Big changes can happen to wealth distribution. In the twentieth century those were WWII and the Reagan presidency. Both profoundly changed wealth distribution. Below we have an economy undergoing such a transition in periods A, B. Given are decile distributions (example, for the poorest 20% of the population system A pays 4% of the countrys wealth to this segment whereas B pays 2%).

CAUTION: The deciles below are cumulative, hence any change is carried forward and felt long after. For example decile 30% have a 3 (9-6) difference. However the difference really is only 1 (9-4 versus 6-2).

% Population % Income A % Income B

10 1 1

20 4 2

30 9 6

40 16 12

50 25 20

60 36 31

70 49 44

80 64 60

90 81 78

100 100 100

1.Despite both 10% being paid the same, system _ pays more to decile 20% through _ %.

2.How many of the middle deciles are paid the same?

3.These same paid deciles are:

4.The biggest difference between the two systems is what is paid to decile _ %.

5.Of all data in both systems, the decile paid the most is _ % in system _

6.System _ has a more equitable wealth distribution.

Extra Credit (+11):

When graphing the above data, they resemble droopy telephone wires climbing a hill. If system C has the top 10% enslaving everyone else then the distribution no longer resembles telephone wires, but looks like . . . ?