PDA

View Full Version : The Tax System – Explained With Beer



sevlex
04-13-2011, 02:09 PM
This may have been posted here before but it's relevant as tax day is approaching:



The Tax System – Explained With Beer

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 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 anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

mriddick
04-13-2011, 03:56 PM
Another way to look at if there were 10 beers available and they were to be split by financial wealth....
The top 2 earners would get 9.3 beers
The other 8 would share .7 of a beer....

If we went by net wealth the top 2 would have 8.5 beers with the other 8 having 1.5

Considering the top 20% earn or own 85-93% of the wealth of the nation wouldn't a flat tax seem to dictate they pay 85-93% of the tax? I'd say if under your example they are paying 77% they are doing pretty good. However if you think about it, if it's correct under your example the top 20 are underpaying and the bottom 40% are getting beer they don't work for then who's getting screwed in the deal (hint the middle).

*Note I'm not worried about the top 20% earning 85-93% of the wealth, IMO they earn it. I'm actually much more concerned the bottom 40-50% are getting something when they are not contributing for it. I will admit it does bother me if the top 20% are not paying the amount of tax they earn in wealth and the bottom 40-50% do not really contribute at all, then it is the middle that pays unfair amount (covering the share the top does not and paying for the bottom).

AKTexas
04-13-2011, 04:33 PM
Can I still drink some beer?

Gunner1558
04-14-2011, 07:36 PM
I'll drink to that...

LAGC
04-14-2011, 09:46 PM
That analogy assumes the rich get the same amount of beer as the poorer folks do.

In reality, the top 5% hog 80% of all new wealth, while the bottom 20% get less than 1% of it.

So using that beer example, it would be like the richest dude got 80 beers out of the bargain, while the bottom four fought over a single beer.

Yet the rich don't contribute the biggest share of taxes, the middle-class does.

mriddick
04-14-2011, 10:18 PM
That analogy assumes the rich get the same amount of beer as the poorer folks do.

In reality, the top 5% hog 80% of all new wealth, while the bottom 20% get less than 1% of it.

So using that beer example, it would be like the richest dude got 80 beers out of the bargain, while the bottom four fought over a single beer.

Yet the rich don't contribute the biggest share of taxes, the middle-class does.
I believe your figures are off, almost all sources I've seen have the figures by net worth much closer to these numbers,
The top 1% own 38% of the wealth in the country,
The next 4% own 21% (top 5% own 59%)
The next 5% own 11.5% (top 10% own 70.5%)
The next 10% own 14.5% (top 20% 85%)
The next 30% own 11% (top 50% 96%)
The next 10% own 3%
The next 40% own 1% (bottom 50% own 4% combined)

Another site lists it as
the top 1% pay 36.9% of federal tax (wealth 32.7%), the top 5% pay 57.1% (wealth 57.2%), top 10% pay 68% (wealth 69.8%), and the bottom 50% pay 3.3% (wealth 2.8%) (close enough to the above figures to back them up). http://www.taxlitigation.net/taxlaw/united-states-tax-distribution/

As for taxes the best figures I've can find are these,
the top 0.1% of taxpayers by income pay 17.4% of federal income taxes (earning 9.1% of the income), the top 1% with gross income of $328,049 or more pay 36.9% (earning 19%), the top 5% with gross income of $137,056 or more pay 57.1% (earning 33.4%), and the bottom 50% with gross income of $30,122 or less pay 3.3% (earning 13.4%).

If the middle class is the middle 50% they pay clearly less then half of all taxes, probably closer to 13-14% (top 25% pay slightly over 86%), the bottom 50% pay in 3% (bottom 30% pay less then 1% by themselves)

LAGC
04-15-2011, 12:29 AM
I was talking about new wealth, not just current net worths.

Consider these charts:

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/howrich2.jpg

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/winners2.jpg

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/balance2.jpg

The rich are hogging the vast majority of the new wealth, the middle class is shrinking, and if this trend keeps up, in 100 years we'll just have a few rich lords ruling over the rest of us poor serfs. Neo-feudalism, if you will.

Oswald Bastable
04-15-2011, 01:13 AM
I was talking about new wealth, not just current net worths.


And here I thought it was old, or (untaxed/undertaxed/hidden) wealth that was the bane of society according to leftists. The wealth hidden by Kennedys and Rockefellers and Bilderburgers and the like, always sheltered from taxes...I thought that was the main bugaboo on the left. Apparently that's changed now, given the left's current position...it's now about wealth the left doesn't own...

Why am I not surprised?

Cypher
04-15-2011, 09:33 AM
That analogy assumes the rich get the same amount of beer as the poorer folks do.

In reality, the top 5% hog 80% of all new wealth, while the bottom 20% get less than 1% of it.

So using that beer example, it would be like the richest dude got 80 beers out of the bargain, while the bottom four fought over a single beer.

Yet the rich don't contribute the biggest share of taxes, the middle-class does.

Wow that's amazing. Do you know where I can get a fantastical magic wealth wand like the other rich bastards have so I can steal all the wealth from the poor people without doing anything to earn or work for it? I wonder what kind of magic wand all the small and large business owners use, are there different models, is there a department of magic wealth wands (DOMWW) that gives them out, or do you just simply steal it from someone that already has a magic wealth wand?

Seriously, I'm being serious here, I reeeeaaallly need my magic wealth wand to pay off some bills and buy that new 52" plasma TV and sound system, without the magic wealth wand I just don't know how I can afford to buy this really important stuff, I mean other rich people have all kinds of cool stuff so why shouldn't I be able to enjoy the same cool stuff they have, it's just not fair. I'm sick and tired of the "man" keeping me down and stealing all the wealth, it's bout time I get me some wealth too.

-Obama 2012-

mriddick
04-15-2011, 11:45 AM
I was talking about new wealth, not just current net worths.

Consider these charts:

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/howrich2.jpg

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/winners2.jpg

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/ww/news/2011/02/23/balance2.jpg

The rich are hogging the vast majority of the new wealth, the middle class is shrinking, and if this trend keeps up, in 100 years we'll just have a few rich lords ruling over the rest of us poor serfs. Neo-feudalism, if you will.
If if you want to go with the made up wealth numbers (or rather the made up way to read wealth) the tax info quoted was way off. If you count the middle class as the middle 50% then they don't pay anywhere near the most tax.