It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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 I 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, 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.
Originally posted by benrl
You left out the corporations that pay 0.00.
should add them to the top as they probably are richer than most of the "men" you listed.edit on 26-7-2012 by benrl because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by seabag
The laws of the land state otherwise.
Simple as that, doesn't matter what the Presidents opinion is, checks and balances.
Need an amendment to change that, Soooo put them back in your equation.
Btw, Im for zero income taxes and for a flat retail tax, Im also for honest arguments not based on the party line.
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by seabag
The laws of the land state otherwise.
Simple as that, doesn't matter what the Presidents opinion is, checks and balances.
Need an amendment to change that, Soooo put them back in your equation.
Btw, Im for zero income taxes and for a flat retail tax, Im also for honest arguments not based on the party line.
Those who pay no taxes are just about the majority now... so previously if you campaigned on raising taxes you would get laughed out of the country. Now you can campaign on raising taxes and you have just about the majority.
I wanted to add is the simplistic "narrative" they push for their agendas is a key part of the problem... they dumb problems down to such a level that the general populous just accepts their BS.
In a recent report by the Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ) and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 26 of 30 Fortune 500 companies examined had negative income tax rates on profits made in the U.S. between 2008 and 2011 (h/t Think Progress).
The findings may seem contradictory with recent news that the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate among developed nations at 39.2 percent. But due to loopholes in the tax code and federal tax subsidies, very few companies actually end up paying the full "statutory" rate.
As it stands now, the actual tax rate corporations pay, called the "effective" tax rate, is at 12.1 percent of profits, the lowest level it's been since 1972, Think Progress reports. Likewise, tax revenue as a percentage of gross domestic product is at lows not seen since the 1940s, according to CTJ.
Due to these tax breaks, companies such as General Electric, Boeing and Verizon made more money after taxes from 2008 to 2011 than they did before filing them, according to the report. The 30 companies in the report made almost $6.5 billion on their taxes over the same time period. Conversely, if they had paid a tax rate of just 35 percent during that time, they would have provided the federal government with $78.3 billion in corporate tax revenue.
link
Top earners are the target for new tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income. About half of tax filers paid no federal income tax at all.
The poor that don't pay taxes start out that way. They begin with no skin in the game, and they don't have to ante up. The rich that don't pay taxes start out at 35% in the hole, and use built in mechanisms in the tax code to bring their effective tax rates down to 0%.
Before anyone talks about raising taxes or the rich not paying their fair share, the loopholes need to be closed so that those rich are paying what they're supposed to first. THEN we can see if we need to raise (unlikely) or even lower (probably) the tax rates.
That's all assuming, of course, that we keep the wholly unconstitutional personal income tax and don't move to a wholly fair and equal Fair Tax, which will raise more revenue than any progressive tax system ever could.
Originally posted by The Old American
That's all assuming, of course, that we keep the wholly unconstitutional personal income tax and don't move to a wholly fair and equal Fair Tax, which will raise more revenue than any progressive tax system ever could.
I say No Taxes, period.
We pay Taxes, and our entire infrastructure, is STILL crap.....
The beer/bar analogy is a bad one and doesn't really represent how income and the progressive tax system work.
The poorest guy in the bar, would only get 1 beer free and wouldn't be able to buy any more. While the richest guy would subsidize the cost of the poorest guy's 1st and only beer, but would be in a position to buy more beers and get totally wasted, as the poorest guy sits there all night with hardly even a buzz.
In real life, the poorest guy's 1st beer is equal to living in a slum and getting food, clothes, shelter, and limited entertainment. The rich guylives in a mansion and has far greater freedom. Just to clarify, the poorest guy is the working poor (minimum wage worker) and not someone on welfare.
The analogy is bad because it paints a picture that both the poor and rich have the same quality of living (only 1 beer), when that's not how income and taxation work at all.
BS, because they are taking more from their workers and consumers.
They treat their workers like they treat products: buy cheap and sell high. Consumers don't get fair deals on their purchases either.
In the end, after years and years of this, businesses end up so wealthy, that they can control parts of the economy and the government. This is exactly how the rich get richer and the rest get poorer. They siphon off extra from their employees and from the consumers. That's where they got the money from.