut A LOT of taxes, he was also forced by threats of veto to also sign into law A LOT of tax increases.

These tax increase were by and large closing of loopholes and tax exemptions, which mainly affected richer tax filers. So much so in fact, that people in the higher tax brackets were paying more in taxes by the start of Reagan’s second term, than when Reagan was first elected.

http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/fig-1.gif

After looking into this, I still haven’t figured out where history got distorted. However, it seems that what happened during the Reagan years to get things “jump-started” was taxing the rich more, and taxing the middle class less.

And that goes against EVERYTHING that “conservatives” say today.

 

AlterNet / By Julianne Escobedo Shepherd

Posted at July 18, 2011, 6:29am

 
See more stories tagged with: