• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Bar Stool Economics

picklesuit

Dirty Hinge
pilot
Contributor
My wife found this for me...
Pickle

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.

So, that's what they decided to do.
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 wi ndfall 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 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," 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 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

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not
understand, no explanation is possible.
 

Single Seat

Average member
pilot
None
^do you listen to Neal Boortz??

Yup

Here's a screen shot of some generic inputs I made to their savings calculator. Figures 80K income, 12K in taxes, 240K 30 year mortgage and 3K in retirement investments every year.
 

Attachments

  • fairtax.jpg
    fairtax.jpg
    439.7 KB · Views: 153

bert

Enjoying the real world
pilot
Contributor
Yup

Here's a screen shot of some generic inputs I made to their savings calculator. Figures 80K income, 12K in taxes, 240K 30 year mortgage and 3K in retirement investments every year.

Random unsolicited comment for any Naval officer who matches the above stats in income/taxes/mortgage: save MORE than 3k/year - a lot more. Then you can finish 20 without having to worry about taking a job just for the money. Even better, then you don't have to do what Millington says you "have" to do because you are depending on that next promotion to keep your hind end out of financial trouble.

Just a little advice from somebody who thinks he has gamed the system: ignore as you please.
 

PropAddict

Now with even more awesome!
pilot
Contributor
I like it. I'm gonna steal that analogy.

I've liked the fair tax idea since I was a bright-eyed, idealistic high schooler in the poorest town in CT.

I was always rebutted with the following argument:

There is still a baseline number of what it costs for a person to live in the US of A.

Earn below it, and you will die. The gov't will give you welfare to prevent your untimely demise, ostensibly so that you can get well and become a contributing member of society. Eventually. Hopefully. Maybe.

Earn more than the subsistence level and you've obviously got more than you "need". Now, the USA has provided a strong infrastructure (roads, national security, etc.), which you have utilized to make that income. Only fair and just that you pay your fair share to help ensure that infrastructure remains intact and viable. The more over subsistence you've earned, well, means you've likely utilized more of those gov't. provided resources, therefore, makes sense that you pay more back to replenish what you used.

Now, a small percentage will make a lot of money. Many, many times that subsistence level. They must have relied heavily on that infrastructure provided by the gov't., if not strictly personally, but also by proxy, through all the people working for them. They can definitely afford to pay more to enure those resources are maintained, so they do. And they're still left with substantially more $$$$ than subsistence.

Contrast this tax breakdown with a head tax or sales tax. Whether I earn 6x the subsistence level or 1.05x, I still pay 8% tax on that gallon of milk. And everything else I buy. It's a tax that's completely unrelated to one's ability to pay, and (theoretically), their relative burden to the gov't for their wealth.

Me: "But at least everyone is paying the same %. That's fair."

Them: "Everyone the same? That sounds communist, to me."

Me: <facepalm>
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
For all those complaining about how their purchasing power would increase by a significant amount under Tax System X, remember that The System™ will soon adjust, and everything will increase in price. Why? Because the consumer can now afford it.
 

scoober78

(HCDAW)
pilot
Contributor
For all those complaining about how their purchasing power would increase by a significant amount under Tax System X, remember that The System™ will soon adjust, and everything will increase in price. Why? Because the consumer can now afford it.


Nittany is absolutely correct here...In a Macro- sense, there is no point arguing either for or against the Fair Tax because of purchasing power. It's a moot point.

How about just arguing for it because its well....fair?:D Whaddya know, its not just a clever name.
 

HueyCobra8151

Well-Known Member
pilot
PropAddict: I do not agree with the argument that your friends made that the richer should pay more taxes because they have used the infrastructure to their advantage to become wealthy.

If the government generated twice as much tax revenue as they do today, the roads and schools would probably be in more or less the same shape they are now - the pork would just flow much more freely.
 

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
PropAddict: I do not agree with the argument that your friends made that the richer should pay more taxes because they have used the infrastructure to their advantage to become wealthy.

If the government generated twice as much tax revenue as they do today, the roads and schools would probably be in more or less the same shape they are now - the pork would just flow much more freely.

Exactly. I think that if a person was smart and successful enough to make a ton of money, that they deserve some tax breaks, NOT pay more taxes. I mean, shit, some of them are paying 5-10 times in taxes what the average americans make in a year.

Just like anything else in life: The smart, capable, tenacious folks will tend to succeed and prosper. The dumb people will get screwed, and end up cursing their fate. Whether it's in the civilian world, or the dummy who joined the service, claimed he got "screwed" and got out into a blue collar dead-end job or whatever. SOMEone has to dig ditches.

Free market capitalism. It's a beautiful thing.

I wholeheartedly agree about the pork flowing with more tax-generated revenue.
 

scoober78

(HCDAW)
pilot
Contributor
I mean, shit, some of them are paying 5-10 times in taxes what the average americans make in a year.

Yes, and no. More in terms of dollars, less in terms of percentage. Which is fair?

The other point is, how much useless and needless complication is induced for everyone by a system taken advantage of by the few with the resources to hire experts to eploit it? Bogey, if you think that the "smart, capable and tenacious" folks in the upper tax brackets do their own taxes, you are insane. They stay in those brackets in large part due to smart, capable and tenacious tax lawyers that they pay heavily to understand the 40 feet of US Tax Code.

I say again... www.fairtax.org ... I say again...
 

MasterBates

Well-Known Member
Doing taxes is overly complex, and I have the computer helping!

I'm single, no investments to speak of, no property, no dependents, and it still takes me hours to do it. I still have to figure out deductions based on alimony, student loan interest, other taxes paid (sales, value based registrations, and others) and professional expenses. Then I can write off portions of what I pay for BioDiesel if I buy it at the pump, and so forth. The tax code is too damn complex.

Once you get into having properties, investments, businesses, etc, it gets that much worse.

It's nice that I can write off my Tailhook, NHA, MOAA, USNI and SAE memberships, but I should not be having to dig up receipts come audit time.
 

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Yes, and no. More in terms of dollars, less in terms of percentage. Which is fair?

The other point is, how much useless and needless complication is induced for everyone by a system taken advantage of by the few with the resources to hire experts to eploit it? Bogey, if you think that the "smart, capable and tenacious" folks in the upper tax brackets do their own taxes, you are insane. They stay in those brackets in large part due to smart, capable and tenacious tax lawyers that they pay heavily to understand the 40 feet of US Tax Code.

I say again... www.fairtax.org ... I say again...

Uh... forgive me if I'm wrong, but I always thought the more you earned, the more PERCENTAGE of your income you paid for taxes. Boo hoo. It just happens to be easier to live on 65% of 10 million dollars than 90% of 12 thousand dollars. Does it make it right? I don't think so, but that's just this yahoo talking. I don't know the breakdown of tax revenue in the US, but I have a feeling it's the old 90/10 rule (90% of the citizens make up 10% of the tax revenue and the richest 10% pay 90%).

And yes they are the smart, capable tenacious folks who became successful and used every possible avenue at their disposal (high powered tax attorneys and accountants) to get them the best deal possible.
 
Top