10 men walked into a bar...

From commentator Evan Garrison on <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123569898005989291.html#articleTabs=article">WSJ.com:</a>





This is a great illustration of our tax system:



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.

So, that's what they decided to do.



The ten men drank in the bar 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 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. 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 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 I!"



"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!"



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... this is why I have never beat Skek up after he has paid a lunch bill. Even if Deuce got his ice cream for free.
 
[quote author="skek" date=1236178059][quote author="graphrix" date=1236175082]And... this is why I have never beat Skek up after he has paid a lunch bill. Even if Deuce got his ice cream for free.</blockquote>


Well, that and the fact that I have 20 pounds on you. But Deuce did enjoy his ice cream, didn't he?</blockquote>


Paging TenMagnet... paging TenMagnet... we have a thread that needs your attention please, I repeat, we have a thread that needs your attention.
 
[quote author="irvinesinglemom" date=1236171182]From commentator Evan Garrison on <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123569898005989291.html#articleTabs=article">WSJ.com:</a>





This is a great illustration of our tax system:



... </blockquote>


Let me guess. You just finished doing your taxes...
 
tax system in acpme's kingdom:



10 men. equal ration of beer. you will drink now and enjoy. do not worry about trivial things like money. only the king has money. back to work, scum!
 
One is always for or against a current tax system based on their own financial situation. Everybody favors a tax system that favors them.



When I first came to this country, I wasn't well off. In turn, I also favored a democratic system as it tended to benefit me more.

Today I have financial stability that I haven't had in the past. At the same time I favor the republican system as it tends to benefit me more. I feel a bit guilty thinking that way, because it is selfish. You know it, I know it.



I know personally how much having lower taxes and education grants helped me. Perhaps I wouldn't be in the same situation today if I didn't receive help from the government. Therefore, I'm generally for the tax breaks for the lower/mid class. However, the problem I have is that there are way too many lazy mfer's out there that add no value to the system and never will. So my tolerance of tax breaks for the lower/middle class is fading fast.
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years?
 
[quote author="BlackVault CM" date=1236213749]One is always for or against a current tax system based on their own financial situation. Everybody favors a tax system that favors them.



When I first came to this country, I wasn't well off. In turn, I also favored a democratic system as it tended to benefit me more.

Today I have financial stability that I haven't had in the past. At the same time I favor the republican system as it tends to benefit me more. I feel a bit guilty thinking that way, because it is selfish. You know it, I know it.



I know personally how much having lower taxes and education grants helped me. Perhaps I wouldn't be in the same situation today if I didn't receive help from the government. Therefore, I'm generally for the tax breaks for the lower/mid class. However, the problem I have is that there are way too many lazy mfer's out there that add no value to the system and never will. So my tolerance of tax breaks for the lower/middle class is fading fast.</blockquote>


You are speaking for yourself and not all of us. I have been for less governement and less social programs since I was old enough to vote, even when I had nothing.



Long story. Ready?





My father and I were living in Europe as a result of his taking a consulting position in his industry. He went from having a middle class income to an upper, upper middle class income overnight. Living in Europe during Watergate and the end of the Vietnam war and attending an international school at age thirteeen was a bit of an eye opener for me. While riding in my dad's new BMW, I had this great idea and expressed it to my father: "Dad, since you are making so much more money now, why don't you give <em>such and such</em> an amount to <em>this or that</em> charity?"





His reponse: "You know that ski trip you are going on to Austria? Instead of me paying for that ski trip, how about if I use that money for the charity you suggest, and I will match that amount to double the contribution?"



It was a great way to teach me not make others pay for my values and to puy my money where my mouth was.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236215568][quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years?</blockquote>


Every great society over the last 3000 years ended because of a flat tax?
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1236218635][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236215568][quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years? </blockquote>


Every great society over the last 3000 years ended because of a flat tax?</blockquote>


That isn't what I said. Try again.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236224362][quote author="trrenter" date=1236218635][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236215568][quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years? </blockquote>


Every great society over the last 3000 years ended because of a flat tax?</blockquote>


That isn't what I said. Try again.</blockquote>


I don't want to try again. You are being perposely vague. What did you mean if I am misunderstanding you.



It seemed to me you were corolating taxes to the demise of every great society over the past 3000 years.
 
sounds like how me and my friends handle the bill when we go out.

the poor or unemployed usually don't pay and they have no say.

the richer guys that pay usually decide where to go and what we are doing that night.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236215568][quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years?</blockquote>


No, the harbinger would be when local people decide the benefits of independence are no longer outweighed by the benefits of inclusion. It happened to every Chinese dynasty, the Greek, Roman, and Ottoman empires, and every colonial power since the Magna Carta. You are attempting to argue that if only the powerful rulers hadn't tried to overly tax the poor they would have extended their empire's glorious existence indefinitely. That is putting the cart before the horse, as the poor only revolt when there is leadership at the local level and I have yet to hear of a band of revolutionaries who were poor/uneducated when the decided to revolt. The harbinger you are loking for is the escalation of taxation on the productive class, as they will only stand for so much before they throw off the yoke and either expatriate or revolt.
 
[quote author="lendingmaestro" date=1236228612]abolish income tax. institute sales taxes</blockquote>


And create a black market for cash only sales that dwarfs Prohibition. Also highly regressive.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1236229631][quote author="no_vaseline" date=1236215568][quote author="trrenter" date=1236213988]Flat tax.</blockquote>


Ah ? the old switch from progressive taxation to regressive taxation play. Wasn?t that the harbinger of the End of Days for every great society over the past 3000 years?</blockquote>


No, the harbinger would be when local people decide the benefits of independence are no longer outweighed by the benefits of inclusion. It happened to every Chinese dynasty, the Greek, Roman, and Ottoman empires, and every colonial power since the Magna Carta. You are attempting to argue that if only the powerful rulers hadn't tried to overly tax the poor they would have extended their empire's glorious existence indefinitely. That is putting the cart before the horse, as the poor only revolt when there is leadership at the local level and I have yet to hear of a band of revolutionaries who were poor/uneducated when the decided to revolt. The harbinger you are loking for is the escalation of taxation on the productive class, as they will only stand for so much before they throw off the yoke and either expatriate or revolt.</blockquote>


This is good stuff, but this isn't the argument I'm making. I have made two blanket statements that have been misinterperted by two different users. Let me clarifiy them.



1) The majority of the 10 person crew shouldn't be drinking beer because they can't afford it without the subsidy.

2) The move from progressive to regressive taxation is (one of many) common signposts on the road to Hell. Oscar cited the victims. It obviously wasn't thier only problems.



The solution is simple. Stop subsidizing beer. And I?m disappointed nobody caught the most important part of the story.
 
[quote author="awgee" date=1236217712][quote author="BlackVault CM" date=1236213749]One is always for or against a current tax system based on their own financial situation. Everybody favors a tax system that favors them.



When I first came to this country, I wasn't well off. In turn, I also favored a democratic system as it tended to benefit me more.

Today I have financial stability that I haven't had in the past. At the same time I favor the republican system as it tends to benefit me more. I feel a bit guilty thinking that way, because it is selfish. You know it, I know it.



I know personally how much having lower taxes and education grants helped me. Perhaps I wouldn't be in the same situation today if I didn't receive help from the government. Therefore, I'm generally for the tax breaks for the lower/mid class. However, the problem I have is that there are way too many lazy mfer's out there that add no value to the system and never will. So my tolerance of tax breaks for the lower/middle class is fading fast.</blockquote>


You are speaking for yourself and not all of us. I have been for less governement and less social programs since I was old enough to vote, even when I had nothing.



Long story. Ready?





My father and I were living in Europe as a result of his taking a consulting position in his industry. He went from having a middle class income to an upper, upper middle class income overnight. Living in Europe during Watergate and the end of the Vietnam war and attending an international school at age thirteeen was a bit of an eye opener for me. While riding in my dad's new BMW, I had this great idea and expressed it to my father: "Dad, since you are making so much more money now, why don't you give <em>such and such</em> an amount to <em>this or that</em> charity?"





His reponse: "You know that ski trip you are going on to Austria? Instead of me paying for that ski trip, how about if I use that money for the charity you suggest, and I will match that amount to double the contribution?"



It was a great way to teach me not make others pay for my values and to puy my money where my mouth was.</blockquote>


What you are describing is something completely different. Not everybody is born in a position where they ride around in their daddys BMW. When you have money...its easy to make money. Someone born in a poor family has a unfair advantage compared to someone born in a rich family. Everything from education, starting capital, expenses etc. Everything adds up and can significantly alter ones success. If you were all of a sudden making 10 bucks an hour, can't afford college, and have to feed 3 kids, would you want tax breaks for the rich? My point is that everybody wants a situation that best fills their pockets.



Getting a tax break for myself because I didn't have money is almost the same situation as ones' papa giving thier child a jump start in life. If your father didn't pay for you college or give you anything to help you in life, and you did everything on your own - then I salute you.
 
Back
Top