The data is in and exposes the complete inaccuracy of President Obama's main campaign theme that the Bush tax cuts largely benefited the rich at the expense of the poor. The Heritage Foundation is the first to bring us the new CBO numbers that completely discredit President Obama and his fellow Democrats.
Since income has become such a large part of this debate I thought we should all look at the growth in their share of income as compared to the growth in the share of taxes they pay (this data is from the CBO):
Total share of income earned | Total share of taxes paid
1990 - share of income = 14% | taxes paid = 25%
2000 - share of income = 21% | taxes paid = 37%
2005 - share of income = 21% | taxes paid = 39%
1990 - share of income = 27% | taxes paid = 40%
2000 - share of income = 35% | taxes paid = 56%
2005 - share of income = 36% | taxes paid = 60%
Looks like it grew quite a bit faster under Clinton didn't it?