A nearly 50% increase in per capita, inflation adjusted, federal spending in just 35 years is not a small change and certainly not conservative.
First, I wish you would have put up the numbers you were citing, but I did you work for you.
Your statement implies that this stat somehow is evidence of progressive policy over the past 35 years. In making your statement you throw out a bunch of macro-data without really understanding its components. So, let me help you. Yes, per-capita expenditures are up.
But, curiously, it has been flat to declining since 1980... that is, however, until the Bush Administration, when it started to climb. Why is that?
Let's see. The major components of spending are 1) Social Security, 2) Medicaid and Medicare, 3) the Defense Department and 4) all other government. Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare were programs enacted well before 1980. Yes, they are causing increasing expenditures, but that is because the population has gotten older, not because we have had progressive legislation to add to the burden (except Medicare Part D, enacted during the Bush Administration).
http://www.businessinsider.com/america-is-getting-older-2014-2
What we did add to our GDP per capita were two elective wars and occupations, which cost the taxpayers between $4 and $6T (that would be as much as $30,000 per tax payer.. all in), but there is nothing "progressive" of substance enacted since 1980 that is to blame here....
Thank you for supporting your argument. I appreciate reasoned thinking. That said, you gave us another set of macro numbers without really understanding the micro. While it is true that the aggregate tax burden falls on the most wealthy quartile, or more specifically the 1%, that is NOT proof that we have a progressive tax system but rather proof that wealth is skewed to the few.
We actually have a de facto flat tax (which is NOT progressive, but rather more regressive) as almost all income groups pay 30% of their income in taxes. It just so happens that the very wealthy 30% contributes more to the government coffers.
Consider a man with a $1,000 income compared to a man with a $1,000,000 income. If each pays 30%, that the government gets $300,300, with 99.9% coming from the very wealthy. Its not a progressive taxing system as each are paying 30%, as we have now.