Yes! When someone says gov't should do something (e.g. pay for people's college, stop ISIS in Syria, subsidize healthcare, fight a war on people who like drugs or guns) they mean that "middle 9.9%" will do most of the lifting.

It would be a tiny increase in hassle if the gov't updated withholding tables at the same time it enacted any spending initiative. "Why's my paycheck lower?" "Sorry, they sent out new withholding tables as part of that new gov't initiative they were talking about in the news."

This article says a "Ruling Elite" is responsible for income inequality. It says with wealth comes a "social contract" that has "privileges" and "a responsibility to the nation", in the words of the author. It doesn't say what this responsibility entails, but the rest of the article is about income inequality.

If income inequality does not go down, this author will say the "Ruling Elite" is to blame.

The chart showing the holders of wealth have an interesting omission. They talk to the bottom 90% and the top .1%. Both now hold roughly equal wealth assets. Since the amount held jjointly is approximately 46%, that leaves approximately 54% to the "middle" 9.9% This is more than twice what is held by either iof the other secions of society. This middle block hold more sway tha either of the others as far as monetary power is concerned.True the power of the 90% is diluted across many more individuals and the poer of the top .1% in concentrated in many fewer people, the powr of the middle can swing one or the other into dominance. The elites need to be careful if the middle gets upset with them, they're do. (look at the just finished election for an example).

Perhaps the ruling elite will no longer be protected. I would like to be a realtor that focuses on listings in Washington, DC right now.