SaltyCajun.com

SaltyCajun.com (http://www.saltycajun.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Discussion (Everything Else) (http://www.saltycajun.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Bar Stool Economics (http://www.saltycajun.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35893)

swamp snorkler 09-07-2012 01:16 PM

Bar Stool Economics
 
For all those in favor of taxing the rich more, here is how it works!!!!!?????

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for a 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 $1.00
The sixth would pay $3.00
The seventh would pay $7.00
The eighth would pay $12.00
The ninth would pay $18.00
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.00

So that's what they decided to do. The men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with arraignment, 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 $20.00.
"Drinks for the ten men now cost just $80.00

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 there "fair share?" They realized that $ 20.00 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, 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 union. " 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 & girls, journalist 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
David R. Kamerschen, PH.D professor of Economics, university of Georgia

GIBob 09-07-2012 02:03 PM

Good stuff there - Thanks

Feesherman 09-07-2012 02:17 PM

And there lies the problem with Dems. They think they can raise taxes on the rich as high as they please and just assume that they will pay. They never consider that they might just take their skin outta the game leaving hundreds of unemployed in their wake!

Matt G 09-07-2012 04:17 PM

Great read! Thanks for the post.

nguidry 09-07-2012 05:26 PM

Love the post. Wish more folks understood. Problem is once the 5th guy gets a free beer he wants free food as well.

Wag 09-07-2012 05:27 PM

that's why I favor a flat tax.....everyone in that scenario would pay the same price for their beer....pretty simple really.

Spunt Drag 09-07-2012 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wag (Post 489414)
that's why I favor a flat tax.....everyone in that scenario would pay the same price for their beer....pretty simple really.

True but economic experts say to get the same amount of current revenue you would have to have a flat tax around 35%. The top 2% of the population pays 40% of total revenue, so a flat tax of around 20% would come up short. These aren't my figures though, just what I've heard.

Gerald 09-07-2012 08:46 PM

Flat Tax..........Lets take this one step farther.

Lets eliminate all Federal income tax and replace it with a Federal sale tax. I don't know what the percentage would be, maybe 5%. Everybody pays the same percentage on what they spend. If the RICH spend a lot of money, they pay more "taxes" on the money they spend.

Maybe something like food items bought at grocery stores would not be taxed.

If you save your money [kind of the same thing as a Roth IRA] you don't pay any tax on that money.

Think of what this would save the Governent..... no more IRS and everything involved in collecting income taxes. Yes it would add to the "sale tax" collections system cost.....but the net savings would be HUGE.

Spunt Drag 09-07-2012 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerald (Post 489605)
Flat Tax..........Lets take this one step farther.

Lets eliminate all Federal income tax and replace it with a Federal sale tax. I don't know what the percentage would be, maybe 5%. Everybody pays the same percentage on what they spend. If the RICH spend a lot of money, they pay more "taxes" on the money they spend.

Maybe something like food items bought at grocery stores would not be taxed.

If you save your money [kind of the same thing as a Roth IRA] you don't pay any tax on that money.

Think of what this would save the Governent..... no more IRS and everything involved in collecting income taxes. Yes it would add to the "sale tax" collections system cost.....but the net savings would be HUGE.

While I would love for this to happen, you wouldn't have much of a military with that little of revenue. And your savings aren't taxed, unless you're talkin about a death tax. What is taxed is the interest your savings or investments (capital gains) make.

Gerald 09-07-2012 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunt Drag (Post 489625)
While I would love for this to happen, you wouldn't have much of a military with that little of revenue. And your savings aren't taxed, unless you're talkin about a death tax. What is taxed is the interest your savings or investments (capital gains) make.

The "Federal Tax" would have to be what it would take in enough money to run the country. Maybe this would be a little higher....say 8 or 10%.

Maybe some Luxury [non-essential] items would be taxed higher.

scott craft 09-08-2012 10:18 PM

Does anyone know what the tax rate is on those in the top 2%? I understand these guys pay more taxes, but is that because they are taxed at a higher rate or simply because of the amount they are taxed on? I suspect it is because they make more and not because of their tax rate, but I haven't researched it.

Spunt Drag 09-08-2012 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott craft (Post 490137)
Does anyone know what the tax rate is on those in the top 2%? I understand these guys pay more taxes, but is that because they are taxed at a higher rate or simply because of the amount they are taxed on? I suspect it is because they make more and not because of their tax rate, but I haven't researched it.

They are taxed at a much higher rate. But it's only their income that is taxed that high. Capital gains is taxed at a much lower rate.

scott craft 09-08-2012 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunt Drag (Post 490141)
They are taxed at a much higher rate. But it's only their income that is taxed that high. Capital gains is taxed at a much lower rate.

Thanks.

getonfish 09-08-2012 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott craft (Post 490137)
Does anyone know what the tax rate is on those in the top 2%? I understand these guys pay more taxes, but is that because they are taxed at a higher rate or simply because of the amount they are taxed on? I suspect it is because they make more and not because of their tax rate, but I haven't researched it.

Warren Buffet publicly said he pays a lower tax rate than his assistant who makes around 50,000 a year. It is well documented that the super rich pay next to nothing in taxes compared to the middle class. Yes they pay much more in regards to monetary amounts but the breaks they receive are ridiculous. They should pay the same rates we pay. Our national debt would be much better off and they would still be ridiculously rich.

weedeater 09-08-2012 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by getonfish (Post 490170)
Warren Buffet publicly said he pays a lower tax rate than his assistant who makes around 50,000 a year. It is well documented that the super rich pay next to nothing in taxes compared to the middle class. Yes they pay much more in regards to monetary amounts but the breaks they receive are ridiculous. They should pay the same rates we pay. Our national debt would be much better off and they would still be ridiculously rich.

Tax the middle class....... they can carry the weight while we have people that's never paid face in their life living high on the hog with their gin and juice

Spunt Drag 09-09-2012 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by getonfish (Post 490170)
Warren Buffet publicly said he pays a lower tax rate than his assistant who makes around 50,000 a year. It is well documented that the super rich pay next to nothing in taxes compared to the middle class. Yes they pay much more in regards to monetary amounts but the breaks they receive are ridiculous. They should pay the same rates we pay. Our national debt would be much better off and they would still be ridiculously rich.

Our national debt would be much better off if the 50% of Americans who pay no taxes at all would pay their "fair"share. I get what you're saying. I'm middle class, and don't feel represented by either party. My company makes Billions, that's millions with a B, and still claims they're broke every quarter. The middle class is disappearing and the rich are gettin richer. But I don't want the government taxing the rich and "spreading the wealth".

getonfish 09-09-2012 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunt Drag (Post 490186)
Our national debt would be much better off if the 50% of Americans who pay no taxes at all would pay their "fair"share. I get what you're saying. I'm middle class, and don't feel represented by either party.

Their fair share of nothing is still nothing. If someone would have the guts to stand up and say we are no longer going to allow the hard working Middle class to pay for your free ride when you are perfectly able to work, then they will either starve or work and pay taxes. Don't get me wrong I am all for Medicaid and food stamps to those who truly need them but you can't just pass the stuff out like candy. My wife is an office manager for a gynecologist and the stuff she tells me about would blow your mind. Women coming in the office with eight hundred dollar shoes and real Coach purses but of course they have Medicaid. One of her patients on Medicaid actually drives a bentley. My wife who is very blunt asked her how she has Medicaid and she said all her stuff is in her elderly grandmothers name. She then begin to talk about how she hustles for her money so the "gubment" don't know about it. My wife then asked her if she know who paid the Medicaid and the woman said "the suckas who don't know how to work the system" my wife almost lost her job that day after the next part of the conversation which I can't post in the general section.

kcinnick 09-09-2012 01:37 AM

There are Government employees who have a job to give out money. They have to give out more money than last year to ensure they still have a job next year. They don't care if you lie, they don't care if you cheat, they just care to add you to the rolls so there is enough work load to ensure their Government Job next year.

When we had my son, the first night we had an awesome nurse, we were considered a priority case since my wife had an emergency C section and there was a point where they felt the baby had to come out now or he may not make it. Anyway, the second night that great nurse was there, but we had the ****tiest nurse of the night. I went to chat with the good nurse, and I asked her why she wasn't still our nurse. Her answer had me hit the roof. "Well, ya'll are good parents and you don't need me, I have to take care of the babies with other types of parents." Turns out, one mom decided she wanted to go clubbing, so she wasn't admitted to the hospital, but the baby was, so she left her baby with the nurses and went out. Another room had one Momma, one Baby and like 3 potential baby daddy's, nurses didn't mind when I slipped up and let my Conceal Carry slip out from under my shirt as I politely told them to get in their room and shut the door or leave the wing.

The kicker is when we were leaving. The doctors come around and do all the discharges at the same time. I noticed the other people loading up new car seats, diaper bags loaded to the brim with diapers, bottles, wipes, etc., strollers, cases of formula, at minimum $750 worth of stuff. Only thing the farewell crew gave me was a bill. I asked what was going on, and they said that stuff was for the medicaid patients and they were getting food stamps and WIC also. So basically, I paid for the birth of my son, and the birth of the people whom my son is going to have to support when he starts working. The only problem I see is the poor are breeding faster than the middle class, they have an incentive to have a child, I have to budget for number 2. I would have loved to have two kids close together in age, but I would have never been able to afford it, well not unless I quit my job and got on the dole.

LPfishnTIM 09-09-2012 05:18 AM

interesting thread and interesting comments! One thing that people forget about the rich, they make jobs and they know how to make and retain money. Qualities that not everybody has. In the Bible, Jesus told many parables, one was about a young rich ruler who gave gold to three men, one multiplied his by 10x, another by 5x and the last buried his gold so he didn't loose it! which one was rewarded the most, the one who gained the most and the one who buried the gold, it was taken from him and given to the one who gained the most! that's Bible economics and I think If we tried it, it would work!

scott craft 09-09-2012 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunt Drag (Post 490186)
Our national debt would be much better off if the 50% of Americans who pay no taxes at all would pay their "fair"share. I get what you're saying. I'm middle class, and don't feel represented by either party. My company makes Billions, that's millions with a B, and still claims they're broke every quarter. The middle class is disappearing and the rich are gettin richer. But I don't want the government taxing the rich and "spreading the wealth".

From what I've read the "50% of Americans pay no taxes" statement isn't quite true, it's a political hype statement. I am in favor of a flat tax because I think everyone should be taxed at the same rate plus getting rid of loopholes will bring in more revenue in its own right.

Matt G 09-09-2012 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott craft (Post 490137)
Does anyone know what the tax rate is on those in the top 2%? I understand these guys pay more taxes, but is that because they are taxed at a higher rate or simply because of the amount they are taxed on? I suspect it is because they make more and not because of their tax rate, but I haven't researched it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by getonfish (Post 490170)
Warren Buffet publicly said he pays a lower tax rate than his assistant who makes around 50,000 a year. It is well documented that the super rich pay next to nothing in taxes compared to the middle class. Yes they pay much more in regards to monetary amounts but the breaks they receive are ridiculous. They should pay the same rates we pay. Our national debt would be much better off and they would still be ridiculously rich.

We have a progressive tax system, meaning your are taxed at a higher rate as you earn more. Example: If you file single status; the first $8,500 you earn is taxed at 10%, everything you earn after that up to $34,500 is taxed at 15%, and so on down the schedule. If you are married filing jointly, married filing single, or HOH you use the respective schedule (see 2011 Schedules below).

Capital gains taxes on the other hand are taxes on the appreciated value (gains) of capital assets (stocks, bonds, real estate, etc....) at the time of sale. However, these assets must have been held for at least 1 year before the sale. Capital Gains taxes for 2011 were 0% taxes for those in the 10% and 15% tax bracket, and 15% for those in the remaining brackets.

So the reason the ultra rich are not paying their "fair share" as you claim GETONFISH is because they make the majority of their money through investments. It is apparent that you cannot become "ultra rich" by working the normal 8-5 like the majority of us on here do. You need something else to help subsidize your ordinary income. Smart people use investing, others use the government. Why should the smart people be be penalized for putting their money at risk to better themselves? You have the same exact tax break that they do if you invest. Otherwise, you would be treating these gains as ordinary income, which could actually put you in a higher tax bracket if you have a substantial amount of investments that were sold in a single year. They are not screwing the system are commiting fraud. They are simply enjoying the same breaks that are afforded to me and you.

SingleFiling Status


[Tax Rate Schedule X, Internal Revenue Code section 1(c)]
  • 10% on taxable income from $0 to $8,500, plus
  • 15% on taxable income over $8,500 to $34,500, plus
  • 25% on taxable income over $34,500 to $83,600, plus
  • 28% on taxable income over $83,600 to $174,400, plus
  • 33% on taxable income over $174,400 to $379,150, plus
  • 35% on taxable income over $379,150.
Married Filing Jointly or Qualifying Widow(er) Filing Status



[Tax Rate Schedule Y-1, Internal Revenue Code section 1(a)]
  • 10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,000, plus
  • 15% on taxable income over $17,000 to $69,000, plus
  • 25% on taxable income over $69,000 to $139,350, plus
  • 28% on taxable income over $139,350 to $212,300, plus
  • 33% on taxable income over $212,300 to $379,150, plus
  • 35% on taxable income over $379,150.
Married Filing Separately Filing Status



[Tax Rate Schedule Y-2, Internal Revenue Code section 1(d)]
  • 10% on taxable income from $0 to $8,500, plus
  • 15% on taxable income over $8,500 to $34,500, plus
  • 25% on taxable income over $34,500 to $69,675, plus
  • 28% on taxable income over $69,675 to $106,150, plus
  • 33% on taxable income over $106,150 to $189,575, plus
  • 35% on taxable income over $189,575.
Head of Household Filing Status



[Tax Rate Schedule Z, Internal Revenue Code section 1(b)]
  • 10% on taxable income from $0 to $12,150, plus
  • 15% on taxable income over $12,150 to $46,250, plus
  • 25% on taxable income over $46,250 to $119,400, plus
  • 28% on taxable income over $119,400 to $193,350, plus
  • 33% on taxable income over $193,350 to $379,150, plus
  • 35% on taxable income over $379,150.

scott craft 09-09-2012 07:33 AM

Thanks Matt, that clears it up a lot.

Spunt Drag 09-09-2012 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott craft (Post 490200)
From what I've read the "50% of Americans pay no taxes" statement isn't quite true, it's a political hype statement. I am in favor of a flat tax because I think everyone should be taxed at the same rate plus getting rid of loopholes will bring in more revenue in its own right.

Mark twain said "There's lies, damn lies, and statistics." so you're probably right. But it's not to say they don't pay income and sales taxes. They just get so much back at the end of the year on their returns they actually come out to the good.

getonfish 09-09-2012 09:27 AM

Matt I understand how the tax code works and I agree that Capitol gains is why the rich pay lower taxes. There needs to be some adjustments made to that law in my opinion.

On the other hand I also understand that it is the rich who supply the jobs to the rest of us. There are in fact HUGE additional tax breaks available to businesses that we don't even qualify for. Messing with those is a double edge sword though.

southern151 09-09-2012 09:38 AM

What are those HUGE tax breaks to businesses? I must need to investigate more. By the time I pay employee taxes, matching taxes, sales taxes and, taxes on profits, I'm taxed out! They only break I have seen is investing in more equipment which is incredibly expensive and, you guessed it, taxed!

bmac 09-09-2012 02:12 PM

You need to hire some GE accountants! They paid no federal taxes on $5 billion in 2010.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...in-2010/73178/

cajunfisher 09-09-2012 02:51 PM

To me the problem is not the people paying taxes. Yes, wealthy people like Buffet pay a lower rate, but that is because of the way he makes his money. For the rest of us, I think the tax rates are pretty high. I see it everytime I look at my check. But, there are two more important factors.
1) the government waste of the taxes that are collected. Any and all excess should be returned to the people who paid those taxes. Kind of like a profit share.
2) the millions who do not pay taxes at all. ie, the earned income credit. How can you earn income if you don't go to work?

getonfish 09-09-2012 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmac (Post 490327)
You need to hire some GE accountants! They paid no federal taxes on $5 billion in 2010.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...in-2010/73178/

Same thing for general motors. That is exactly what I was referring to.

jbert22 09-09-2012 08:32 PM

correct me if im wrong but do some of you agree that we should increase taxes on businesses that have employees? I might be crazy but if business werent hit by taxes they could afford to hire more people. From what I hear Obama wants to slam businesses with big taxes so that the middle class wont have to pay as much. But what money will the middle class have if BUSINESSES have to suffer for being sucessfull???

Matt G 09-09-2012 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbert22 (Post 490572)
correct me if im wrong but do some of you agree that we should increase taxes on businesses that have employees? I might be crazy but if business werent hit by taxes they could afford to hire more people. From what I hear Obama wants to slam businesses with big taxes so that the middle class wont have to pay as much. But what money will the middle class have if BUSINESSES have to suffer for being sucessfull???

X2. My thoughts exactly. Like Getonfish said, it is a double edge sword. Don't tax business enough and the middle and lower class cry that it's not fair. Tax business too much and they'll either close down or move overseas where the tax laws are more palatable. What most people don't realize is that the majority of small business owners, which are the majority of business owners, don't make as much as you would expect. I know when things slow down in the shop, my old man will go months without a pay check not to have to let anybody go. I don't know of many business owners who would do this. They would simply shut the doors and move on to the next adventure. However; when the business goes, so does several people's jobs. Without jobs, the economy could not sustain itself. With that being said; without business, there would be no jobs. Democrats need to tread carefully because they are on a slippery slope.

2ndamendment 09-09-2012 10:11 PM

If you have not done so, consider seeing the movie 2016. The movie research sheds some light on this subject.

SULPHITE 09-09-2012 10:24 PM

Stuff like this happens

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-1...re-tax/4251642

LPfishnTIM 09-09-2012 11:01 PM

by reading this thread I just realized I need to switch I tax info at work to head of household.

Matt G 09-10-2012 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LPfishnTIM (Post 490635)
by reading this thread I just realized I need to switch I tax info at work to head of household.

http://taxes.about.com/od/filingstat...fhousehold.htm

This is the general requirements to claim HOH.

GIBob 09-10-2012 08:04 AM

Don't need more taxes, need to reduce government waste - federal, state, and local - they all start buying next election votes with our money the day they take office..

jchief 09-10-2012 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIBob (Post 490696)
Don't need more taxes, need to reduce government waste - federal, state, and local - they all start buying next election votes with our money the day they take office..


Agree. Do away with EVERY federal subsidy and start over.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - [ARG:3 UNDEFINED], Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors
All content, images, designs, and logos are Copyright © 2009-2012,
Salty Cajun, LLC
No unathorized use is permitted