Bar Stool Economics

[Red Arrow]

Guido:

While I think the rich (you) should pay more dollars, you should pay a similar percent on your top dollar as everyone else. 

However, you forget that as a rich person paying high taxes you get:

Better police protection
Better fire protection
Better acesss to good roads without paying tolls
Better snow removal (In Bixby?)
Better sewer service
Better tasting tap water
Better protection from foreign enemies
Better Federal protection of your investments (FDIC etc)
Free parking downtown
Special privileges on the waterways
Exclusive use of boat launching ramps at the Corps of Engineers controlled lakes
Free golf everywhere
.....

Oops, probably not quite true.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Rich not paying enough?  Right now the tax system is based on percentages.  I REALLY would love to hear what Guido thinks is a fair way to tax people?  Please....just outline a few of the details - a quick overview.

Bitching about the rich not paying enough?  Yeah, that might be about right, since our system IS currently based on percentages and methods to squirm out of paying those percentages.  Yes, I would like to see the class warfare being waged by the top 1% on the bottom 99% END.  (1% is also the badge that outlaw biker gangs use for showing their "pride".  Oh, crap, now I've gone and pissed of the bikers, too!)

I am a long ways from rich, but not in danger of losing the house (yet) either.  I would love to have lower taxes to pay.  I would be much more than thrilled if those "1%" would pay even half the overall rate that I pay.  As stated over and over and over, there would be no deficit, no debt, and no missed economic opportunities due to the unavailability of $14 trillion to the overall economy.  

That is a topic that hasn't been discussed much - think of what we could do in this country if that 14 trillion was not in debt, but floating around through the economy!!!  What a horrible disservice we have done to ourselves and our children!!

But our imperialist voyeurism HAS been kind of fun....

[guido911]

Rich not paying enough?  Right now the tax system is based on percentages.  I REALLY would love to hear what Guido thinks is a fair way to tax people?  Please....just outline a few of the details - a quick overview.

Bitching about the rich not paying enough?  Yeah, that might be about right, since our system IS currently based on percentages and methods to squirm out of paying those percentages.  Yes, I would like to see the class warfare being waged by the top 1% on the bottom 99% END.  (1% is also the badge that outlaw biker gangs use for showing their "pride".  Oh, crap, now I've gone and pissed of the bikers, too!)

I am a long ways from rich, but not in danger of losing the house (yet) either.  I would love to have lower taxes to pay.  I would be much more than thrilled if those "1%" would pay even half the overall rate that I pay.  As stated over and over and over, there would be no deficit, no debt, and no missed economic opportunities due to the unavailability of $14 trillion to the overall economy.  

That is a topic that hasn't been discussed much - think of what we could do in this country if that 14 trillion was not in debt, but floating around through the economy!!!  What a horrible disservice we have done to ourselves and our children!!

But our imperialist voyeurism HAS been kind of fun....

Something along these lines is fair:

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer

As for your bullsh!t assertion that the rich are engaging in class warfare, got a link for that? Because last I checked its the poor that is bitching the most. Did you forget to read the original post in this thread?

[Red Arrow]

That is a topic that hasn't been discussed much - think of what we could do in this country if that 14 trillion was not in debt, but floating around through the economy!!!

I believe it is already floating around in the economy without inefficient government assistance.  Funnel that money through the government and we will be lucky if it does half the good.  Rich people don't keep their money stuffed in a mattress or buried in jars in the back yard.  It's out making them more money which means it is available for other people to do things with. 

I see only a few basic things that are taxable and nobody likes any of them.

Income
Possessions, usually property but could be expanded to include YOUR saving account, wardrobe,  etc.
Spending, (Sales, VAT etc) we could expand "sales tax" to both the buyer and seller.
Life,  pay a tax for the  privilege of being allowed to live.
Death,  we already tax that in the estate taxes.
Activities, Use tax for boat ramps, golf fees, toll roads

Someone feel free to add to the list.

[TulsaMoon]

Simple question. Why should the rich pay a higher % in taxes? Break it down in facts, not just your opinion.

[guido911]

Simple question. Why should the rich pay a higher % in taxes? Break it down in facts, not just your opinion.

Simple answer.  Because they cheated their way to success.

[TulsaMoon]

Simple answer.  Because they cheated their way to success.

Oh my, all Rich people in this country cheated their way to success... Well done Guido, you hit the FACT nail right on the head..

[Gaspar]

Simple answer.  Because they cheated their way to success.

Or how about . . ."They're members of the lucky sperm club."

That's my new favorite.

A better question would be, why do people who pay little or no taxes have any say in what other people pay?

The welfare state reduces a citizen to a client, subordinates them to a bureaucrat, and subjects them to rules that are anti-work, anti-family, anti-opportunity and anti-property … Humans forced to suffer under such anti-human rules naturally develop pathologies.  The first is to blame the successful for their poverty, the second is to demand that a larger welfare state is the only way to eliminate their poverty. 

[Red Arrow]

A better question would be, why do people who pay little or no taxes have any say in what other people pay?

In order to maintain that status of paying little or no tax, whichever tax is being talked about at the time.

[nathanm]

Simple question. Why should the rich pay a higher % in taxes? Break it down in facts, not just your opinion.

If you read the thread, you would know why. The marginal utility of the 400,000th dollar of income is less than the marginal utility of the 40,000th dollar. This is basic economics.

Gaspar, I wish I paid little or no tax. 40-50% of my family's income goes to paying various taxes, depending on the given year. I think it's telling that you and guido think that most anyone who argues in favor of progressive taxation must be some deadbeat freeloader sitting at home on welfare who doesn't pay a dime in taxes. I'm glad that the world I see outside is not as threatening as the one in your head.

Guido, I believe you're the one complaining about a change of about 1% of your income in tax.

[TulsaMoon]

If you read the thread, you would know why.  

microeconomics and macroeconomics?

I started the thread...... oh my I have continued to read it, silly me.

I do agree though.

Might I wish apon a cricket and plant my arse in a lazyboy and live off those that really work....

Question still.. Why should those that do give to those that don't. Simple... And once again, no real answer

[Red Arrow]

If you read the thread, you would know why. The marginal utility of the 400,000th dollar of income is less than the marginal utility of the 40,000th dollar. This is basic economics.

At one time, it was basic science that the earth was flat and the sun (moon and stars) revolved around the earth.

[nathanm]

Question still.. Why should those that do give to those that don't. Simple... And once again, no real answer

You're making the common mistake of presuming that those who don't make a crap-ton of money do so because they're lazy or whatever. Some choose to do necessary jobs that don't pay well. Others just never have the opportunity to start a business or can't get a graduate degree because of life circumstances or whatever.

Still others are lazy clucks who manage to make a lot of money because of luck or family connections. And those who are lazy and refuse to work hard and are poor because of it.

And then there are the folks who work hard and sacrifice and make a lot of money. And those who work hard and sacrifice and never manage to make a lot of money. We like to believe that we live in a country where merit is the only thing that matters, but it doesn't work that way.

Take a common recent example of newly minted attorneys who find it nearly impossible to get a job in the current economy. You simply can't be a lazy moron and make it through law school, yet they don't manage to get hired because almost nobody is hiring attorneys right now.

Red Arrow, even the most radical free-marketeer economists believe in the concept of marginal utility.

[guido911]

You're making the common mistake of presuming that those who don't make a crap-ton of money do so because they're lazy or whatever. Some choose to do necessary jobs that don't pay well. Others just never have the opportunity to start a business or can't get a graduate degree because of life circumstances or whatever.

Still others are lazy clucks who manage to make a lot of money because of luck or family connections. And those who are lazy and refuse to work hard and are poor because of it.

And then there are the folks who work hard and sacrifice and make a lot of money. And those who work hard and sacrifice and never manage to make a lot of money. We like to believe that we live in a country where merit is the only thing that matters, but it doesn't work that way.

Take a common recent example of newly minted attorneys who find it nearly impossible to get a job in the current economy. You simply can't be a lazy moron and make it through law school, yet they don't manage to get hired because almost nobody is hiring attorneys right now.

Red Arrow, even the most radical free-marketeer economists believe in the concept of marginal utility.

Just answer Moon's question.

[Red Arrow]

Red Arrow, even the most radical free-marketeer economists believe in the concept of marginal utility.

When I Googled "marginal utility" the concept that was presented first had to do with satisfaction.  I agree if you only make $10,000 that $1000 will be more significant to you than to someone making (the proverbial) $10,000,000.  However, someone making BIG bucks is also more likely to spend $100,000 than someone making $10,000.  If I get the time (to waste), I'll look into"marginal utility" to verify that people are using the term within the assumptions of the original concept.

The first option for most students that can't make it in engineering/science (physics, chemistry, math, geology...) school is usually to go to business/economics school, usually at the same university.  If they get through that, they will probably make more money than engineers, validating your statement that merit and hard work don't always pay.

Your example of unemployed lawyers reminds me of unemployed aerospace engineers driving taxis when I was in college.  Many of us decided not to specialize in aerospace.