Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
51. it's income though - not wages
Tue Dec 10, 2013, 06:34 AM
Dec 2013

although they don't say if it is pre-tax or post-tax.

I think the bend point is in 1980, as shown here http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023937994

income share of the top 1%
1960 - 10.03
1980 - 10.02 flat for twenty years
2010 - 19.86

income share of the top 4%
1960 - 12.54
1980 - 13.15 a slight gain
2010 - 15.99 a much bigger gain

logically, if the top 1% gets $2 trillion worth of tax cuts from 1986-2006 then that money adds to their wealth, and since their money "works for them" they use that extra wealth to make even more income.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Rec. Great Graphic........ Smarmie Doofus Dec 2013 #1
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Wilms Dec 2013 #2
+1. n/t Smarmie Doofus Dec 2013 #4
Been saying that for 30 yrs FreakinDJ Dec 2013 #3
I wonder why they chose 1973 as a starting point and what would happen if they chose a different freedom fighter jh Dec 2013 #5
1974 Housing Bubble FreakinDJ Dec 2013 #7
pre- and post- oil embargo? eShirl Dec 2013 #8
blue loses after 1968 hfojvt Dec 2013 #47
I agree, the true bend point is 1969 Sirveri Dec 2013 #48
it's income though - not wages hfojvt Dec 2013 #51
K & R for the collosal failure & expecting the backlash to turn LEFT in a huge way, can you mother earth Dec 2013 #6
Think how good we would be doing if we were following the pre-Reagan graph right now! Dustlawyer Dec 2013 #9
I remember old Bushy calling it VOODOO economics.... Historic NY Dec 2013 #10
Instead of naming an airport after Reagan, MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #11
Reagan's Debt! ReRe Dec 2013 #12
I think the REAGAN DEBT is better than Reagan's Debt. pangaia Dec 2013 #19
Yes.... ReRe Dec 2013 #32
BTW just to note hootinholler Dec 2013 #40
Sorry I didn't describe it accurately... ReRe Dec 2013 #46
Priceless..... pangaia Dec 2013 #44
Hedrick Smith reminds me of... ReRe Dec 2013 #45
Hey, Rupert Murdoch's billionaire donors paid for that privilege fair and square. Lasher Dec 2013 #13
The idea was not new. Government joined with corporations is fascism. And if the isn't good enough jwirr Dec 2013 #14
k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t Laelth Dec 2013 #15
A great successs... Gary 50 Dec 2013 #16
Exact.. sendero Dec 2013 #30
I can't recommend this enough times liberal N proud Dec 2013 #17
Who's Mow? pangaia Dec 2013 #20
Who's... Gary 50 Dec 2013 #21
What's on second. pangaia Dec 2013 #23
Actually started decade before RR econoclast Dec 2013 #18
Your graphic shows the 1% also suffered a decline beginning in ~ 1973 ... Scuba Dec 2013 #24
The decline for the 1% econoclast Dec 2013 #25
What happened in the early '70's was gas prices skyrocketing. What happened in 1982 was Reagan. Scuba Dec 2013 #26
Respectfully disagree econoclast Dec 2013 #41
The Economic Recovery Act of 1981 was an across the board cut. badtoworse Dec 2013 #55
Reaganomics was the beginning of the end for the middle class nt HelenWheels Dec 2013 #22
1981 CountAllVotes Dec 2013 #27
Exactly gopiscrap Dec 2013 #28
K&R Agree. nt stevenleser Dec 2013 #29
They lied all the way to the bank. KansDem Dec 2013 #31
IMO, what began happening to our economy around 1980 was inevitable badtoworse Dec 2013 #33
If the international labor market was the only consideration your theory would have more credence. Scuba Dec 2013 #34
Decades of high taxes and massive public spending would have preserved the economy? badtoworse Dec 2013 #35
Yes, a progressive tax system and public investment have benefited the economy .... Scuba Dec 2013 #36
Look at the attached graph from the St Louis Fed badtoworse Dec 2013 #37
Sure he cut taxes...for the top income earners. And then he raised taxes. Again and again and again progressoid Dec 2013 #49
If I recall correctly, income tax rates were cut across the board, not just on the wealthy badtoworse Dec 2013 #52
Yes, the initial cuts were across the board. progressoid Dec 2013 #54
Globalization moondust Dec 2013 #38
Revenue colsohlibgal Dec 2013 #39
All hail to Saint Ronnie, the gipper, whose deification is on the fast track. Glory be to indepat Dec 2013 #42
Yep kentuck Dec 2013 #43
Who Stole The American Dream - Video - Book cantbeserious Dec 2013 #50
I've Been Saying This For More Years Than ChiciB1 Dec 2013 #53
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Reaganomics is what happe...»Reply #51