[adwf]

Disposable income would be a better metric in this case. They may earn only 24% of the income, but how much of that is excess? ie. beyond providing their needs.

For the other 76%, all of that income may be spent on just food/rent/other essentials. Whereas the 1% have excess that they can save, or spend on luxuries. That's why tiered tax regimes exist.

NB. The definition of "needs" is obviously very debatable. The top 1% in California is defined as ~$90k, but given a median rent of >$4000/mth in SF, that skews the needs/excess taxable money argument considerably.