Economics

[th1b.taylor]

BAR STOOL ECONOMICS​

For all those in favor of taxing the rich more, here is how it works!!!!!?????

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.

"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 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 & 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.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
David R. Kamerschen, PH.D professor of Economics, university of Georgiasee More

 

[Foreigner]

Yes, it really is that simple.

Have seen this before. Good post.




.

 

[joshhuntnm]

That is great--makes it simple and clear. All those who speak of paying your fair share should read this.

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

That is the part that all socialist liberals never grasp .... there are no wealthy people to tax in the socialist system.

A person cannot attain wealth and individual success in the socialist system

And if a fool does try .... he soon realizes his efforts will reward those who do nothing productive.

 

[Strat]

Socialsm is greed and envy of your neighbor,the desire to force them down to your level because you know you don't have what it takes to rise to theirs.

 

[Foreigner]

My favorite Liberal canard is that the rich "Don't pay their fair share" of taxes.


This may be true for corporations. General Electric paid ZERO dollars in taxes over the last several years.
Strangely enough GE's CEO Jeff Emmelt sits on Obama's "Jobs Council." Apparently that "not paying their fair share" fact isn't an issue with the White House.


But individually, statistics show that while the top 1% makes roughly 16% of all profits, they also pay over 36% of all income taxes.


The top 10% pays 70% of all income taxes.


The bottom 50% of American pay absolutely NO income taxes.





But this is where it becomes humorous.


Democrats claim that bottom 50% DO pay their fair share of taxes, via sales tax, gasoline taxes, etc.


They get a comically confused look on their face when you then point out that the top 10% ALSO pay those taxes ON TOP OF the income taxes that the bottom 50% do not pay.

 

[Brother James]

It is even worse. The tax system is set up so that a person can get a "refund" of $5,000, $6,000, $7,000 or even more even if they had no income tax withheld from their wages. They not only pay nothing in for income taxes, but they get money back that originally belonged to someone else. It's called the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit. So the government takes some of the money paid in taxes by that other 50% and gives it to many of those in the bottom 50%. But nobody calls it a welfare program. So many of them are not paying those gasoline/sales/other taxes at all because far more is "refunded" to them. I hate calling it a refund because you can only get a refund of something you actually paid and they paid nothing. But in our system, they can pass a law saying a dog is a cat and everyone will pretend they hear it purring.

 

[Foreigner]

You are correct. CNN reported that several people who are not paying income taxes are receiving a "tax refund" from Uncle Sam.

Anderson Cooper chuckled in wonder as he reported that people are "receiving a check called a 'refund' on money that they did not pay."

 

[Brother James]

Most people who do not live on such government assistance have no idea it even exists. Do you know that the $8000+ "refund" is not even considered when determining if a person is eligible for food stamps, public assistance, etc.? It is not considered in determining if a person is below the poverty line. Plus, between 22%-30% of the people who claim the Earned Income Tax Credit don't even qualify for it. But the government does little to investigate this fraud. 21 million households receive this money. So, a single parent of 3 who works making $11 an hour gets a "refund" of about $8500 from the government, or another $4.25 an hour on top of their wages. So really they are making the equivilent of $16 an hour (no taxes on the $8500) if you add this money, but their medicaid and food stamps and other benefits are calculated on the $11 an hour.

 

[Eltanin]

I am for the Fair Tax, but I haven't heard about that for a few years now...

 

[revturmoil]

Socialsm is greed and envy of your neighbor,the desire to force them down to your level because you know you don't have what it takes to rise to theirs.

My my how people allow themselves to be misled!

 

[Strat]

My my how people allow themselves to be misled!

Realy,the only thing i left out of my definition was the gaining of power by politicians through the greed and envy people have towards their neighbor who would dare to surpass them in life,it is also an excellent means of gaining control over people's lives by first telling them government must provide everything,then since government is paying their bills it has the right to run their lives....just like Dad used to say....as long as i pay the bills around here you will live by my rules....and since America has a large population of adult children who don't want to leave home is working quite well.

 

[revturmoil]

Realy,the only thing i left out of my definition was the gaining of power by politicians through the greed and envy people have towards their neighbor who would dare to surpass them in life,it is also an excellent means of gaining control over people's lives by first telling them government must provide everything,then since government is paying their bills it has the right to run their lives....just like Dad used to say....as long as i pay the bills around here you will live by my rules....and since America has a large population of adult children who don't want to leave home is working quite well.

Capitalism has greed and envy written all over it!

AND! You have an extreme view of socialism.

 

[Brother James]

Capitalism has greed and envy written all over it!

AND! You have an extreme view of socialism.

The great thing about capitalism is that it produces the most prosperity for the most people whether the capitalist is motivated by greed or not. If I am greedy and want to make more money than anyone else, I will have to produce a better product and sell it cheaper than competitors. If I don't, I'll fail and not make the huge sums of money I crave. And if better products are available more cheaply, that benefits all of society. It doesn't matter what negative attribute you ascribe to the capitalist, freedom of choice among people in the marketplace wins every time. Central planning of economic activity fails every time.

The founder of Merck is said to have been very humanitarian minded. He said, "If I can create pharmaceutical products that reduce human suffering, I will not have to worry about money." His motive was to reduce suffering, and he knew that his attitude would create profits for him. Other pharmaceutical companies might have been founded with a greed motive. But in a free market, the company that produces the best products will win. The motives of the entrepreneurs make absolutely no difference. So slurring capitalists and capitalism accomplishes nothing in arguing for the best economic system.

 

[soupy]

Capitalism has greed and envy written all over it!

AND! You have an extreme view of socialism.

Maybe it would help if you explained your view of socialism

 

[Strat]

Capitalism has greed and envy written all over it!

AND! You have an extreme view of socialism.

And socialism has naive stupidity along with greed and envy written all over it,calling someone greedy for wanting to keep the money they earned while excusing those who want money they have not earned,capitalism produces the wealth that socialist lust for...you need us,we don't need you.

 

[Brother James]

Actually, socialism was Marx and Engel's attempt to address the evils that were imposed on workers in the 19th century in Europe. The industrial revolution was chewing people up and spitting them out. People meant nothing, industrial production was all that mattered. Engels and Marx could not foresee the outcome of what their theory would produce. Today, we have many examples of what socialism has produced. Modern socialists are not in the same category as the theorists who first thought of it. Now we have track records to review, and the reviews are terrible.

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, everyone.

I just had a few thoughts this morning I'd like to share.

In September of 2012, there was a video that was secretly taken at a private fundraiser for Mitt Romney’s election campaign. This video was leaked to the media, particularly on You-Tube, where it went viral, and it was not very flattering of the candidate. He was saying things that were thought to be insensitive and divisive. It’s been said (by ?) that Mitt Romney was showing “his true colors” in being for one segment of the population but not for another segment of the population, namely the Democratic supporters of President Barak Obama. He further said that a candidate for the President of the US must look out for the welfare of its entire people. However, I’ve listened to this video and what Senator Romney is saying is that the people have divided themselves into two camps: those who are the doers and providers for the nation’s income and those who are the ones who have given up, rely on the government to supply their needs, and who have become leaches on society.

There is a truth to what Romney said, although he could have worded it better. Some people HAVE come to rely on the government as a “Big Brother” to supply their needs in this economic crisis. However, it is the ATTITUDE of dependence that he should have focused upon instead of the PEOPLE themselves. People try to do what is right until they’ve been beaten down too many times and they give up. Then, they will develop such an attitude. It’s not because they WANT to be dependent on the government; it’s simply because they HAVE to be dependent on the government to survive! This is all they know to do! They need to be TAUGHT how they can break out of that mentality and become independent once again!

Mitt Romney is a self-made (or God-made) millionaire who has already learned this independence mentality and is no longer (if he was ever) confined to the dependence mentality. The saying goes, “You don’t know that you don’t know what you don’t know.” If all one has ever known was to take hand-outs wherever they were provided, he or she may have a blind spot to the possibility of being able to fly on one’s own! We already know that Mitt Romney is not that great of a “people person.” He does have trouble when it comes to mingling with others, relating to others, and “looking good” for the camera. However, those are MINOR points compared to what we really need as a leader for this country. In the areas for which he is well-known and a great achiever, he is an IDEAL candidate for the Presidency! He IS a great businessman! He IS a great leader for the economic welfare of a company! Those traits can be easily transferred to the national arena and well adapted to the economic crisis which we are currently facing.

If our country elects President Obama for another 4 years, we will be forced to continue in an our-government-will-provide mentality and dependency. In fact, with Obamacare in place, it will get worse. We will become almost insurmountably dependent upon the huge US government to “supply all our needs,” when we really should be looking to God to supply all our needs.

Philippians 4:19
19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
KJV

If Mitt Romney is elected, the tide may turn. We will have a greater chance of getting our people back to work if he indeed focuses on two facts: We cannot continue to spend money we don’t have, and we cannot continue to have someone else do our work for us.

Money doesn’t grow on trees. It doesn’t magically appear out of thin air. The government cannot print more money without real valuables, such as gold, behind it. For the government to do so would be a catastrophe!

Therefore, it is essential that each and every one of the recipients on welfare who could indeed work to strive to get off welfare as soon as possible. Such welfare is meant to be a short-term stopgap to get one back on his or her feet.

(One should also be careful at this point about another factor: We don’t need or desire one to gravitate toward illegal or hurtful occupations in this quest to become financially independent. That would be a DETRIMENT to society and not helpful at all to our financial needs in the long run.)

We NEED Mitt Romney to be President because we NEED to have a good example of financial responsibility in that office! While it is good to be sympathetic to the hurts and needs of others, one can only help out another out of his or her ABUNDANCE!

If one is alone in his or her giving, he or she could give out of his or her poverty, giving away the very things he or she needs to survive. But, when a person has a family and others who depend on him or her to survive, he or she does not have that luxury without it being a joint decision. IF the family chooses to live on less to provide for others, that should be THEIR choice AS A FAMILY.

Whether one is alone giving out of his or her abundance or poverty or one is a member of a family giving out of their abundance or poverty to provide welfare for others, it should NEVER be forced upon them to do so by the government! And yet, that is PRECISELY what we are doing to force families and small business owners to “give ‘til it hurts” for the welfare web our government has spun! That is just WRONG! That’s a socialistic mentality, and we need to avoid it like the plague!

We need to be FREE TO GIVE in whatever way God has laid it upon our hearts to give! We should not be FORCING PEOPLE TO GIVE, especially when it is not in their power to do so!

2 Corinthians 9:7
7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
KJV

Many of the “have-nots” have said that the “fat cats” need to be forced to give to the “have-nots,” not realizing that such a socialistic equality being forced by the state would also force us into a horrible equality of poverty! Even though it is true that “they SHOULD give out of their abundant wealth to the poor,” it is not for us nor even for a collection of us, known as the US Government, to force them to do so.

Nobody wants to live in poverty; everyone wants to live in abundant wealth, whether to squander on themselves or on their families or to give away to others they see in need and hurting. But, it is wrong to TAKE the wealth from others so we can live in more luxury and abundant wealth. That’s stealing!

We should not have a goal of equality but rather a goal of justice! If a person is willing to work harder or smarter than others, then they should reap the harvest of plenty, the benefits of their industry! If others are not so willing to work, they likewise should reap the harvest of their inactivity, the compensation of their lack of industry.

Yeshua` (Jesus) Himself said that we would always have the poor with us. It is an OPPORTUNITY for us to be able to give to those in need! If there was no one in need, there would be no opportunity for us to be able to show our generosity to others!

Mark 14:3-9
3 And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head.
4 And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made?
5 For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the poor. And they murmured against her.
6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.
7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
8 She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.
9 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.
KJV

Just as in this story, the alabaster box of spikenard ointment was the possession of this woman! She was free to do with it as she desired! The others were indignant against her for “wasting it” instead of “selling it to give money to the poor,” but it was not THEIR box of ointment or money to give! God put it upon this woman’s heart to do this deed for the Master, anointing Him for burial! That never would have happened if the other people present had forced her to do what they wanted her to do, if they had had their way!

There are other factors – other considerations – that I believe makes Mitt Romney the best choice for President, but from a purely economic point of view, we NEED Mitt Romney as President, IMO.

 

[soupy]

The bar stool economics reminds me of this father daughter lesson:

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, ... in other words, redistribution of wealth. She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth, and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load, and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying. Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"

She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes. She never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."

Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office, and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA, and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0? That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA, and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair? I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled, winked, and said gently, "Welcome to the conservative side of the fence."

 

[Foreigner]

We have a winner ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

Good post, Soupy.