Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Diana Duncan <dianaduncan AT contentdb.net>]

Just because I didn't cite a reference about the (semi-mythical) 
marriage penalty before...

http://www.concordcoalition.org/federal_budget/marriagepenalty.html

<quote>
How Big is the Impact of the Penalty?

The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that more than 20 million 
married couples pay higher taxes than they would if they were single, 
giving rise to a marriage penalty. However, it is important to consider 
that CBO also concluded that another 25 million couples receive a 
marriage bonus, which means that their taxes are lower as a consequence 
of marriage.

More specifically, CBO has estimated that in 1996, just over half of 
all married couples received marriage bonuses, saving them $1,300 per 
couple on average. At the same time, a little more than 40 percent of 
couples incurred penalties, averaging $1,380 per couple.
</quote>

Plus, I misremembered the disparity of incomes thing...

"Couples in which earnings are split relatively equally between 
husbands and wives are more likely to experience a marriage penalty. 
Couples in which one member has little or no earnings will generally 
have a marriage bonus."

This site has an interesting history of the issue, and reminds me of 
why I messed up the disparity of income thing in the first place.

http://www.ncpa.org/bg/bg145.html

<quote>
In practice, the impact of lower tax rates was mainly on women. Since a 
married woman's earnings came on top of her husband's, she was in 
effect taxed at her husband's marginal tax rate on the first dollar of 
her earnings. Marginal tax rates as high as 90 percent after World War 
II strongly discouraged married women from working.
</quote>

Anyhoo, just in the mood to back up my statements with some links for 
once.  :)

Diana