nurkvinny Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 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 ball. “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 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 ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? 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. And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). 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 dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten 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 get all the breaks!” “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 and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Gump 9 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Bravo!!!! Can't explain any better than beer and bar!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already 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. The world according to Obama where being a successful businessman is evil. I can't believe Obama snapped with his smart-ass comment about Romney's pension vs his. Sadly, it's probably true on many accounts. Obama likely doesn't look at his investments like Romney does. Yep, that's just the kinda guy we need running our country for another four years. :dumb: He likely also doesn't have as much money because, yes, Romney has been far more successful building a successful career from scratch. Obama likely couldn't bake cookies from scratch let alone help anyone in American make any scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam1647545489 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CqHPZteJ7rI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crummer Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 "Instant Classic" 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 ball. “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 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 ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? 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. And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving). 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 dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten 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 get all the breaks!” “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 and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankis Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Romney has been far more successful building a successful career from scratch. From scratch? Dream on, bud. Take a look at the family Mitt Romney was born into. He went to Harvard to earn his business degree, and was active in both of his parents political campaigns.... Don't give the guy too much credit like so many people seem to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSXRAntwon Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 From scratch? Dream on, bud. Take a look at the family Mitt Romney was born into. He went to Harvard to earn his business degree, and was active in both of his parents political campaigns.... Don't give the guy too much credit like so many people seem to do. So what are you saying? If someone gives you $1000 to start a business and you successfully build it, its not made from "scratch" unless you start your business from your own money? Just like Obama said it, "If you have a small business, you didnt build it." I say BULLSHIT. Give me a break, a lot of companies use loans (like Mitt probably used some family money) to start businesses.....smh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWW$HEEET Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Who gives a fuck if someone starts a business from a loan? You pay interest on loaned money anyhow. That interest is a cost of doing business, an opportunity cost, and a in most cases a first venture into entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is a factor of this economy right next to land, labor and capital. Unfortuately politicians are trying to stifle it, when it was what built this country in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankis Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 So what are you saying? If someone gives you $1000 to start a business and you successfully build it, its not made from "scratch" unless you start your business from your own money? Just like Obama said it, "If you have a small business, you didnt build it." I say BULLSHIT. Give me a break, a lot of companies use loans (like Mitt probably used some family money) to start businesses.....smh That's quite a lot to interpret from my comment. All that I ACTUALLY said was that it is not exactly accurate to suggest that Romney built his successful business career from scratch. Coming from a wealthy political family, and being equipped with a Harvard education do wonders for a persons perceived business acumen. In addition, I did not mention anything about building a successful business, I was referring to successfully building/developing his own personal CAREER. Nowhere did I suggest that it's wrong to get a little help from mom/dad or anyone else, or that if given help you deserve less credit. One does have to look at just how much advantage he was given/born into. Doesn't sound much like "from scratch" to me. I guess I'm struggling to find pure facts that suggest he has business skills that would prove advantageous for our current economic situation. Most of what I hear over and over about Romney can be summarized into "he's made himself wealthy and has headed some large businesses in the past, he must be able to fix it!"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 The analogy is inaccurate. The first two guys would be getting handed $10 when everyone else's backs are turned because they have eight kids (earned income credit) The world according to Obama where being a successful businessman is evil. I can't believe Obama snapped with his smart-ass comment about Romney's pension vs his. Sadly, it's probably true on many accounts. Obama likely doesn't look at his investments like Romney does. Yep, that's just the kinda guy we need running our country for another four years. :dumb: He likely also doesn't have as much money because, yes, Romney has been far more successful building a successful career from scratch. Obama likely couldn't bake cookies from scratch let alone help anyone in American make any scratch. Obama doesn't know anything about business. The only reason he has any money at all is because someone was paid to write a couple books that were loosely based off Obama's life, then allow Obama to take the credit for it. From scratch? Dream on, bud. Take a look at the family Mitt Romney was born into. He went to Harvard to earn his business degree, and was active in both of his parents political campaigns.... Don't give the guy too much credit like so many people seem to do. Wasn't Mitt's father a political refugee from Mexico? Sounds like an ideal way to raise a family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbospec29 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 I don't mind paying my 7 or 12 bucks for a beer so 4 other guys can drink on me, but they better be able to pass a drug screen and prove that's all they have in their system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 All that I ACTUALLY said was that it is not exactly accurate to suggest that Romney built his successful business career from scratch. Coming from a wealthy political family, and being equipped with a Harvard education do wonders for a persons perceived business acumen. Where one comes from doesn't mean shit. The man was one of three initial partners in 1984 and put his family and his own finances on the line as the company was born. He and his partners worked to raise the initial money to run the company, it wasn't provided to him on a silver spoon. There was considerable risk involved and it wasn't perceived acumen that drove the success they have had. He knows his shit and was more than willing and able to put up or shut up and did it with all the marbles on the line. One does have to look at just how much advantage he was given/born into. Doesn't sound much like "from scratch" to me. I was referring to successfully building/developing his own personal CAREER. No different than a skilled and well trained chef. Using your logic a well trained chef can't create a dish from scratch. You might not consider what he did building something from scratch, but having an education doesn't negate that. In terms of building his own CAREER, he did EXACTLY that. Read up on his past and how he made his money. No one handed him what he has. I guess I'm struggling to find pure facts that suggest he has business skills that would prove advantageous for our current economic situation. ^^ the above applies 200% to Obama not Romney. Want data on his skills and abilities, then look at the companies he's worked with and the fact that many if not most of them have come forward to endorse and say words about him and what he was able to do. Show us any of that about Obama. Most of what I hear over and over about Romney can be summarized into "he's made himself wealthy and has headed some large businesses in the past, he must be able to fix it!"...The country is in a shitty financial situation being led by a man with no personal financial success worth comparing to Romney nor an ability to negotiate and influence people to come together to make impactful decision. In the end, yeah, what people have shown they have done is way more credible than someone who talks a good game, hasn't delivered in the past nor been able to foster improvements in the last four years while holding the highest position in the country. He's failed to deliver, bottom line. No studies needed, no Romney talking points needed, the proof is all around us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankis Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Tim, there's still quite a bit there I don't agree with, but I'm not typing another novel. All of your points in mind though, I think it's a little bit silly to suggest that a president with a different view or skillset can honestly make much of a difference anyway. The views and decisions made by a president are only a small part of what it takes to impact serious economic change/growth. A better argument might be to suggest that simply putting a Republican in office could initiate some degree of cooperation by all the other players involved, to hopefully allow more productivity. I personally have a hard time attributing the majority of our economic situation to deficiencies in Barack Obama or his decision-making. Opinions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Tim, there's still quite a bit there I don't agree with, but I'm not typing another novel. All of your points in mind though, I think it's a little bit silly to suggest that a president with a different view or skillset can honestly make much of a difference anyway. The views and decisions made by a president are only a small part of what it takes to impact serious economic change/growth. It's not silly to suggest a POTUS Skill set will make a difference. I'll explain, but first, I'll agree with you that business acumen is only a part of it. A true leader is charged with providing visions and have the ability to influence others to do more than they would do on their own. Leaders influence thoughts, emotions and actions of those working for them and with them. They do this through credibility, trust and respect. Now, take away their credibility, respect and general belief that they know what the hell their doing and you get gridlock or no votes. Essentially what Obama has. Not surprising either. He's a great orator but has no hands on experience or proof that he can make anything happen. That said, it's no surprise the last four years haven't resulted in any improvements. It's also no surprise that those he most work with in both parties have no desire to agree with him, have little respect for him and see him as nothing more than a great orator. He has the balls to try and claim Mitt's numbers don't add up yet he's yet to prove he has ever added anything up and brought it to life. Contrast that with what Mitt has done his entire life for companies in as bad or worse shape than our economy is in right now. We need what he has to offer far more than what Obama has to offer. A better argument might be to suggest that simply putting a Republican in office could initiate some degree of cooperation by all the other players involved, to hopefully allow more productivity. I personally have a hard time attributing the majority of our economic situation to deficiencies in Barack Obama or his decision-making.Opinions...So it looks as if we agree on the first part of your comment. the second however, I'll leave you with the fact that while you seem to not want to blame Obama for our economic situation, hell, I'll even give you that....let's not blame him for what he walked into. However, he has made it way, way worse and has little results in the way of improving life for the Middle Class and that is a direct result of his lack of acumen. The man had four years to deliver and didn't. Rule #1 in trust and respect is to do what you say you're going to do. He failed. He had a great set of interviews but a poor brag-book coming into term 1. What's changed to make us believe or know anything will be different in term 2? Nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Jones Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfunnyryan Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 i think i understand this thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Abolish the Federal Income Tax. Why not on the 100 year anniversary of the scam that is income tax? The Federal government was never suppose to be able to tax us a percentage of jack shit. I want to abolish the income tax, but I don’t want to replace it with anything. About 45 percent of all federal revenue comes from the personal income tax. That means that about 55 percent — over half of all revenue — comes from other sources, like excise taxes, fees, and corporate taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 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… Ahh... The old barstool economics allegory that confuses simplicity with clarity. This fails to acknowledge a few things: the first 9 men who sell their labor or time also contribute a payroll taxes, they are disproportionately impacted by consumption taxes, and that 10th man's beer money likely came from capital gains which not only do not incur payroll taxes, but are taxed at a significantly lower rate. Additionally, the 10th man's internet (government invention), business employs 50 publicly (government), schooled employees, ships goods on the government's interstate system and benefits exponentially more from national and local civility being maintained by police and armed forces... among plenty of other disproportionate benefits. Simplicity is most often perceived as clarity when it reinforces one's preconceived notions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 This fails to acknowledge a few things: the first 9 men who sell their labor or time also contribute a payroll taxes, they are disproportionately impacted by consumption taxes, and that 10th man's beer money likely came from capital gains which not only do not incur payroll taxes, but are taxed at a significantly lower rate. This is America and a capitalistic society where the first 9 men have made a their choice to sell their labor or time for their job based on what they decided to do with their life. Just because one man chooses to be a blue color guy and the other a doctor doesn't make the system bad. Choices, we all make them. What to be less impacted by consumption taxes then make choices that will result in a better paying job. In terms of capital gains, it would be bullshit to not provide incentives to those doctors to invest in the market. If you taxed me higher there's no incentive for me to invest. I'm sorry but Romney is spot on with his thoughts. Those that disagree are typically those that don't have the money to invest and are stuck in a $50k/yr job by choices they made. He made his money and made some solid choices to do it. He also continues to take risks that others choose not to or can't, again, based on their previous choices. This country needs less lowering of the bar and more kicks in the ass to get people to raise their own game. People need to stop bitching about what the other guy has and start trying to get more for themselves through the same hard work and smart moves. They need to look at what's happening because of them and not whining about what they perceive is happening to them. Additionally, the 10th man's internet (government invention), business employs 50 publicly (government), schooled employees, ships goods on the government's interstate system and benefits exponentially more from national and local civility being maintained by police and armed forces... among plenty of other disproportionate benefits. Yep, and that 10th man hires the same 50 publicly schooled employees that his tax dollars also contributed to as does everyone else. Uses the same interstate system he too pays taxes on. You're inferring that because he chose to work hard and take on more responsibility and provide more jobs to those around him and contribute more in the way of payroll and other taxes by running a business that involves shipping goods he should be penalized over the guy that chooses to work at the local drug store? Dumb. As a business owner you know he already pays more and works harder. There's no disproportionate uses going on that need taxed further. Don't lower the bar for him by taxing him more, raise it for everyone by encouraging them to go for the same carrot that hangs before them just the same. Simplicity is most often perceived as clarity when it reinforces one's preconceived notions.and socialistic views that penalize success lower the bar for the nation. in sales it's called pay the performers. not everyone will achieve performer status even when they really try. welcome to life. Natural selection is natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Interesting quote from old Abe. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves. --Abraham Lincoln Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Interesting quote from old Abe. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves. --Abraham Lincoln Lincoln didn't say that. Though I agree with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan9381 Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 I saw a quote somewhere recently that said something along the lines of "not everyone can be the CEO, someone has to be the janitor". I feel like some people in this thread completely overlook this. Not everyone is going to go to school and be in a position making tons of money a year. You have to have people to do the grunt work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Lincoln didn't say that. Though I agree with it. can't say I fact-check it but it was something I read recently in an email that circulated around and like you, I agree with it regardless of the author. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 What to be less impacted by consumption taxes then make choices that will result in a better paying job. So let me ask this, what would happen if every one "chose" to be owners and investors and the middle market collapsed. You are operating from a perspective that the middle class are second class citizens who have simply chosen not to be financially successful. You realize that some people choose occupations for reasons other than money, right? Are you saying we should punish those who chose to be mechanics, policemen, firefighters, teachers, and in many cases doctors; because they've chosen to pursue passion rather than riches? Are you saying your child's best teacher who is, at most, making 70k/year needs to "raise her game". Isn't this the antithetical argument? If you taxed me higher there's no incentive for me to invest. Taxes are a cost function and all investments are a risk/reward proposition. Taxes are not a punishment, they are a cost of doing business. When I sell a $100,000 order and the goods I sell cost 50k, I don't say "I made 100k and the manufacturer took away 50k". The cost of goods was a cost of doing business just as taxes equate to the expense of having a stable market to compete in. Want a zero tax environment? See how your business fares in Zimbabwe. My investments would still be successful less 7% more in taxes. I would still invest because my risk/reward analysis still makes sense. As a business owner you know he already pays more and works harder That's a joke right? Once you get to the consulting world you will realize that your perceptions of business owners is more dynamic than the "Job Creator" narrative you are being sold. Me and my wife would be a lot less busy if business owners worked as hard as you think they do. There is just as much entitlement at the top as there is on the bottom. If you can't even agree that a successful business makes a profit on our government's investment in infrastructure and the security to keep shit together, then this is not a worthwhile argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 aAnd socialistic views that penalize success lower the bar for the nation. in sales it's called pay the performers. not everyone will achieve performer status even when they really try. welcome to life. Natural selection is natural. You are suggesting that a progressive tax codes is "socialistic". What do you suggest? When I was a Sales VP I did pay the performers and I fired the non-performers. Here in the real world what is your equivalency to "firing"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.