• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Using BEER to explain the progressive income tax system

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
This has probably been posted before but I figured I'd put it up again:

TAXATION EXPLAINED TO THE MASSES

Suppose that every evening, 10 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 10 men drank in the bar every evening and were quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner said "Since you are all such good customers, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the 10 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? 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 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.
Therefore, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing.
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 buck too. It's unfair - he got 10 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 always win!"

"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, labor unions and fellow Democrats, is how the tax system works. The people who 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 quit drinking altogether (or in economic terms they may "go Galt" which will deprive the government of income).
 
Or here is another 10% of 10,000 per year as compared to 30% of 100,000 per year. Now who loses the most from their income in reality.
 
I read that several years ago. I think it was one of my roommates from college who sent it to me. There is a whole lot more that is accurately described in that analogy than not. Still, a lot of people just read it and go "Uh, I don't get it".

BTW, I finally finished Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand was way ahead of her time. Unfortunately, I found the book a bit verbose and not really an easy read. Is there a Cliff's Notes version of it on audio books? :D Oh, wait, I forgot. You lived in that fraternity that didn't allow Cliff's Notes. :yum:
 
Or here is another 10% of 10,000 per year as compared to 30% of 100,000 per year. Now who loses the most from their income in reality.
Whose 'reality'?
$1,000 vs $30,000.
100,000 pays 29 times what 10,000 does.
Any real look will show that 30,000 is more than 1,000.
 
Last edited:
In spending power or the ability to live in this country? Oh and that was 10,000 not 1,000 as that wouldn't eve pay taxes of any kind.
 
In spending power or the ability to live in this country? Oh and that was 10,000 not 1,000 as that wouldn't eve pay taxes of any kind.
$1,000 is the taxes you cited at 10% of 10,000. Actually, if you have a family of four you don't pay federal income tax until after the 50,000 level.
30,000 is a lot more spending power than 1,000.
 
But wait! The rich "OWE" the the ones that can't afford to drink. It is their "Right" to drink.

Proof:
Food Stamps
AFDC
WIC
Energy assistance
the list goes on and on.

This "aide" doesn't grow on trees.
It comes from the money you send in the form of taxes.

Unfortunately, The spineless weasels have no balls to either take enough to pay for it OR - stop giving it away. Thus the trillions in debt.:hammer:
 
But wait! The rich "OWE" the the ones that can't afford to drink. It is their "Right" to drink.

Proof:
Food Stamps
AFDC
WIC
Energy assistance
the list goes on and on.

This "aide" doesn't grow on trees.
It comes from the money you send in the form of taxes.

Unfortunately, The spineless weasels have no balls to either take enough to pay for it OR - stop giving it away. Thus the trillions in debt.:hammer:

You know, if the tax system was even remotely fair and not broken past the point of being able to be fixed, I'd have no problem paying my fair share. The same goes for my pet peeve; property taxes. Give me a price. Name a figure for the tax I have to pay to actually own my property. I'd gladly pay it and be done with it.

The problem exists when these old hippies who burned their brains out "experimenting" on drugs have now grown up and cannot understand that there cannot be any "free rides". As long as we have a party who feels that about half of the public should be completely on a free ride, our tax system will never work. If you make very little; you pay very little. Even if it's just a few cents, you pay your fair share. Any man with a set of balls should be ashamed enough to refuse to let others take care of him like they are his momma. Unfortunately, there seems to be a severe shortage of real men anymore and about half of them have no problem running around with no balls sticking their hands out asking for more. :hammer:
 
I agree our tax system is broken hence this is why we have a government with elected officials to fix these problems. Now if they don't bring it up or deal with it vote them out period. This is the job of government isn't it, we do pay them a pretty good salary and benefits to do this job if I remember correctly.
 
I agree our tax system is broken hence this is why we have a government with elected officials to fix these problems. Now if they don't bring it up or deal with it vote them out period. This is the job of government isn't it, we do pay them a pretty good salary and benefits to do this job if I remember correctly.

I've been busy with other issues, but didn't they also vote themselves a raise as well? Or am I confusing that with something else?
 
Oh yes they vote themselves a cost of living income almost every year but not a chance for SS recipients. You do understand that most of the newly elected House and Senate are multi million dollar a year incomes. Hence their not caring much about the working people of this country who make what $10 to $30 per hour. Just the sheep to sheer while they get richer.
 
That's all wrong.....i have never seen a rich man put his hand in his pocket to buy the beers down my Pub...hence he has so much money,and the fact he will drink the higher costing drinks like whiskey and Brandy screws over the poorer guy drinking a $2 Beer.

Now i have confused the issue just like the Government would.

The rich will get richer and the poor will stay drinking cheap Beer.
 
Top