• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Bar Stool Economics

I actually enjoyed the story quite a bit.

And not because of who wrote it or even whether the numbers accurately express the percentages of taxes actually paid by poor, middle class, or wealthy citizens. The reason that I enjoyed it was because of the irony of trying to "kill the goose that lays the golden eggs".

Even though I am much closer financially to those who would get their beer for free than those who would support the rest of the beer drinkers, I often feel gratitude that there ARE those who can afford to carry a bigger load than the rest of us. But I fear that we "poor folk" can sometimes turn that gratitude into an expectation that we should grab even more - and "the rich" should keep dishing it out without complaining. Unfortunately, we may never stop to consider that some of those rich "geese" have the financial means to take their golden eggs elsewhere, leaving us here to shoulder the burden without them, just as in the story - if we make it too unpleasant for them here.

That is what I got out of it, regardless of whether the details were accurate, or who wrote it. Just my own opinion, from my own perspective.
 
kathylove said:
And not because of who wrote it or even whether the numbers accurately express the percentages of taxes actually paid by poor, middle class, or wealthy citizens. The reason that I enjoyed it was because of the irony of trying to "kill the goose that lays the golden eggs".

Even though I am much closer financially to those who would get their beer for free than those who would support the rest of the beer drinkers, I often feel gratitude that there ARE those who can afford to carry a bigger load than the rest of us. But I fear that we "poor folk" can sometimes turn that gratitude into an expectation that we should grab even more - and "the rich" should keep dishing it out without complaining. Unfortunately, we may never stop to consider that some of those rich "geese" have the financial means to take their golden eggs elsewhere, leaving us here to shoulder the burden without them, just as in the story - if we make it too unpleasant for them here.

That is what I got out of it, regardless of whether the details were accurate, or who wrote it. Just my own opinion, from my own perspective.
Click to expand...
Bravo! You have such clear vision in life Kathy.


As far as the OP it is what it is, a simple analogy. An analogy by definition is not intended as an exact duplicate or factual quote but to demonstrate similarity. In MHO it does in that our tax system is based on a graduated scale with those at the top paying more and those at the bottom paying less (actually none or in some cases getting paid instead of paying). And it eludes to the socioeconomic issues created by our tax system. The top doesn't want to keep paying more and more so they are drinking beer abroad (ie outsourcing)(not my favorite thing for sure). The bottom is becoming not only dependent on the top paying for them but in more and more cases expectant of it. :shrugs:

If the OP is too simple perhaps this is a better read.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html
 
Thank you Kathy and tsst. I knew that sooner or later somebody would actually read it. Tyflier is obviously trying to goad me into an argument which he has already shown me to be a complete waste of time.

It was a simple story that really did not deserve all the nonsense that this thread has developed. I don't see any need to discuss it further.
 
Leew said:
Thank you Kathy and tsst. I knew that sooner or later somebody would actually read it. Tyflier is obviously trying to goad me into an argument which he has already shown me to be a complete waste of time.

It was a simple story that really did not deserve all the nonsense that this thread has developed. I don't see any need to discuss it further.
Click to expand...

I have no interest in goading you into anything. I do, however, have a keen interest in seeing how you can provide any sort of realism to your "analogy".

You made repeated statements as to the accuracy of the story as it relates to our current tax system, and I challenge you to actually show a single real-world accuracy within it. I'll save you the time, there aren't any.

The entire story is propoganda by definition. It is untrue, it relies entirely on an emotional response from the reader, and is designed to stir feelings of anger.

As for your links, which you posted to show how accurate your story is...if the richest 5% of our country report 33% of our national income, I don't see any legitimate reason why they SHOULDN'T pay the bulk of our national income tax. They make the bulk of our national income...

Imagine what the percentages would be if these figures were actually reported truthfully, and actually included the money that was stored off-shore to avoid taxes, laundered to avoid taxes, and just plain "lost" to avoid taxes...

And yet, your story ends with the subliminal threat that the rest of us better shape up, and appreciate everything this 5% does for us, or else...

Right...just a simple story...no point, no reason...just an innocent little story...:rolleyes:
 
tyflier said:
As for your links, which you posted to show how accurate your story is...if the richest 5% of our country report 33% of our national income, I don't see any legitimate reason why they SHOULDN'T pay the bulk of our national income tax. They make the bulk of our national income...

And yet, your story ends with the subliminal threat that the rest of us better shape up, and appreciate everything this 5% does for us, or else...
Click to expand...

I'm not in the richest 5% by any means. I am in about the top 20% and that just barely. I do pay more taxes than the bottom 20% both in absolute terms (how many $ of tax I pay per year) and in percentage terms (what fraction of my income goes to taxes). I am OK with that. I make more, I should pay more.

But I have two observations. One is that the top 5% can take their money and leave the USA and take the taxes they would have paid with them, so there is a limit to how much we can tax them before they do that. I don't know what that limit is, but we know that the Beatles left England because of high taxes, and stayed away. They were very very rich and the taxes were very very high there when they did it, but they did do it, and England lost the taxes they would have paid during the years they lived outside of England for tax reasons.

The other is that if I am going to pay higher absolute amounts of money and a higher percentage of my income, I want to see my fellow citizens getting value for their money and often I don't. The umemployment system stinks. The borders are not defended. The banks got bailed out not reformed, and the so-called banking reform doesn't seem to protect me from paying for another bank bailout down the road. We are spending money like water in Afghanistan & Iraq but I don't see any infrastructure getting built in either place and I don't see the lives of Afghanis or Iraqis getting better. I think I am entitled to see that I am getting something for my money, not necessarily in direct benefits to me, but at least in benefits to my fellow citizens. I don't see it.
 
Tyflyer, this will be my only response to your antagonism. The story relates to the real world because in the real world the people who make the most pay the most tax. My links were to show that that was a fact. It is not real hard to understand. There is no subliminal message. It spells it out pretty clearly. If the rich guy quits paying the remaining guys can't afford to buy the beer on their own.

In the case of my link, it showed that in 2002, the top 5% of the income earners paid over 50% of the taxes collected that year. I think that is cause for those of us in the bottom 95% to appreciate what they do.

You have said in another thread that you are certain that the top 5% are cheating in some why yet you offer no proof, just your statements. The story was just a story, the facts I have stated here are documented facts.

As I have said every time you come in the room, I have no desire to argue with you. You can pick apart this statement like you so often do, but this will be my last response to you.
 
I guess the free beer is a hand out?

Imagine what the percentages would be if these figures were actually reported truthfully, and actually included the money that was stored off-shore to avoid taxes, laundered to avoid taxes, and just plain "lost" to avoid taxes...

Where is the proof that the rich do not report truthfully or are you saying since you lie all of America lies.

Why should the rich pay taxes? All you need is a good tax attorney and if you are poor a good tax man or woman. All you need to do is find an EX-IRS agent they know all the loop-holes.

Now how come Uncle Sam will not give me free beer. I forgot, I get free cheese good thing I like nachos.

Love the Fatman
 
Betsy, I agree with what you have said. More so, I think most people will agree with that. Nobody likes to pay taxes but I think we all understand that it is necessary. I also think it is reasonable for the rich to pay at a higher rate than the poor. I have no problem with the very poor paying no tax at all, it makes sense and seems fair to me.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the Beatles analogy. I think that if you over tax the rich or make them feel they are being treated unfairly, they do have the ability to move their business to other countries where the climate is more favorable. I don't know how much money England lost due to the Beatles moving to another country but I would imagine it was substantial.

I also agree with Betsy that I think we would all be happier with paying our taxes if we felt the money was being spent wisely. Government waste and the miss handling of our money makes me feel like paying taxes is a waste of money. When times are hard nobody wants to see their money being wasted.
 
Leew said:
Tyflyer, this will be my only response to your antagonism.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you are taking such offense to those who are disagreeing with the analogy. You keep acting as if they are antagonizing you. However, from what I've seen for the most part they have only been disagreeing with and 'attacking' the story/analogy/idea. When you present an idea, be prepared to hear differing opinions.

I think it is an interesting analogy, in the way that Kathy explained it. But like others have stated it is much to oversimplified to completely extrapolate it to the real world. I also think the article that Dead Mouse posted about refuting this analogy is interesting.
 
Leew said:
I also agree with Betsy that I think we would all be happier with paying our taxes if we felt the money was being spent wisely. Government waste and the miss handling of our money makes me feel like paying taxes is a waste of money. When times are hard nobody wants to see their money being wasted.
Click to expand...

I got to agree with that. I just finished a year working for the state and I have never seen so much fraud and waste. It was made bearable by pockets of honest hard working folk running like gold through the mainstream of many who were examples of the idiocy of government.

Not to go off topic but I still remember being sent memos during the swine flu scare about handwashing from the same bosses who hired people who allowed the handsoap dispenser in the restrooms to be empty for days at a time. What a joke.
 
Leew said:
I also agree with Betsy that I think we would all be happier with paying our taxes if we felt the money was being spent wisely. Government waste and the miss handling of our money makes me feel like paying taxes is a waste of money. When times are hard nobody wants to see their money being wasted.
Click to expand...

Lucille said:
I got to agree with that. I just finished a year working for the state and I have never seen so much fraud and waste. It was made bearable by pockets of honest hard working folk running like gold through the mainstream of many who were examples of the idiocy of government.
Click to expand...

Ditto for me (minus working for the state)
 
Actually, I found the story quite entertaining, and pretty much dead on with MY interpretation of how the world of taxation seems to work.

As for the actual source of the material, does anyone know who originally came up with the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"? Does it really matter WHO that might be in reference to the POINT of that story?

But the "taxation" story does lead one to ponder how a capitalistic based economy such as we have in the USA could have a taxation system in place completely at odds with this sort of philosophy.

WHY should someone who earns more have to PAY more in taxes? What value are they receiving in return for the higher payments?

Wouldn't a more realistically CAPITALISTIC way of managing the tax system be to simply generate a census of the number of citizens within the country eligible to pay taxes, and divide that number into the budget proposed for spending that year to come up with a BILL that each of those eligible tax payers must pay? In other words, charge everyone the same amount of money that they owe for taxes, regardless of their financial status. After all, the RETURNS on that money do not follow an escalating level of value based on paying more, so why SHOULDN'T it be such that the amount to be paid is equally level? And why should someone who was industrious or lucky enough to make more money for their toil have to be penalized by paying more for that industriousness or luck? Isn't the entire point of capitalism that the work be rewarded with equivalent value in monetary return?

It may sound harsh to put it in blunt terms, but perhaps bluntness is now needed to bring this country back in shape. Quite simply, here is your BILL to remain a citizen of the U.S.A. Pay it, any way you can, or there is the door.
 
Rich Z said:
It may sound harsh to put it in blunt terms, but perhaps bluntness is now needed to bring this country back in shape. Quite simply, here is your BILL to remain a citizen of the U.S.A. Pay it, any way you can, or there is the door.
Click to expand...

Children? Women at home raising a family? The aged, ill, or handicapped?
This plan IS harsh and not well thought out.
 
My personal opinion on taxes is that the IRS needs to be completely abolished and the federal government going back to being funded by the individual states, each of which determining what they and their constituents want to pay. This is how our founding fathers wanted things to be done and they knew first hand what they were talking about as taxation was a major issue for the revolution. There are other issues that go along with this, but that discussion will not be well received by many.
 
Rich Z said:
Actually, I found the story quite entertaining, and pretty much dead on with MY interpretation of how the world of taxation seems to work.

As for the actual source of the material, does anyone know who originally came up with the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"? Does it really matter WHO that might be in reference to the POINT of that story?

But the "taxation" story does lead one to ponder how a capitalistic based economy such as we have in the USA could have a taxation system in place completely at odds with this sort of philosophy.

WHY should someone who earns more have to PAY more in taxes? What value are they receiving in return for the higher payments?

Wouldn't a more realistically CAPITALISTIC way of managing the tax system be to simply generate a census of the number of citizens within the country eligible to pay taxes, and divide that number into the budget proposed for spending that year to come up with a BILL that each of those eligible tax payers must pay? In other words, charge everyone the same amount of money that they owe for taxes, regardless of their financial status. After all, the RETURNS on that money do not follow an escalating level of value based on paying more, so why SHOULDN'T it be such that the amount to be paid is equally level? And why should someone who was industrious or lucky enough to make more money for their toil have to be penalized by paying more for that industriousness or luck? Isn't the entire point of capitalism that the work be rewarded with equivalent value in monetary return?

It may sound harsh to put it in blunt terms, but perhaps bluntness is now needed to bring this country back in shape. Quite simply, here is your BILL to remain a citizen of the U.S.A. Pay it, any way you can, or there is the door.
Click to expand...

I am not so sure about this, as Susan said, there are too many single women raising kids and handicapped people....
But my personal utopia would be a flat tax. No IRS, no CPAs, no tax code that you need 10 degrees to figure out. No loopholes or tax breaks of any kind for any one or any corperation.
Just a flat rate, 20% or 25% of all income taken in.
If you are rich, you pay 25% of your earnings that year.
If you are poor you pay 25% too. In monthly payments if the bulk is hard to come up with all at once.
The rich will still be paying more, but it will be proportional, and it will be FAIR.
 
I tend to agree with both Rich AND Beth because even with Beth's system of the FLAT TAX, people will still holler that the single women raising kids are paying "more" even though it is "Proportionally Fair". EVERYONE pays... no one is exempt. Take the personal feelings out of it... Fair is FAIR.

What makes me ILL about the tax system now is that I can go to 3 different Tax Preparers and get 3 different "owed" amounts. BUT, if I do it on my own, and my figure happens to be a little bit less... DING, I get hit with not only the tax, but late fees as well. A FLAT TAX that everyone must pay (I was thinking along the lines of 15%... but that needs to be worked out) would be great.

IN ADDITION to that, I think we need to get rid of the government taking it out of our paychecks automatically. The way it is now, they take it out, people don't see it, and it never really computes. IF people had to manually pay it, then they would be more conscious of what the government (state & federal) is doing with THEIR hard earned cash and then they would be on the look out for candidates who are more in line with their desired spending practices. Nowadays, there's sooo much "hidden" that people often vote for and elect candidates that are actually spending more and more (and ASKING for more and more) without even knowing it. Break that check book out and debit card out and have to balance your living budget at the same time, and I'm almost positive that folks would BALK at all the government waste out there.
 
BTW, I too liked the little "something to think about" that the "analogy" gave. Of course it is simplistic and doesn't address all the "issues". BUT, it is supposed to and should make one think about it. The feeling of "entitlement" and "unfairness" that people feel about those who have more makes me... ILL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top