i think most citizens support a progressive income tax system, so this question may be moot as well

When I was in college, I took a course called "Education Testing and Measurement". The course was taught by a radical empiricist, that is, one who maintains that only what can be measured is real, or worth bothering with. Because of this stance, the testing was composed of multiple choice questions that could be simply graded as right or wrong. Nothing that introduced the possibility of subjective bias on the part of the test administrator was allowed (SAT, GRE etc).

Now, as it turned out, the "trick" to devising these tests was to plot the scores to create distribution curves which would look like the bell curve that we are all familiar with. But by tweaking the answers offered from A to E, the curve can be skewed so that it is drawn out on either end and in this way, show finer distinctions in performance. So, you can tinker with the offered choices to create a test that draws fine distinctions between very intelligent people or very stupid people. You do this by eliminating answers that did not draw enough responses. For example, if the correct solution to a question is 23.6, then 2.36, 236, and 47.2 are more likely to draw responses than 1,000,478 is, because the latter is implausible whereas the former are not since they could be arrived at by a simple error in place or division. So, anyway, applying this principle, you go through the tests over successive generations until you trick enough people to get the distribution curve you want. (Now what this had to do with education as imparting knowledge is debatable, but that's not the subject here.)

The point obviously, is that the possible responses to the question influence the answer. And the questions asked in the Gallup poll surveys cited in the article (column whatever) are infuriating in their vagueness. "How do people FEEL about their chances of becoming rich?" and "Do they perceive themselves as being poor or whatever?" What kind of bullshit is this?

Wouldn't a well constructed series of questions give results that when plotted, actually accurately reflect the objective conditions people live in, that is, the true distribution of income and wealth?

Interesting, thx for sharing that.

Much bigger than any of the things Dean listed is the fact that government allows people exclusive use of land without collecting enough taxation to pay off the people who have lost their right to access that land. (About 10-20% of GDP.)

Wages and investment income are taxed differently as well. Wages are taxed at a higher rate and then employment taxes are tacked on top. Oligarchs make most of there money through "capital gain" and "carried forward interest" which are taxed at the highest marginal rate of ONLY 15%! Sorry wage earners..thanks for playing..hahah

This exact question has been asked on the General Social Survey for years. Literally. Here is a good blog post showing the responses over time. Not a bad question.

http://mwsances.scripts.mit.edu/blog/?p=435

Go, Dean! That's turning the tables!

Jon wrote,

This exact question has been asked on the General Social Survey for years. Literally.

So? The fact of the matter is that government in the US currently transfers wealth from the lower and middle segments of the ladder to the top, via government-sanctioned economic rents.

Just because the people that created the poll are ignorant of this fact is irrelevant.

I don't see what the problem is. The question clearly is about whether or not people see this as the proper role of government, not what people see government actually doing. If you had the result that people were in agreement with the statement, then you could argue that government was pursuing policies that people didn't support.

MacCruiskeen wrote,

The question clearly is about whether or not people see this as the proper role of government, not what people see government actually doing.

You're wrong.

Of course, "is" is not "ought."

However, the background claim that government redistributes wealth downwards is so pervasive (even most people on the left believe it, AFAICT) that as written it's completely misleading.