in article 3IMAc.3993$Yb1.3660@nwrddc02.gnilink.net, Kevin Wayne Williams at
kww.nihongo@verizon.nut wrote on 6/19/04 10:31 AM:

> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:
> 
>> Kevin Wayne Williams <kww.nihongo@verizon.nut> wrote:
>> 
>>> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>>> Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> in article T7uAc.44199$tA6.15747@nwrddc03.gnilink.net, Kevin Wayne
>>>>> Williams
>>>>> at kww.nihongo@verizon.nut wrote on 6/18/04 1:24 PM:
>> 
>> 
>>>>>> EIC can result in a refund greater than taxes paid in. That's a negative
>>>>>> tax rate in my book. The citations that Mr. Fester posted concur, and
>> 
>> 
>>>> Uh, no  they don't. They cite AVERAGE rates for all people in the
>>>> group.
>> 
>> 
>>>> I can see why you have problems with statistics, Mr Williams.
>> 
>> 
>>>>>> describe that tax burden on the bottom 20% of the population as negative.
>> 
>> 
>>>>> Does Mike realize that?
>> 
>> 
>>>> Do either you or Mr Williams realize that Earned Income Credit is not
>>>> available to the income brackets on web page cited?
>> 
>> 
>>>> Do you two know what Earned Income Credit is?
>>> 
>>> From the notest on table 1-9:
>>> "The share of taxes paid by the lowest quintile is less than zero and is
>>> not shown."
>> 
>> 
>>> You need to read more carefully
>> 
>> 
>> There is no table 1-9 in either of
>> 
>> http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincometable.html
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-4.htm
> 
> More precisely: Figure 1-9 of
> http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=3089&sequence=2
> 
> Or didn't you bother to read all of your sources?
> 
> KWW

Could it be that Mike didn't like that particular source because it is a
government source.

One interesting graph is one the
http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-4.htm site, which shows a pie
chart of 1999 (Projected) Income Tax Burden that shows the lowest 20% have a
-2% tax burden.