Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site tilt.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ulysses!allegra!princeton!tilt!chenr From: chenr@tilt.UUCP (Raymond Chen ) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Do the rich pay their fair share? - (nf) Message-ID: <54@tilt.UUCP> Date: Wed, 11-Apr-84 00:51:03 EST Article-I.D.: tilt.54 Posted: Wed Apr 11 00:51:03 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 12-Apr-84 04:35:21 EST References: <29200122@uiucdcs.UUCP> Organization: Princeton Univ. EECS Lines: 35 To uiucdcs!renner: I think that if you were to look at the figures based on the unadjusted gross income, like you said you would have preferred to do, or looked at income adjusted in a different way, you would have reached different conclusions. I've taken a few politics courses and econ courses here at school and remember my professor's giving us data on this subject. The data we got ended up being in the form of your basic bell-curve, with the lower income brackets paying from 10% and up, peaking at about 35-45% in the $30-40000 dollar range, and dropping to below 5% at the highest brackets. Again, the same caveat: I don't know exactly how these figures were arrived at, although I do know that they weren't the ravings of ultra-liberal crusaders. The professors were all fairly moderate and thought they had honest figures. So, there do exist other data that would support sevener's claim. Whether the data is biased incorrectly is something else. Does anybody out there have any researched numbers they could post? (Sorry I couldn't do it myself ...) Remember: Figures don't lie, but liars can figure... (flames > /dev/null) -- From the Random Fingers of -- Ray Chen {allegra | ihnp4 | mhuxi}!princeton!down!tilt!chenr "It's amazing what a thousand monkeys and a few typewriters can accomplish..."