Percentages 2: Attack of the Taxes

1% of the population pays 40% of the taxes. 

That set of numbers is absolutely useless.  I'll say it again but louder so you can hear me.  THAT SET OF NUMBERS IS ABSOLUTELY USELESS. 

Not many things make me want to smack someone but I swear the next politician that uses such a meaningless factoid I will personally seek out and smack.  As long as someone foots the airfare and expenses. 

There are countless articles referencing these numbers.  A quick search of the phrase "1% of the population pays 40% taxes" returns millions of results.  Partisan results abound and dominate.  Democrats and Republicans fall on either side of the argument surrounding a question "should the rich be paying 40% of the taxes in the country".  The articles that point out the meaninglessness, absurdity, and outright mind-numbing slowness of mind of even considering those numbers as important are... small.

Few tell the real story - the tax RATE of someone in the 1% earner bracket is rarely mentioned.  1 and 40.  1 and 40.  And if you think those numbers clearly show the unfairness for those 1% you are possibly brain damaged.  No really get that thing checked out.

I'm not here to talk about that tax rate or any others.  The current tax law is labyrinthian, arcane, and may have been invented by rabid insane asylum residents from a future that never existed.  It is not, to make it concise, possible to talk about that subject without studying the fine points for 8 years while living on the top of a mountain and wearing clogs.

My point is that batting around numbers that mean nothing by themselves and then repeating it over and over again is insanely irresponsible.  It is outright damning that politicians would use it - but then I can't really blame them.  They repeat it and the population, the dumbasses we, whip into a frenzy in agreement or disagreement.  Over something that means NOTHING.  Worse than nothing.  It is a single point on a chart with zero other points being mentioned.  Useless.  Try submitting a chart with exactly one data point and see how far that gets you. 

In fact it reminds me of a chart I found while doing some research.  "Number of dragons killed by turrets in Rocheƒter: 3"

Go ahead and glean something useful from that.  Go on.  In fact write thousands of articles that use only that as a data point.  And then flame war anyone that doesn't agree with your stance on it.  A single data point.  That means nothing.