[woooooo]

Reagan did 3 big tax bills, 81 tax cut, 83 social security and the 86 reforms you're referencing.

You're right that the 86 reform was pretty progressive but with all 3, the rich did great, poor did alright and middle class did poorly, IMO.

[rayiner]

According to the data, the share of federal taxes paid by the top 1% increased from about 15% in 1979 to 25% in 2019, while the share paid by the bottom 20% decreased from about 20% to 15%.

[woooooo]

That's absolute dollars right? As in, they're paying more total dollars in income tax, despite a lower tax rate, because they're making so much more compared to 79? (Income inequality has steadily gone up).

What was their effective rate in those years? What percentage of their income are they paying compared to the nonrich, and how did it trend?

[rayiner]

It’s not absolute dollars. It’s the percentage of the total tax burden that they’re paying.

[woooooo]

Because income inequality is growing, they have more of the total money, they're paying more of the total taxes despite a lower rate.

Whether you think that's a good thing or a bad thing, it's hard to call it progressive.

[ghufran_syed]

you’re assuming that the tax bills had no effect on the economy…instead, the 80’s saw a massive reduction in inflation and tremendous economic growth that helped all parts of society. Is it possible that the tax cuts and the economic growth were related?