PDA

View Full Version : Taxation Theory?



Suraknar
03-30-2007, 07:30
I find this interesting:

An explanation of the US tax system (and tax cuts) in layman terms:

Rather than belabor the supposition, lets just suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

With mutual agreement, this is what they did.

All ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until on day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you all are such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men - the paying customers?

How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. " I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me"
"That's true" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor"

So, the nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.

The rich people (those who earn more than $15,800 yr. or own stocks), and who pay the highest taxes, get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen , Ph.D.

Economics University of Georgia

For those with an understanding of what is written here, no explanation is needed.
For those with no understanding, an explanation is impossible, even futile.

~:cheers:

AntiochusIII
03-30-2007, 08:22
From what I hear, the first to the ninth guys all work for the tenth in his factory with the first four being menial laborers and the ninth the manager. The workload for each ranges from eight to twelve hours a day. There was actually an eleventh guy who used to work there too but since he got his arm cut up the tenth guy threw him out. He's now the bartender's lackey working below minimum wage.

So yeah, analogies are just pretentious ways of avoiding the full picture of things. :balloon:

Suraknar
03-30-2007, 08:31
I tend to agree with you AntiochusIII

BDC
03-30-2007, 09:49
The reason the 10th guy didn't turn up wasn't the money, it was he was on his yacht somewhere in the Med having a party.

How does earing over $15k a year make your rich? That'd be well below minimum wage here. You'd barely cover rent on a room.

Sjakihata
03-30-2007, 11:04
$15k is peanuts, $100k is more like it, though you arent incredibly rich.

doc_bean
03-30-2007, 12:39
15K€ gross would be minimum wage or below here, I know people who made over 30K their first year.

So what's the moral now ? Don't tax the rich and end up with a lot more poor people ? :laugh4:

Ice
03-30-2007, 16:39
Yes, making around 16K a year is probably like getting paid 9 dollars an hour. I would consider that poor, not rich.

Vladimir
03-30-2007, 16:44
From what I hear, the first to the ninth guys all work for the tenth in his factory with the first four being menial laborers and the ninth the manager. The workload for each ranges from eight to twelve hours a day. There was actually an eleventh guy who used to work there too but since he got his arm cut up the tenth guy threw him out. He's now the bartender's lackey working below minimum wage.

So yeah, analogies are just pretentious ways of avoiding the full picture of things. :balloon:

You should try reading as well as listening, literacy is cool like that. Your opinion ignores the percentage of small businesses in the US.

drone
03-30-2007, 17:06
Pfffft. He forgets to add AMT to the analogy, which raises the beer tab for the mid-range drinkers as a function of time, as well as beer price inflation in general. Are one or more of the men drinking the good stuff instead of standard swill? Who pays (and recoups) the pitcher deposit? Do some men drink more due to lack of quarters skill? If one of them can chat up the ladies, that's usually worth some beer credit. Is there a cover charge? Come on, the devil is in the details (and in the tax code).

So that's what they teach at the University[sic] of Georgia? At GT (where we take both drinking and math more seriously), this analogy wouldn't last 10 minutes in a classroom. :smug:

Vladimir
03-30-2007, 17:22
I don't think you'd have to worry about beer inflation much as I'm sure the Fed would raise interest rates to keep it manageable.

Lemur
03-30-2007, 17:35
For those with an understanding of what is written here, no explanation is needed.
For those with no understanding, an explanation is impossible, even futile.
What a strange thing to say. So there is no intent to persuade, only to reinforce? Ever heard of preaching to the choir (http://www.goenglish.com/PreachingToTheChoir.asp)?

drone
03-30-2007, 17:41
I don't think you'd have to worry about beer inflation much as I'm sure the Fed would raise interest rates to keep it manageable.
I'm not sure the Fed would take action over beer prices, but I'm sure grain subsidies would be involved somehow.

Are local alcohol sin-taxes deductible? :inquisitive:

AntiochusIII
03-30-2007, 23:15
You should try reading as well as listening, literacy is cool like that. Your opinion ignores the percentage of small businesses in the US.I'm precisely pointing out the whole thing about analogies being, well, pretentious ways of ignoring the full picture. So my analogy is flawed and even downright misleading?

Well of course it is! Read between the lines, brother. Intent and written text aren't always the same.

:balloon:

Admittedly, I'm probably ticked off by the whole "if you don't agree with me I'm not gonna bother to argue with you because you're just a stupid socialist" [/reading between the lines] implication at the end. Smart move, professor.

Watchman
03-30-2007, 23:47
I don't think the OP analogy would survive too long in the classes I attend. And most folks in the Uni I'm enrolled in are from the population segment which is at least popularly assumed to be more affluent than the average...