bigphesta
04-15-2003, 04:39 AM
It's Friday night, you and the gang (your five closest friends) are all heading out to the local pub for a few beers after a hard week of work. Of course, it's your local hangout, so the pretty girl behind the bar has no problem with letting you run up a tab. Closing time hits, everyone is feeling good, and the lovely bartender brings back the bill. Seems the six of you managed to drink up 100 beers. At $1 per beer, that's a bill of $100.
Now, you could split the bill down the middle, each of you paying $16.66, but, as one friend quickly points out, not everyone drank the same amount. Why should someone who had just 10 beers pay as much as the person who had 20? That seems reasonable so everyone starts to count the beers they drank. Seems simple. You get a certain % of the pie, you owe certain % of the cost.
You drank 13
Ozzie drank 21
Phreddie drank 14
Tom drank 11
Willy drank 21
Mike drank 20
Logic would dictate that if you drank 13 beers, you'd owe $13. Given that, do you think that you're going to be allowed to leave the bar throwing down $4 while Ozzie has to throw down $37 bucks when he had 21 beers? Would that be fair? I mean, sure, he drank a bit more than you, but why does each of his "dollar" beers cost him $1.85 when you're trying to weasel your way into paying 40 cents for each of yours? Let's say the tables were turned, and YOU were being told you had to pay $1.85 per beer while Ozzie only had to pay 40 cents per beer. Would you see this as fair?
Well, our government does. Today's April 15th, Tax Day, and our government thinks that "Ozzie" - representing the top 1% of wage earners in the United States - has to pay 37% of the total US Federal Income Tax burden, despite the fact that the top 1% only accounts for 21% of the total taxable income in the US.
Frank - representing the top 5% of earners (not including those in the top 1%) - earns 14% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 19% of the total tax burden.
Tom - representing the top 10% of earners (not including those in the top 5%) - earns 11% of the total income in the United States, and incredibly responsible for 11% of the total tax burden.
Willy - representing the top 25% of earners (not including those in the top 10%) - earns 21% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 17% of the total tax burden.
Mike - representing the top 50% of earners (not including those in the top 25%)- earns 20% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 12% of the total tax burden.
And of course, "you" - who represents of the bottom 50% of tax payers (and this is in no means intended to estimate your income, simply used 'you' as an example) - earns 13% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 4% of the total tax burden.
In a land where "All Men are Created Equal", does it make sense to you that someone can earn 13% of the pie and only be responsible for 4% of the cost, while someone else, working just as hard, can earn 21% of the pie, yet pays 37% of the burden? Is that "equal'? The top 10% of earners in the US pay 67.3% of the taxes, yet only earn only 46% of all wages. I mean, sure, 46% of the pie locked in the hands of 10% of the people is a sizeable chunk, but does that mean that they need to be punished? And 67.3% of the tax burden on the same 10% of the population is a much bigger chunk, and is definitely not equal, that's exploitation.
Forcing 10% of the population to cover over 67% of the expenses when they're only responsible for 46% of the taxable income, yet trying to prevent any sort of tax break because it's a "tax break for the rich" should be a crime. Simple math tells you if you're paying 67% of the bill, and bill is reduced by 10%, the total whole dollar amount of your savings will be more than the rest of the populations (90%) who's paying a laughable 33% of the bill. And a 10% tax cut for anyone is a 10% tax cut, and is only for the 'rich' when they're paying such a disproportioned amount to start with that any cut can't help but be substantial.
And the amount that the bottom 50%, even the bottom 75% (those making less than $55,000 per year) of wage earners is dwarfed in comparison to what those in the top 25% make, so by definition, you can't give them much of a tax cut. Yet these are the people to whom the liberal elite claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" mentioned as a reason to NOT give all Americans a tax cut. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore and any tax cut will seem to favor the rich if you're only looking at dollar amounts and this is simply an excuse by Democrats in Washington to keep you scared, angry at the 'rich,' and allowing them to keep their hands in your pocket book. All fairness issues aside, ALL tax cuts are good for ALL people. Period.
Well, Happy Tax Day. Maybe you should just try and find someone to go out drinking with and forget this whole message...
Now, you could split the bill down the middle, each of you paying $16.66, but, as one friend quickly points out, not everyone drank the same amount. Why should someone who had just 10 beers pay as much as the person who had 20? That seems reasonable so everyone starts to count the beers they drank. Seems simple. You get a certain % of the pie, you owe certain % of the cost.
You drank 13
Ozzie drank 21
Phreddie drank 14
Tom drank 11
Willy drank 21
Mike drank 20
Logic would dictate that if you drank 13 beers, you'd owe $13. Given that, do you think that you're going to be allowed to leave the bar throwing down $4 while Ozzie has to throw down $37 bucks when he had 21 beers? Would that be fair? I mean, sure, he drank a bit more than you, but why does each of his "dollar" beers cost him $1.85 when you're trying to weasel your way into paying 40 cents for each of yours? Let's say the tables were turned, and YOU were being told you had to pay $1.85 per beer while Ozzie only had to pay 40 cents per beer. Would you see this as fair?
Well, our government does. Today's April 15th, Tax Day, and our government thinks that "Ozzie" - representing the top 1% of wage earners in the United States - has to pay 37% of the total US Federal Income Tax burden, despite the fact that the top 1% only accounts for 21% of the total taxable income in the US.
Frank - representing the top 5% of earners (not including those in the top 1%) - earns 14% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 19% of the total tax burden.
Tom - representing the top 10% of earners (not including those in the top 5%) - earns 11% of the total income in the United States, and incredibly responsible for 11% of the total tax burden.
Willy - representing the top 25% of earners (not including those in the top 10%) - earns 21% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 17% of the total tax burden.
Mike - representing the top 50% of earners (not including those in the top 25%)- earns 20% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 12% of the total tax burden.
And of course, "you" - who represents of the bottom 50% of tax payers (and this is in no means intended to estimate your income, simply used 'you' as an example) - earns 13% of the total income in the United States, yet is responsible for 4% of the total tax burden.
In a land where "All Men are Created Equal", does it make sense to you that someone can earn 13% of the pie and only be responsible for 4% of the cost, while someone else, working just as hard, can earn 21% of the pie, yet pays 37% of the burden? Is that "equal'? The top 10% of earners in the US pay 67.3% of the taxes, yet only earn only 46% of all wages. I mean, sure, 46% of the pie locked in the hands of 10% of the people is a sizeable chunk, but does that mean that they need to be punished? And 67.3% of the tax burden on the same 10% of the population is a much bigger chunk, and is definitely not equal, that's exploitation.
Forcing 10% of the population to cover over 67% of the expenses when they're only responsible for 46% of the taxable income, yet trying to prevent any sort of tax break because it's a "tax break for the rich" should be a crime. Simple math tells you if you're paying 67% of the bill, and bill is reduced by 10%, the total whole dollar amount of your savings will be more than the rest of the populations (90%) who's paying a laughable 33% of the bill. And a 10% tax cut for anyone is a 10% tax cut, and is only for the 'rich' when they're paying such a disproportioned amount to start with that any cut can't help but be substantial.
And the amount that the bottom 50%, even the bottom 75% (those making less than $55,000 per year) of wage earners is dwarfed in comparison to what those in the top 25% make, so by definition, you can't give them much of a tax cut. Yet these are the people to whom the liberal elite claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" mentioned as a reason to NOT give all Americans a tax cut. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore and any tax cut will seem to favor the rich if you're only looking at dollar amounts and this is simply an excuse by Democrats in Washington to keep you scared, angry at the 'rich,' and allowing them to keep their hands in your pocket book. All fairness issues aside, ALL tax cuts are good for ALL people. Period.
Well, Happy Tax Day. Maybe you should just try and find someone to go out drinking with and forget this whole message...