taxation funnies

loonyme

New member
this is an interesting little piece...DISCUSS


You've heard the cry in the past "It's just a tax cut for the rich!", and it is accepted as fact. But what does that really mean?

The following explanation may help.

Suppose that every day, 10 men go out for dinner. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. They decided to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, and it went like this:

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

All 10 were quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner said: "Since you are all such good customers, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the 10 only cost $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
The first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But how should the other six, the paying customers, divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share"? They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth and sixth men would each end up being paid to eat. The restaurateur suggested reducing each man's bill by roughly the same percentage, thus:

* The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
* The sixth paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
* The seventh paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
* The eighth paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
* The ninth paid $14 instead of ?£18 (22% saving).
* The tenth paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off, and the first four continued to eat for free, but 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!" "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. The nine sat down and ate without him, but when they came to pay the bill, they discovered that they didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of it.

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.





<P ID="signature">JUSTME</P>
 
> this is an interesting little piece...DISCUSS

It makes an excellent point. When somebody says "almost all of this tax cut is going to the rich", people often react with outrage because they think they're being discriminated against. On the other hand, when people first hear about tax cuts in general, they tend to think "great, money in my pocket". I like to think that these two effects cancel each other, but that's probably not the case.

If you ask me, the general public isn't nearly rational enough to make a good decision about tax cuts and it's kind of a shame that this issue carries so much weight in elections.

<P ID="signature">
tiger5.gif
</P>
 
Well there is a huge belief that the rich get out of paying most taxes anyway through "loopholes" of all kinds that normal folk can't take advantage of. So any reduction in their part just seems like preferential treatment.

Of course everyone is just at each other's throat. Grass is greener on the other side of the fence.

<P ID="signature">your wish,
my fear,
both granted
http://rob.therobbit.com</P>
 
What would you rather be....poor and pay no tax, or rich and pay lots of tax? I most certainly would prefer to be rich and pay more tax....why you ask? Well, for starters, if I were rich I could afford to pay more, and it wouldn't hurt me....If I make a million per year, and pay out $400,000....I won't be starving, and I still think I could afford that Lamborghini I had been eyeing. Now...if someone makes $50,000 per year, and you jack $20,000 (which is pretty much the case)...you're left with $30,000 to have a morgtage, a car, a family....."living the american dream" as the saying goes. Now, depending on where you live, $30,000 may or may not be a lot of money. Where I live, that is a "fair" amount of money to work with...but you will NEVER own a home, BARELY own a car, and forget about livining in anything bigger than 600 square feet and plan on having any money to do anything. Now, what I am I getting at you ask? Well, the rich pay more because they can afford more...simple as that. Are they being penalized for being successful (or greedy, depending on the individual)? No, they are contributing more of a weight because they have more weight. Also, when you look at the "tax breaks for the rich", it really only applies to something like < 1% of the population. So, in the end, the middle class pays the majory of the taxes, even though the rich pay more individually.

So the question raised here is, what should the tax system be like? Well, I'm no economist, but I think the current system works ok but there's certainly room for improvement. Mainly, there should be no tax breaks for the anyone, but tax "benefits" lets call them, for the majority lying in the (lower) middle class (dont even get me started on tax benefits for companies that outsource....that's another rant for another day). Flat tax? eh, good in theory, but in practice probably won't make anyone happy. Taxes really can't make anyone happy, but I think that "fair" is never an attainable goal. The middle class bitch about the rich for getting tax breaks b/c they feel that since they can afford it, they should shovel it out. The rich are only interested in getting richer (yeah, i know, hasty/broad generalization here, but bear with me), and therefore LOVE a good tax break. Unfortunately, the real issue about taxes, is that tax rates and laws only work when they are working toward a specific goal. Right now, taxes are collected to generate revenue for the federal government, and no one really knows how much that is or what it'll do BECAUSE THE FUCKING BUDGET ISN'T BALANCED!!!! If the current adminstration (or any future one) could balance the budget FIRST, and then determine how much revenue they needed to get there through taxes, THEN they could issue a more "fair" system. I'm sure that there are convoluted algorithms and formulas for determining the current tax rates based on business and earnings and profit etc etc etc (at least I HOPE there is....), but these rates don't work towards anything. In any business, you have your revenue and expenses, and therefore a profit margin. You need to figure out what you're going to spend, and then damn well better make sure you generate the revenue to cover it (yeah, if the gov't was a business, it would've been chapter 11 in 1983). So, what I feel is that tax laws and breaks are something that can only be figured once a balanced budget is created. Then and ONLY THEN can a serious discussion about what tax rates should be occurr.

But then again....what do I know about macroeconomics.......

<P ID="signature"><div align="center">
ZMD.gif

...the way to be!</div></P>
 
Back
Top Bottom