To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (43497 ) 5/26/2010 8:20:06 PM From: TimF Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588 Correcting an error is not "having it both ways". Re: "the general burden of taxation on the middle class was lower." Already asserted several times by you... (but never proven.) Shown. Not proven, but this is neither a court of law, nor a detailed research project. The vast majority of statements here (including the vast majority of your statements), even the vast majority of clearly correct statements, are never proven. But while the point wasn't quite "proven", it was backed up. I showed that the federal income taxes where not generally higher for the middle class in the past. Its well known that the payroll taxes where lower. You know it, I know it, and we each know the other person knows it. No proof is necessary here. State tax rates have generally increased. A point which is generally known, but I'll add some more information to back it up, despite the fact that I think your disputing something you know to be true. Year/Total State Revenue (in millions nominal dollars) / Total US GDP (in millions nominal dollars) / Ratio (GDP/State revenue, lower numbers show higher tax burden) 1950/ $ 13903/ $ 329000 / 23.66 1960/ $ 32838/ $ 526900 / 16.05 1970/ $ 88939/ $ 1017300 / 11.44 2005/ $1637791/ $12154000 / 7.42 State Revenue data fromtaxfoundation.org US GDP (nominal, as revenue data is also in nominal dollars) from data360.org --- So income tax, somewhere in the same general range, certainly not significantly higher. Payroll tax Much lower, State revenue as a portion of the economy, much higher, and misc. federal taxes are also higher (they didn't have the post 9/11 air ticket charge, they didn't have the telecommunications charge to generate money for the government to promote and subsidize internet access, hotel taxes where less common etc.) Add all that up, and you have solid evidence that "the general burden of taxation on the middle class was lower."