Author Topic: Taxes  (Read 104 times)

_That_Cracka_J

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4385
  • Karma: 55
  • Nintendo Entertainment System
Taxes
« on: March 09, 2003, 06:02:50 PM »
Taxes

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.
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 divide 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 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 paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh,
paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with
a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

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. "But he got $7!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 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 he 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 were
$52 short!

And that, boys and girls,journalists and college instructors, is how the
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.
There are lots of good restaurants in Europe and the Caribbean !!!

 

TheSheriff

  • Guest
Re:Taxes
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2003, 06:23:00 PM »
Excellent post.
 

Trauma-san

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16639
  • Karma: -231
Re:Taxes
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2003, 10:50:26 PM »
Yes, very good post.  I think everyone should be taxed the same percentage, and that it shouldn't slide as you get richer and richer, it should be the same percentage, whether they're taking 10% of 10 grand, or 80 million.  
 

ITW [the irish boy]

  • Muthafuckin' Double OG
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 657
  • Karma: -10
  • BOW DOWN
Re:Taxes
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2003, 01:00:44 PM »
Good post

Think about what u said trauma

1/ the man on 10000. That will barely cover rent and food, leaving nothing to save and improve for the future. Taxing him 10% will take away 1000 which he doesnt have to give away. That 1000 could very easily make rent impossible and make him homeless.
2/ the man on 80 million only needs about 40000 to live comfortably. Therefor he has over 79 million to spend as he wills. take ten percent away and he still has 72million, which really makes no difference whatsoever to him. even if you taxed him 50% he'd still have more than the bottom third would earn put together in about 100yrs. Surely the strongest should look out for the weakest?

if you put a tax free allowance at about 15000 you will give people a chance to better themselves, in effect get a grip, before they try to climb the ladder.


When looking at taxes look at it from what you would have said behind a veil of ignorance, not knowing your position in life. I think most people would prefer to put in safety nets on the basis that they could be born into a poor family. we would like to know that if we couldnt walk, people would walk for us. I doubt we would say lets take the risk and pray we are born rich or ambitious, it would be better that we would at least have a basic standard of living.
Dunno how well i explained that, yiz understand it?
SO MANY PEOPLE THINK THEY KNOW
BUT DO THEY KNOW TO THINK
THINK ABOUT THINKING
BEFORE THEY KNOW NOTHING
DID THEY KNOW SOMETHING
LETS THINK
 

Trauma-san

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16639
  • Karma: -231
Re:Taxes
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2003, 09:15:16 PM »
It was just a statement I threw out; of course someone at 10,000 would be under the poverty level, and would receive his taxes back at the end of the year, just like he does now.  I'm talking about people who aren't at poverty level; I don't think Bill Gates should pay a higher percentage than someone making 40 a year, just because he worked hard to get his money.  It should be a straight percentage, across the board, with of course child tax credits, poverty lines, etc.  incorporated... the 10,000 was just to show the extremes of the financial spectrum.  
 

Doggystylin

  • Guest
Re:Taxes
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2003, 09:28:53 PM »
that was extremely confusing for me but i think i get the point
 

ITW [the irish boy]

  • Muthafuckin' Double OG
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 657
  • Karma: -10
  • BOW DOWN
Re:Taxes
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2003, 08:20:30 AM »
yeah ok, we'll assume that the poverty end is dealt with, now lets look at the 40g man and bill gates.

First off, I think Bill Gates has done well for himself, but he does have more money to help the poor. 40g has also done well except perhaps without the same luck or ambition gates had.
Lets look at it from the actual work point of view. 40g most likely works long hours doing hard work. Bill gates is much more likely to have people doing stuff for him, and he just makes the end decision. Thats the way it works in organistaions, the higher you get, the more money and less work u have to do. My dad is a manager now and he says he does half the work he did when he was earning 20g.

I think taxes should be set at your ability to pay.40g is likely to have a mortgage and a family to look after, while gates has these basics ensured. For those who dont know, in economic terms a progressive tax is one which taxes the rich more than the poor, and regressive is vice versa. In my opinion, there should be a TFA at 15000, 10% up to 25000, 33% up to 50000 and 45% for those above that. I dont understand why people disagree with paying taxes, when it is providing you with the infrastructure (hostpital, roads, schools etc) that you wouldnt have afterwards.

What you need to watch out for though is charging the rich too much. this will encourage them to evade tax or move elsewhere. 45% is reasonable, because when youhave over 50g coming in you are well able to pay that. I think tax incentives should be put in place for new businesses etc to let them expand, but after maybe 3 yrs if they are taking in over 50g, tax them the higher rate.  If, and when, i earn that much money, i will be glad to pay it, to help those not so lucky
SO MANY PEOPLE THINK THEY KNOW
BUT DO THEY KNOW TO THINK
THINK ABOUT THINKING
BEFORE THEY KNOW NOTHING
DID THEY KNOW SOMETHING
LETS THINK