Teh Politics Forum Rumors and lies and Teh Iraqi Info Minister and much much more...

Tax cuts: A Simple Lesson In Economics

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-27-2004 | 09:27 PM
  #1  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Tax cuts: A Simple Lesson In Economics

Contrary to popular belief, this was not written by David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor of Economics. The author is unknown, but nonetheless, the piece still expresses a good analogy on tax breaks.

Keep in mind that this is just a scale analogy and doesn't suggest that the poor don't pay any taxes. We all know that they pay taxes but it's nowhere near the percentage that comes from the rich.

You may have seen this before but here it is anyway....

Tax, tax cuts and how it all works...

Sometimes Politicians can exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!", and it is just accepted to be fact. But what does that really mean? Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, we hope the following will help.

This is how the cookie crumbles. Please read it carefully.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. 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 $7.
The eighth $12.
The ninth $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."

So, now dinner for the ten only cost $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 eat for free. But what about the other six, the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share'?

The six men 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 eat their meal.

So, the restaurant 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.

And so:




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 paid $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 eat 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 $2? 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!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate 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 people 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 at the table anymore.
Old 10-27-2004 | 09:35 PM
  #2  
bassplayrr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
How exactly will they "leave the table?" You can't opt out of paying taxes like you can opt out of sitting at a table. It's a good way to try and explain it, but too simplistic in its moral.

-Chris

Though most rich do seem to be able to avoid paying taxes through loop-holes, so I gess you can leave the table.
Old 10-27-2004 | 09:39 PM
  #3  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by bassplayrr
How exactly will they "leave the table?" You can't opt out of paying taxes like you can opt out of sitting at a table. It's a good way to try and explain it, but too simplistic in its moral.

-Chris

Though most rich do seem to be able to avoid paying taxes through loop-holes, so I gess you can leave the table.

I suppose those that are really rich have the capability of outsourcing their entire worth and business for maximum gain. Is that a decent example of leaving the table?

If it makes you happy forget about the last sentence seeing how it's irrelevant.
Old 10-27-2004 | 09:55 PM
  #4  
FUNKED1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,152
I think people should have to pass an economics quiz before they are allowed to vote. Wouldn't be a whole lot of votes for Repocrats or Dempublicans if we had that.
Old 10-27-2004 | 10:07 PM
  #5  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by FUNKED1
I think people should have to pass an economics quiz before they are allowed to vote. Wouldn't be a whole lot of votes for Repocrats or Dempublicans if we had that.
Not if P Diddy, Leo DeCaprio and Cameron Diaz have anything to say about it.
Old 10-28-2004 | 09:10 AM
  #6  
psoper's Avatar
250,000-mile Club President
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,770
From: Bizerkeley
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
C'mon Salty- the words "simple" and "economic" don't belong in the same sentance.

This is a total BS argument and has nothing to do whatsoever with our tax structure or economic reality.

Now, perhaps if the restaurant owner came and said that his cost of the meals is going up $20, instead going down as you suggested- ...(the 150 billion and counting being given to- not earned by- companies going to "work" in Iraq isn't making it any cheaper to "serve dinner" to america's citizens), yet at the same time that he's dropping the bill for the individuals like you'd suggested; you'd be making a case a little more analogous to what we're living through-

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 paid $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.

Actually the first four "poor" guys are still in the same situation, not better off, but that's irrelevent-

Because the bottom line is that dinner wasn't being paid for, the resauranteur is losing $20 every time this table comes in- and guess what- that restaurant probably isn't going to be open much longer.





Thanks for the little fairy tale though.

Last edited by psoper; 10-28-2004 at 09:12 AM.
Old 10-28-2004 | 10:09 AM
  #7  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by psoper
Each of the six was better off than before.

Actually the first four "poor" guys are still in the same situation, not better off, but that's irrelevent-

Because the bottom line is that dinner wasn't being paid for, the resauranteur is losing $20 every time this table comes in- and guess what- that restaurant probably isn't going to be open much longer.


Thanks for the little fairy tale though.
Anytime, psoper... so it's up to the most successful man with the deepest pocket to support another small business (or in this case the country with the largest share)? How can this possibly be fair? Didn't your Mother teach you to share with other children when you were younger? And didn't the lunch lady serve every student an equal portion in the lunch line?
Old 10-28-2004 | 11:25 AM
  #8  
njc200's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 384
From: Salt Lake City, Utah
Originally Posted by FUNKED1
I think people should have to pass an economics quiz before they are allowed to vote.
Not to hijack this thread or anything, but I hate it when people say things like this. It is not a privilege to get to vote. It is every person's right as a United States citizen to vote.

Its this mentality that this country was founded AGAINST. The colonies had no representation in their government and felt that was unfair.

Originally Posted by Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,---That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:13 PM
  #9  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by njc200
Not to hijack this thread or anything, but I hate it when people say things like this. It is not a privilege to get to vote. It is every person's right as a United States citizen to vote.
Wrong.

Voting is not a right of every US Citizen just as having a drivers license isn't a right of everyone. You can have the privilege of voting revoked if you're a felon -or- ex-felon just like a revoked license for breaking a significant traffic law.

The 14th amendment gives states the power to deny federal voting privileges.
This includes not just prison inmates (48 states), parolees (33 states) and probationers (29 states) but also a large number of people -- one third of the disenfranchised in all -- who are off parole and "free." Therefore, voting is not a right as you so firmly suggest...
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:19 PM
  #10  
bassplayrr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
Originally Posted by Salty
Wrong.

Voting is not a right of every US Citizen just as having a drivers license isn't a right of everyone. You can have the privilege of voting revoked if you're a felon -or- ex-felon just like a revoked license for breaking a significant traffic law.

The 14th amendment gives states the power to deny federal voting privileges.
This includes not just prison inmates (48 states), parolees (33 states) and probationers (29 states) but also a large number of people -- one third of the disenfranchised in all -- who are off parole and "free." Therefore, voting is not a right as you so firmly suggest...
Under that logic, Freedom, which we all claim as a RIGHT is actually not, considering that if you are convicted of a felony your Freedom can be revoked. So do you believe hat Freedom is not your right?

-Chris
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:21 PM
  #11  
riptide2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Unkown Author
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.
I think someone has read one too many Ayn Rand novels...

Last edited by Salty; 10-28-2004 at 01:28 PM. Reason: I did not write that so don't quote me...
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:27 PM
  #12  
Salty's Avatar
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by bassplayrr
Under that logic, Freedom, which we all claim as a RIGHT is actually not, considering that if you are convicted of a felony your Freedom can be revoked. So do you believe hat Freedom is not your right?

-Chris
There is no "well with that logic blah, blah, blah..." regarding this issue. Voting is not a right, Period.

Tell this to the 5million+ American citizens that can't vote because of this...

EDIT: For the record I never thought freedom was a right, something that was guaranteed and/or free... brave people before us spilled their blood for our freedoms.

Last edited by Salty; 10-28-2004 at 01:31 PM.
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:34 PM
  #13  
bassplayrr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
That's like saying "Tell the 2 Million+ inmates that Freedom is a right." Rights can be revoked. Voting is a right as much as free speech is a right as much as general liberties are a right. In any Democracy/Republic the foundation is the fact that voting is a right of the general public.

-Chris

I guess you and I just have a fundamnetal disagreement of what is our right. Have you read the Bill of RIGHTS? I know you have.
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:38 PM
  #14  
FUNKED1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,152
Where in the bill of rights does it say "stupid people get to vote"?
Old 10-28-2004 | 01:41 PM
  #15  
bassplayrr's Avatar
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
Originally Posted by FUNKED1
Where in the bill of rights does it say "stupid people get to vote"?

No no, I brought up the Bill of Rights to show that Freedom is a right, and that since freedom can be revoked, then rights can be revoked. Salty's main reasoning in his post was that since voting can be revoked it must not be a right. Get it?

-Chris



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:40 AM.