Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How we should split the bar tab
#1
Not sure where this belongs. It's not a joke, it's not about politics so I figure I'll place it here.

Please move if need be.



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.


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 every-body'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 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).


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'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.


David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics, University of Georgia


They call me The Mum - Jimmie the Mum
Viva Mumcero - Mahk 12/4/2010 - http://www.stogiechat.com/forum/thread-20737.html
Honorary Shield Brother
Weak people seek Revenge, Strong people Forgive, Intelligent people Ignore
Reply
#2
Jimmy,

This is great! 
Reply
#3
This is how "Backass" Class-Envy works!  And sweet Barry Millhouse Obama convinced a lot of people this is how it should be!
Reply
#4
Very nice Jimmy
Reply
#5
Goes to show the best way to deal with the problem is to just eliminate the taxes based on wages & dependents.    A national "sales tax" on everything and no deductions from payroll, and no more IRS tax returns.  

Just removing the IRS alone would cut a ton of fat from the budget required to run the country.   Then anyone drinking the beer would pay their fair share of tax based on what they actually consumed.   Won't matter how many kids, what they make, or if its a business writeoff.

Another point to that system is the thousands of people working under the table, no social security number, or here illegally are not putting a dime into the system.   Put a flat % tax on everything purchased and now you have EVERYONE paying their share of the tax.

Where there would be a problem is determining the social security that everyone is supposed to get at retirement.   But then again, is it really going to be there for many of us after 2017 anyways?   I think all employers would have to do is still "report" earnings for employees and the funds could be applied to each persons account like it already works.   The exception would be the money would come from taxes collected versus ones paycheck.
Reply
#6
admin Wrote:Goes to show the best way to deal with the problem is to just eliminate the taxes based on wages & dependents.    A national "sales tax" on everything and no deductions from payroll, and no more IRS tax returns.  

Just removing the IRS alone would cut a ton of fat from the budget required to run the country.   Then anyone drinking the beer would pay their fair share of tax based on what they actually consumed.   Won't matter how many kids, what they make, or if its a business writeoff.

Another point to that system is the thousands of people working under the table, no social security number, or here illegally are not putting a dime into the system.   Put a flat % tax on everything purchased and now you have EVERYONE paying their share of the tax.

Where there would be a problem is determining the social security that everyone is supposed to get at retirement.   But then again, is it really going to be there for many of us after 2017 anyways?   I think all employers would have to do is still "report" earnings for employees and the funds could be applied to each persons account like it already works.   The exception would be the money would come from taxes collected versus ones paycheck.
But if we got rid of the IRS...just imagine how many agents would be unemployed! Tongue
If Sonny had EZ-Pass, he'd have survived that hit...
Never apologize mister, it's a sign of weakness. - Capt. Nathan Cutting Brittles
Reply
#7
Tonto The Long Island Sidekick Wrote:
admin Wrote:Goes to show the best way to deal with the problem is to just eliminate the taxes based on wages & dependents.    A national "sales tax" on everything and no deductions from payroll, and no more IRS tax returns.  

Just removing the IRS alone would cut a ton of fat from the budget required to run the country.   Then anyone drinking the beer would pay their fair share of tax based on what they actually consumed.   Won't matter how many kids, what they make, or if its a business writeoff.

Another point to that system is the thousands of people working under the table, no social security number, or here illegally are not putting a dime into the system.   Put a flat % tax on everything purchased and now you have EVERYONE paying their share of the tax.

Where there would be a problem is determining the social security that everyone is supposed to get at retirement.   But then again, is it really going to be there for many of us after 2017 anyways?   I think all employers would have to do is still "report" earnings for employees and the funds could be applied to each persons account like it already works.   The exception would be the money would come from taxes collected versus ones paycheck.
But if we got rid of the IRS...just imagine how many agents would be unemployed! Tongue

 

They could be a part of BO's "Civilian Militia".
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)