The devil is in the details. I tried to click on the site for this study's methodology and got the error message: "This contains information Web-TV cannot use." Could this be Bill Gates at work?
My point, and it was confirmed by the study cited, is that income taxes are not necessarily progressive. There's the Social Security payroll tax, for instance. Pennsylvania's state income tax must be flat-- it would take a constitutional amendment to change it-- and there are no deductions. (The rate is around 2%) The City of Philadelphia has a wage tax of about 5%. That's 15% coming off the top in non-progressive taxes.
On the other hand, substantial portions of my spending escape sales taxes. 40% of my net income goes toward rent. Add in food, clothing, mass transit, internet access, sidewalk sales, medical expenses, and lottery tickets and I end up paying sales taxes (7%) on less than half of what I spend. (And don't forget toilet paper. Making toilet paper taxable in New Jersey may have made the difference in the Florio/Whitman race.) Much less. I only pay sales taxes on books, prepared food, purchases at the state store, bar tabs, and rare consumer items-- a CD now and then and I bought a new TV this year.
So, what do these surveyers have poor people spending their money on? Do the surveyers account for tax avoidance (legal and illegal)? And the study itself concluded that whether income taxes were progressive or regressive was very important.
I'm perfectly willing to accept that other states' residents have different experiences. James in Philly
-------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Phil Gasper <ptrg at sirius.com> Subject: RE: Cato Ad Infinito Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 17:59:37 -0700 Size: 2549 URL: <../attachments/19980814/145c2277/attachment.eml>