Taxes. (1 Viewer)

Jenn

Nitro Member
Sometimes politicians, journalists and the liberal left exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" and it is just accepted to be fact.

But what does that really mean?

Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help. Please read it carefully.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner 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 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." Dinner 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 eat 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 eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested:

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 paid $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... the least proportionate savings)
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 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 me!"

"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 first nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man 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 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 eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
 
Sorry, Ninji.....:D

how do i know this was written by some right wing bazillionaire who is so into his money he inherited from his family and by the way has never "worked" in his silver-spoon, rolls royce, pate eatin day in his life.

becaus and i will quote form the dr.'s website:
"Complete vitae available online (http://davidk.myweb.uga.edu/vita.pdf). Contrary to Internet folklore, Dr. Kamerschen is NOT the author of "Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics." Additionally, he does NOT know who wrote it. "

what crap............that is not how the system works either. i know because i pay my taxes and don't have enough money to hire a loophole finder.
 
The top 50% of wage earners in this Country pay 95% of all Taxes. The welfare/Food stamp crowd have it made in the shade!:confused:
 
Joe...wrong.....am married to a CPA in the franchise tax board for Calif and the wealthiest account for only 6% of taxes received.
The backbone is represented by the middle income.
Remember that the rich 'bend' the laws more than the poor and stupid.

I was told years ago by a big time CEO that laws were written to control the poor and stupid as the rich are up to nonsense everyday...go figure
 
Joe...wrong.....am married to a CPA in the franchise tax board for Calif and the wealthiest account for only 6% of taxes received.
The backbone is represented by the middle income.
Remember that the rich 'bend' the laws more than the poor and stupid.

I was told years ago by a big time CEO that laws were written to control the poor and stupid as the rich are up to nonsense everyday...go figure

.............the poor and stupid...............maybe Terry, you should donate some of your time to educate the "STUPID" and donate some of your money to help the "POOR"
 
Joe...wrong.....am married to a CPA in the franchise tax board for Calif and the wealthiest account for only 6% of taxes received.
The backbone is represented by the middle income.
Remember that the rich 'bend' the laws more than the poor and stupid.

I was told years ago by a big time CEO that laws were written to control the poor and stupid as the rich are up to nonsense everyday...go figure

Terry, no offense but that is Naive as can be. The Donald Trumps, Bill Gates' of this world pay more in taxes in one annual Quarter than I'll make in my lifetime! Forbes magazine back in '98-99 Had an article claiming that earning just $63,000 put you in the Top 10% of all wage earners. I'm sure that's gone up some, but you get my point. We have producers in this country, and we have takers. And the Takers are growing a heck of a lot faster than the Producers.:confused:
 
Last edited:
Terry, no offense but that is Naive as can be. The Donald Trumps, Bill Gates' of this world pay more in taxes in one annual Quarter than I'll make in my lifetime! Forbes magazine back in '98-99 Had an article claiming that earning just $63,000 put you in the Top 10% of all wage earners. I'm sure that's gone up some, but you get my point. We have producers in this country, and we have takers. And the Takers are growing a heck of a lot faster than the Producers.:confused:

Joe, those guys may pay more in taxes, but their income on a weekly basis would make you cry. Imagine a new diesel top kick and stacker. Every week.

And that is the issue- the ratio of income to tax paid is much lower for most in that Top 10% due to the capabilities of folks at that level to make their money work for them in such a way that prying eyes and fingers don't have access. And since the governing bodies know that, they make up the slack on those not as Tax saavy, primarily those in the Middle/ Upper Middle class.

They know there isn't anymore to be had from the Bottom 30%, plus that percentage of the population is less inclined to invest their tax refund- it's going to be spent/ reinvested in the US economy (and the gov knows that and relies on it much more than the check they may get from Mr. Trump or Mr. Gates).

Bottom line- although it may seem that there are loungers and loafers running roughshod all over this country, every dime they have, no matter where it comes from goes right back into the US in the form of buying food, paying utilities and purchasing products at WallyWorld.
The same can not be said for those with investments in China, India or Iraq- I don't know too many folks in my status circle that can do that, but I wouldn't doubt that there is quite a bit of money that comes from OUR wallets for their products into the bank accounts of some "American" corporation that will never have that money see a tax or an investment on American soil.
 
Joe, those guys may pay more in taxes, but their income on a weekly basis would make you cry. Imagine a new diesel top kick and stacker. Every week.

And that is the issue- the ratio of income to tax paid is much lower for most in that Top 10% due to the capabilities of folks at that level to make their money work for them in such a way that prying eyes and fingers don't have access. And since the governing bodies know that, they make up the slack on those not as Tax saavy, primarily those in the Middle/ Upper Middle class.

They know there isn't anymore to be had from the Bottom 30%, plus that percentage of the population is less inclined to invest their tax refund- it's going to be spent/ reinvested in the US economy (and the gov knows that and relies on it much more than the check they may get from Mr. Trump or Mr. Gates).

Bottom line- although it may seem that there are loungers and loafers running roughshod all over this country, every dime they have, no matter where it comes from goes right back into the US in the form of buying food, paying utilities and purchasing products at WallyWorld.
The same can not be said for those with investments in China, India or Iraq- I don't know too many folks in my status circle that can do that, but I wouldn't doubt that there is quite a bit of money that comes from OUR wallets for their products into the bank accounts of some "American" corporation that will never have that money see a tax or an investment on American soil.

It blows me away at just how many Americans love to see the Rich get Hammered on April 15th. And then Bitch and Moan when they're jobs get axed! These are the very people that employ 80% of this country.
 
It blows me away at just how many Americans love to see the Rich get Hammered on April 15th. And then Bitch and Moan when they're jobs get axed! These are the very people that employ 80% of this country.

Not lookin for the rich to get hammered, dude. It would be nice if they could just keep it in the "family" and pay their fair (for all parties) share...

I am not talkin about Mr. and Mrs. American company owner- I point my finger at the companies that make their name and their home base here in the States, but when you call Customer Service, some guy in Mumbai or Shanghi is answering your questions (that would be a direct point at Mr. Gates..)..

Any company that lays off thousands of Americans to send those same jobs overseas so that their profits can go up are the same companies that, because of off-shore investments and thousands of underpaid employees overseas, doesn't allow that money to come back into OUR economy, even though their products have dominated our markets, is no friend of mine, yours or anyone that lives, works and invests HERE.. Stop fooling yourself into thinking that any company that does that is looking out for YOUR best interest- they don't need you as an ally...
 
The problem is that everyone seems to have a different idea of what is "fair" and what is "confiscatory." I just read an article about how the government of Hugo Chavez may "confiscate" (steal) the golf courses of wealthy capitalists to hand the property over for the use of the poor.

When they first passed income tax in this country, in order to get it in the door they said that if the top rate ever got to be over 2% it would be "sinful." I heard in the news the other day that the top rate is currently 35%.

Putting the emphasis on what someone has left after taxes is putting your nose in someone else's business, IMO. MY idea of fair is that taxing should be done as minimally as possible and that money should be kept where it will provide the most net benefit for the most people. When you confiscate money and just hand it to people, nothing is produced for it. You miss a benefit step. Let the wealthy invest the same money and people go to work, generating MORE taxes. It's a volume thing. It's why the economy goes up a few years after tax cuts even if the liberal media is kicking and screaming each time they are cut.

Anyone in favor of our insane "progressive" taxes should be in favor of taking it a step further. Why not just make everyone carry "income ID" cards to be shown whenever making a purchase so that everyone can pay a different price for goods based on what they earn. Just charge the wealthy $1,000 for a loaf of bread. That's basically what you're doing.

I'm nowhere near what could be considered "wealthy" by most in this country. It doesn't have to happen to me for me to call it wrong. What's the old saying? I said nothing when they came for so and so? When they came for me, there was nobody left TOO say anything?

My definition of "fair" would be that everyone pays the same AMOUNT of income tax. Even with a flat tax someone earning ten times more pays ten times more to drive on the same roads. Percentage based taxes are obscenely unfair on their own, much less our "progressive" rates going up as income goes up.

The consumer pays for everything. Higher income taxes are just another cost of doing business for the employer that "someone" has to earn them the money to be able to cover. How many of the same mouths tout taxing the "rich" (ahem...employers) while complaining about not getting the raises and benefits they think they deserve. I call it you falling sucker to the shell game. You taxed yourself without even realizing it.
 
Any company that lays off thousands of Americans to send those same jobs overseas so that their profits can go up are the same companies that, because of off-shore investments and thousands of underpaid employees overseas, doesn't allow that money to come back into OUR economy, even though their products have dominated our markets, is no friend of mine, yours or anyone that lives, works and invests HERE.. Stop fooling yourself into thinking that any company that does that is looking out for YOUR best interest- they don't need you as an ally...

John Kerry ran on promising to raise taxes on anyone earning over $200,000. He also complained about low paying jobs and jobs going overseas.

Question. How do you raise an employer's taxes AND expect them to hand out increased wages and benefits? How do you raise their taxes (cost of doing business) AND expect them to stand up to foreign competition? What if a company is faced with the choice of using foreign labor to survive or go out of business due to not being able to compete? Which would YOU do as an owner? (meanwhile, someone would be on a message board who didn't even know you saying that you were no friend of theirs because you chose to survive)

I'll be the first to agree with you that we shouldn't trade with any country that isn't willing to trade with us on an equal basis. I also believe we shouldn't trade with any country that doesn't share our beliefs of what basic human rights are. Why the hell do we trade with China and not Cuba?

A company is in business to do ONE THING, and that's to make money. You shouldn't EXPECT them to be in business to look out for your interests. YOU should be in business as an employee to look out for your interests. Just whose responsibility do you think this is? Who is responsible for you other than you?

Money can only be in one of two places. The government's hands or the private sector's. Only one of those two is able to multiply money. On average, a dollar will never hire as many people in the government's hands as it will in the private sector's. Nobody watches your money like you when it's yours to lose. It's in the government's best interest to waste money in any program so they have a leg to stand on in demanding more each year. Employers have been having the sh*t taxed out of them WHILE the media convinces people that their woes are due to those nasty "rich" people.
 
A company is in business to do ONE THING, and that's to make money. You shouldn't EXPECT them to be in business to look out for your interests. YOU should be in business as an employee to look out for your interests. Just whose responsibility do you think this is? Who is responsible for you other than you?

And yet, so many companies wave ther Red, White and Blue and talk about American Pride, or how this is Our Country (latest Ford blah blah blah..), using it as a sales pitch to woo those in the "Red" states to believing that they are better than some other foreign entity doing the same product. It is a sales technique now, not, as some think, a representation of some companies alligence to a home nation.

I don't expect some company to look out FOR my interests- I do expect myself to decide which companies do REPRESENT my interests. And as a taxpaying US citizen, one of the things I expect is that that company doesn't wiggle its way through some loophole in the tax law (that they probably helped create) to neglect their tax paid vs. income earned responsibility to obscenely pad their bottom line.
 
And yet, so many companies wave ther Red, White and Blue and talk about American Pride, or how this is Our Country (latest Ford blah blah blah..), using it as a sales pitch to woo those in the "Red" states to believing that they are better than some other foreign entity doing the same product. It is a sales technique now, not, as some think, a representation of some companies alligence to a home nation.

I don't expect some company to look out FOR my interests- I do expect myself to decide which companies do REPRESENT my interests. And as a taxpaying US citizen, one of the things I expect is that that company doesn't wiggle its way through some loophole in the tax law (that they probably helped create) to neglect their tax paid vs. income earned responsibility to obscenely pad their bottom line.

Who doesn't know that pretty much any company is going to tell you whatever they think you want to see or hear in their commercials? I'll agree with you that it should lead to the company's discredit and I'd hope that people would be intelligent enough to see it for what it is.

".. Stop fooling yourself into thinking that any company that does that is looking out for YOUR best interest"

This sounds to me like you DO expect a company to look out for your interests. Winning in business means winning and there is no obligation to pay any more for anything or anybody than what's needed.

If you want more out of life than what's offered by employment, do what the business does and put YOUR money at risk. Don't just suck on their nipple and then complain about what does or doesn't come out.

You can be an employee. You can work for yourself. You can pay others to work for you. That's the economic system that has allowed the opportunity (a word you don't hear enough anymore) for anyone here to start with nothing and make something out of themselves by working harder and/or smarter and/or longer. Tell me where else in the world you can show up with nothing and have a better chance.

But, when you do win, we have people who think THEY are somehow entitled to your spoils. Like was said on the first page of this thread, you have people who are more concerned with what someone else has than with what is the best overall system for everyone. If someone else has more than you, why not concentrate on elevating yourself to where they're at instead of wanting them pulled down to where you are? That's why I put "progressive" taxes in quotation marks each time. They may be "progressive" in a mathematical sense, but not in what they do for society. They're the opposite of "progress" in that sense.

Being more concerned with what someone else has is doing your economics thinking with your heart instead of your head. Just because you don't LIKE what someone else has, doesn't mean that you're going to be better off if more of their money is in the government's hands instead of their own.
 
Last edited:
I just heard a statistic the other day (that I'll have to check out for myself) that the median income in this country is now at around $50,000 per household, but that it's at around $60,000 for Chinese-American households. Why do you think that is? Maybe they're busting their butts and not waiting around for a handout.
 
Sorry, Ninji.....:D

how do i know this was written by some right wing bazillionaire who is so into his money he inherited from his family and by the way has never "worked" in his silver-spoon, rolls royce, pate eatin day in his life.

becaus and i will quote form the dr.'s website:
"Complete vitae available online (http://davidk.myweb.uga.edu/vita.pdf). Contrary to Internet folklore, Dr. Kamerschen is NOT the author of "Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics." Additionally, he does NOT know who wrote it. "

what crap............that is not how the system works either. i know because i pay my taxes and don't have enough money to hire a loophole finder.

The story may or may not be accurate, however, the fact is...the top 5% of wage earners pay over 50% of all income taxes. The top 50% pay over 95% of all income taxes, the bottom pay, well, nothing or next to nothing.

Go here and see for yourself,

http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/factsheetwhopaysmostindividualincometaxes.update.pdf
 
.

I don't expect some company to look out FOR my interests- I do expect myself to decide which companies do REPRESENT my interests. And as a taxpaying US citizen, one of the things I expect is that that company doesn't wiggle its way through some loophole in the tax law (that they probably helped create) to neglect their tax paid vs. income earned responsibility to obscenely pad their bottom line.

So then you're saying that a person who operates his racing as a business should not take advantage of any "loophole(s)" in the tax code, or make all the deductions that they can?
 
Joe...wrong.....am married to a CPA in the franchise tax board for Calif and the wealthiest account for only 6% of taxes received.
The backbone is represented by the middle income.
Remember that the rich 'bend' the laws more than the poor and stupid.

I was told years ago by a big time CEO that laws were written to control the poor and stupid as the rich are up to nonsense everyday...go figure

Uh,,you need to go look at the IRS tables for the last 40 years,,,,,the top 50% pay, and have always pay most of the income taxes.....regardless of which party had the White House and Congress
 
Not lookin for the rich to get hammered, dude. It would be nice if they could just keep it in the "family" and pay their fair (for all parties) share...

The top 1% already pay over 1/3 of the taxes..just what the hell do you consider their "fair share" should be?
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread


Back
Top