Wow. Almost everyone misses the real implication of this statistic. It's not a good argument for lowering tax rates on high income. An exaggerated example will illustrate.
Imagine a micronation of 100 people. The nation spends about $15,000/yr to function. Now, let's posit that 99 of the citizens earn $1/yr and 1 citizen earns $1,000,000/yr. The 99 pay taxes on wage income at 5%, each paying $0.05 (a nickel)/yr. The 1 pays taxes on capital gains and other "wealthy" forms of income at 1%, paying $10,000/yr. The nation runs at a deficit, like ours.
The "top 20%" (1 person) pays over 99% of the taxes.
As you see, that isn't a good case for lowering the top person's tax RATE.
Instead, it begs the question "how can the top be paying so much of overall taxes while paying a lower RATE than workers?
It illustrates the enormity of today's income gap. It is the OPPOSITE of an argument for reducing RATES at the top.

Troy: I hope you don't think Jerry would think much of you.