How This Democrat Views Taxation

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • navarre1095

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 23, 2010
    478
    18
    Meth Vernon
    This was sent to me and I find that I agree, mostly.

    TAXATION EXPLAINED TO THE MASSES
    Suppose that every evening, 10 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.
    So, that's what they decided to do. The 10 men drank in the bar every evening and were quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner said "Since you are all such good customers, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the 10 men would 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 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 a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
    Therefore, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing.
    The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
    The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
    The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
    The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
    The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
    "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," 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 buck too. It's unfair - he got 10 times more benefit than me!"
    "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy always win!"
    "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax 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 their 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, labor unions and fellow Democrats, is how the tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes will naturally 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.

    As a caveat, I don't personally believe that able-bodied and unproductive members of society should receive any long term benefit.

    Flame on brothers.
     

    cburnworth

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 13, 2010
    999
    93
    it doesn't take a genius to figure out the more money a person has the more stuff they buy, the more companies make, the more people they hire. wait for it......... the more tax revenue generated.
     

    chraland51

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    May 31, 2009
    1,096
    38
    Camby Area
    All of us normal conservatives might fully understand the story after the first reading. The libtards out there who are jealous of and hate the rich and wealthy would have to read it several times to fully understand it because the logic of the story is contrary to how they are taught to think. How many of the people that are making the laws by which we are governed, including taxed, do you think are not wealthy? Very few, but somehow they feel our pain. If they really felt our pain, they would not be acting the way they currently are. Remember this the next time you vote. I am willing to give the tea party supported candidates some time before they make some real noise, but the business as usual republican leadership had better pay attention to the mood of the citizens of this country and not worry about what the illegal aliens and their offspring think about things. Just my two cents.
     

    pudly

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    Nov 12, 2008
    13,329
    83
    Undisclosed
    That assumes everyone looks at it in a simple dollar amount comparison rather than a percentage.

    In the story, everyone does. In real life, not everyone. However, you can look at the current horror by the left over extending the current tax rates for higher income people as well as the middle class to see this story come to life.
     

    ghostinthewood

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 1, 2010
    566
    18
    Washington, IN
    it doesn't take a genius to figure out the more money a person has the more stuff they buy, the more companies make, the more people they hire. wait for it......... the more tax revenue generated.
    Actually companies have recovered from the recession, especially since we're officially out of it, but they refuse to hire people. They've adapted with less employees so why would they hire more people at the moment?

    That's all I'm saying since if I were to say much else I might have my intelligence questioned by those who resort to elementary insults. =o
     

    hornadylnl

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 19, 2008
    21,505
    63
    All of us normal conservatives might fully understand the story after the first reading. The libtards out there who are jealous of and hate the rich and wealthy would have to read it several times to fully understand it because the logic of the story is contrary to how they are taught to think.

    Ditto Atlas Shrugged.
     

    hornadylnl

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 19, 2008
    21,505
    63
    Actually companies have recovered from the recession, especially since we're officially out of it, but they refuse to hire people. They've adapted with less employees so why would they hire more people at the moment?

    That's all I'm saying since if I were to say much else I might have my intelligence questioned by those who resort to elementary insults. =o

    So if you buy a more fuel efficient vehicle, do you continue to buy the same amount of gas as you would for your old vehicle or do you cheat the oil company and pocket your savings?
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    So if you buy a more fuel efficient vehicle, do you continue to buy the same amount of gas as you would for your old vehicle or do you cheat the oil company and pocket your savings?

    People who buy a hybrid are cheating the government out of their rightful fuel taxes.

    How are we going to pay for less taxes collected from hybrid owners?
     

    hornadylnl

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 19, 2008
    21,505
    63
    People who buy a hybrid are cheating the government out of their rightful fuel taxes.

    How are we going to pay for less taxes collected from hybrid owners?

    Some states have tried to implement sliding tax scales on how fuel efficient the vehicle is. IE, a hybrid owner would pay more per gallon than an suv owner because they are cheating the government out of tax revenue. I think one of the other schemes they've tried is putting gps on vehicles and taxing by miles driven instead of fuel bought.

    If a company is cheating workers by operating more efficiently, logic would state that prius hippies are cheating on taxes, right?
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    If a company is cheating workers by operating more efficiently, logic would state that prius hippies are cheating on taxes, right?

    Exactly.

    And don't forget, workers who are more productive than their comrades are taking food from their comrades' mouths.

    Who is John Galt?
     

    hornadylnl

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 19, 2008
    21,505
    63
    Exactly.

    And don't forget, workers who are more productive than their comrades are taking food from their comrades' mouths.

    Who is John Galt?

    I just cheated the state today by buying a $550 receiver from Best Buy for $370. Should I mail in the $11.90 to the state that they lost in tax revenue? Did I cheat some poor single mother $11.90 in food stamp money because I'm greedy and I pocketed the money?
     

    ghostinthewood

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 1, 2010
    566
    18
    Washington, IN
    So if you buy a more fuel efficient vehicle, do you continue to buy the same amount of gas as you would for your old vehicle or do you cheat the oil company and pocket your savings?
    Not at all the point I was making. Someone alluded to trickle down economics. It doesn't work that way. Our economy has recovered, but the job market is still down (though better than what it was).

    I said nothing close to saying efficiency was bad. I just said a certain theory doesn't always work in real life.
     

    hornadylnl

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 19, 2008
    21,505
    63
    Not at all the point I was making. Someone alluded to trickle down economics. It doesn't work that way. Our economy has recovered, but the job market is still down (though better than what it was).

    I said nothing close to saying efficiency was bad. I just said a certain theory doesn't always work in real life.

    Sorry, I guess I read too much into it. I thought you were implying that companies in the wrong for not rehiring.

    I think the economy still has a lot do with slow hiring rates. Companiesxare finally starting to get back on their feet. My company laid off a massive amount of people. They had 1 year recall rights and very few were called back within that year. About 15-18 months after the layoff, they started bringing in temps to meet increased production demand. Many of those temps were the laid off employees. We are now starting to rehire some of those temps. Many are getting back their old time and pay, something which the company had zero obligation to do. I work with a guy that is supposed to start back at his old wage which is over $11k a year over starting wage. So maybe not all employers are evil.

    Many businesses are having to do the same thing when a consumer does when they get laid off from work. You cut out all unnecessary spending such as cable tv, eating out, selling of vehicles, or whatever is necessary to stay afloat. You wouldn't go out and buy a brand new vehicle the day you get a new job, would you?
     

    ghostinthewood

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 1, 2010
    566
    18
    Washington, IN
    Sorry, I guess I read too much into it. I thought you were implying that companies in the wrong for not rehiring.

    I think the economy still has a lot do with slow hiring rates. Companiesxare finally starting to get back on their feet. My company laid off a massive amount of people. They had 1 year recall rights and very few were called back within that year. About 15-18 months after the layoff, they started bringing in temps to meet increased production demand. Many of those temps were the laid off employees. We are now starting to rehire some of those temps. Many are getting back their old time and pay, something which the company had zero obligation to do. I work with a guy that is supposed to start back at his old wage which is over $11k a year over starting wage. So maybe not all employers are evil.

    Many businesses are having to do the same thing when a consumer does when they get laid off from work. You cut out all unnecessary spending such as cable tv, eating out, selling of vehicles, or whatever is necessary to stay afloat. You wouldn't go out and buy a brand new vehicle the day you get a new job, would you?
    Its not the economy. A lot of those big evil corporations are making a little bit more than they used to. Good for them. I think its shady but I understand its business. People are hurting but you can't blame someone for being efficient and making a buck.

    However, it just proves that trickle down economics is only a theory. That was the only point I was trying to make.

    Meaning, people may want to act high and mighty about one party or another, but in reality I'm sure I (and any other reasonable person) can find examples as to why everyone is consistently wrong.

    So basically I'm just trying to bruise ego's and stop elitism. =p
     
    Top Bottom