Progressive tax

[Farang]

"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Farang
"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

Here is a much easier to understand explanation -

Our Tax System, Explained in Beer

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 bee r 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 windfall 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 percent, 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 n inth 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. B ut 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.

Credit for this example has been given to many, but no one has yet claimed to be the author.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Both forms of taxation are equally trash.

 

[Farang]

RY62 you can disagree with progressive taxation that's fine but I'd rather people be debating that than debating the pros and cons of socialism.

And that tenth man would find that all the other bars charge him just as much

 

[davestar]

Originally posted by: RY62
Here is a much easier to understand explanation -

Our Tax System, Explained in Beer

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 bee r 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 windfall 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 percent, 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 n inth 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. B ut 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.

Credit for this example has been given to many, but no one has yet claimed to be the author.

if by "easier to understand" you mean "a wildly inaccurate metaphor", then yes, i totally agree with you.

 

[Moonbeam]

I loved the Obama line about next week McSame will be accusing me of being a communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.

 

[midway]

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: Farang
"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

Here is a much easier to understand explanation -

Our Tax System, Explained in Beer

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 bee r 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 windfall 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 percent, 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 n inth 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. B ut 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.

Credit for this example has been given to many, but no one has yet claimed to be the author.

That's a horrible analogy. You left out the part where the 10th man gets free blowjobs form the bar owner's daughter, a large cut of the $41 paid by the other 9 men, and gets to choose what beer the bar serves.

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I loved the Obama line about next week McSame will be accusing me of being a communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.

I enjoyed that too. Instead I see a headline on CNN saying "McCain says Obama lied about public financing". Obviously Obama didn't lie - he changed his mind when he saw how much money he was getting. Big effin' difference, not that it matters a week before the election.

Remember, if you repeat something often enough, the simpletons will buy it.

 

[ohnoes]

Thats a terrible metaphor. There's nothing about expenditures or disposable income. The cost of supplying the beer is still at $100, and the value of $1 to #6 is inherently different than the value of $1 to #10.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: midway
That's a horrible analogy. You left out the part where the 10th man gets free blowjobs form the bar owner's daughter, a large cut of the $41 paid by the other 9 men, and gets to choose what beer the bar serves.

Hehehe well played sir! :laugh:


All progressive vs regressive taxation arguments aside, Farang is 100% correct. All of this bullshit regarding socialism needs to stop. If you want to disagree or argue about Obama's tax policies then so be it ,but stop calling it something that it most certainly is not. Doing so only promotes a type of fear mongering just like Bush was doing to all of us to support his "War on Terror".

 

[bamacre]

The idea of being progressive depends on one's definition of progress.

 

[Jaskalas]

OP, at what point does wealth redistribution become socialism?

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: midway

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: Farang
"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

Here is a much easier to understand explanation -

Our Tax System, Explained in Beer

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 bee r 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 windfall 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 percent, 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 n inth 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. B ut 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.

Credit for this example has been given to many, but no one has yet claimed to be the author.

That's a horrible analogy. You left out the part where the 10th man gets free blowjobs form the bar owner's daughter, a large cut of the $41 paid by the other 9 men, and gets to choose what beer the bar serves.

Ah, so I pay $59 to get a 'large cut' of $41. Sounds like a good deal!

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
OP, at what point does wealth redistribution become socialism?

I'm not even looking that far. I find it sinister when it opposes the principles of personal property rights and economic freedom.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Farang
"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

Well McCain is just pointing to the fact that Obama's tax plan will give more handout to the bottom brackets, and his UHC plan will create one more big government program.

McCain is just trying hard to paint Obama as a socialist just like Obama trying to paint McCain as another Bush. Same political BS, nothing really new here.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: rchiu
Well McCain is just pointing to the fact that Obama's tax plan will give more handout to the bottom brackets, and his UHC plan will create one more big government program.

McCain is just trying hard to paint Obama as a socialist just like Obama trying to paint McCain as another Bush. Same political BS, nothing really new here.

Tax plans are not a hand outs no matter what. If you want to call using tax dollars to send checks in the mail to people handouts then that is fine, but the tax plans them self are not handouts.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
OP, at what point does wealth redistribution become socialism?

All forms of socialism call for collective ownership of the means of production. When we discuss progressive taxation in the U.S., we are talking about taxing people based on income from brackets of 10-35%. I think this is a bit of a loaded question and I don't know where the line is from progressive taxation to socialism. What I do know is that neither Obama nor McCain's plans come anywhere near to having collective ownership of the means of production in the United States, and neither of their plans are outside the norm of American tax policy for the past 100 years.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Farang
"It's like these people take pride in being ignorant" - Barack Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

We have had a progressive income tax in the United States ever since there has been an income tax, nearly one hundred years. Conservatives generally favor a more regressive (but still progressive) tax system, while Democrats favor a more progressive tax system. This debate is not at all a debate over what is socialist and what is not.

And if I may take a quote out of the article:

In the U.S., the vast majority of economists (81%) support progressive taxation.[17][18]

I understand partisans aren't going to bother reading facts but if you are being duped into confusion about this line of attack from McCain I thought you might like to read about what the debate really is about and make up your mind based on the facts.

Well McCain is just pointing to the fact that Obama's tax plan will give more handout to the bottom brackets, and his UHC plan will create one more big government program.

McCain is just trying hard to paint Obama as a socialist just like Obama trying to paint McCain as another Bush. Same political BS, nothing really new here.

Exactly. No one is really trying to argue that progressive tax is terrible. I think we ALL know that the US has had a progressive tax system forever, and that conservatives want a more regressive (but still progressive) system.

The call of socialism is with regards to redistributing wealth in the sense that there are handouts to the lower income individuals and raising of taxes on the wealthier Americans. Whether you think that's fair or not is the dividing line between the candidates. OP, your post is stating the obvious, and McCain supporters understand this. No one's trying to argue against the progressive taxation we have in the US, just how progressive it is.

 

[Genx87]

Progressive taxation is fine. My biggest question right now is why are we focusing on tapping people making 250K when the truely wealthy hide behind a flat capital gains tax? If the point of Obama is to get the money out of the wealthy why is he trying to tax new money?

Anyways

This socialist stuff is a sad attempt at a dead campaign to get people motivated. I dont think it will work. People want change, they will make that happen in under a week. I actually am going to vote for Obama. Because quite frankly McCain's campaign was so pitiful I cant even muster enough effort to vote just hoping for gridlock. I say let the floodgates open and see what comes of it. The worst that will happen is democrats actually fix the ship. But maybe the republicans will get their shit together, let the democrats wallown in their own incompetence, and turn the tide in 2010.

That said

Honestly though Socialism in its true form never redistributed wealth down. My sig says it perfectly. If Obama was a socialist he would tax all of us 100%, collect our wealth, and then make us wards of the state. We will all be poor while him and the political class are wealthy and control the power.

 

[BigDH01]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
OP, at what point does wealth redistribution become socialism?

What kind of Socialism?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: rchiu
Well McCain is just pointing to the fact that Obama's tax plan will give more handout to the bottom brackets, and his UHC plan will create one more big government program.

McCain is just trying hard to paint Obama as a socialist just like Obama trying to paint McCain as another Bush. Same political BS, nothing really new here.

Tax plans are not a hand outs no matter what. If you want to call using tax dollars to send checks in the mail to people handouts then that is fine, but the tax plans them self are not handouts.

Oh yeah? How would you call sending tax rebate checks to those who don't pay tax?

 

[davestar]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
OP, at what point does wealth redistribution become socialism?

first, any kind of taxation is "wealth redistribution", so if you find believe that's a scary term that only applies to Obama, you're delusional.

second, much more needs to happen than nudging around a couple tax brackets for the US gov't to be anywhere near termed a "socialist government" .

third, do you think we were a socialist country in the 1990s? no? well then we won't be a socialist country under Obama either because his proposed tax plan mirrors Clinton's quite closely.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Progressive taxation is fine. My biggest question right now is why are we focusing on tapping people making 250K when the truely wealthy hide behind a flat capital gains tax? If the point of Obama is to get the money out of the wealthy why is he trying to tax new money?

Anyways

This socialist stuff is a sad attempt at a dead campaign to get people motivated. I dont think it will work. People want change, they will make that happen in under a week. I actually am going to vote for Obama. Because quite frankly McCain's campaign was so pitiful I cant even muster enough effort to vote just hoping for gridlock. I say let the floodgates open and see what comes of it. The worst that will happen is democrats actually fix the ship. But maybe the republicans will get their shit together, let the democrats wallown in their own incompetence, and turn the tide in 2010.

That said

Honestly though Socialism in its true form never redistributed wealth down. My sig says it perfectly. If Obama was a socialist he would tax all of us 100%, collect our wealth, and then make us wards of the state. We will all be poor while him and the political class are wealthy and control the power.

Isn't Obama planning on making some changes to the capital gains taxes as well which would help with that issue? As far as rest of that post I pretty much agree.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: midway
That's a horrible analogy. You left out the part where the 10th man gets free blowjobs form the bar owner's daughter, a large cut of the $41 paid by the other 9 men, and gets to choose what beer the bar serves.

There are a few benefits to being a bar owner. :laugh:

It also fails to mention the new plan where, not only do the poor get free beer but, the successful earners are required to pay cab fare to and from the bar for the deadbeats.

 

[Genx87]

I have heard him talk about raising the capital gains tax. At one point it was a bit ridiculous, something like 38%. But then he settled at 20%. But the last I heard he has backed away from it out of fear it will hurt the stock market and investment.