>>>In 2011, the top 10% of the earners paid 70% of Federal Income taxes:
>>>
>>>http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/top10-percent-income-earners
>>>
>>>I would say that this is indeed unfair. As you said, everyone should pay their fair share.
>>
>>Since, according to this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth , the top 10% own 70% of the wealth I wonder why you regard the tax structure as unfair?
>
>
>Because federal income tax is based on income, not wealth.

I was aware of that :-}
But whether taxes *should* be based solely on income is a moot point. IAC, based on the Gini index: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

Income disparity in the U.S. is the highest of any developed country - it doesn't even compare well with a lot of third-world dicatatorships.

And the gap is steadily widening. See the graph about half way down this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient

I don't think any european country would regard this as 'fair' (although the UK gap is widening at least as quickly....)

Also see 'Role of presidential partisanship' here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States


>In order to compare you need to look at income distribution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_distribution
>
>The problems:
>1. 48% of americans pay zero income tax
>2. the so-called wealthy are taxed exorbitantly
>3. and the super-wealthy can afford accountants to find loopholes such that their effective tax rate is significantly less than the wealthy and often less than the middle-class. As Buffet put it, he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/aug/18/warren-buffett/warren-buffett-says-super-rich-pay-lower-taxes-oth/