Democratic Math

If you don't understand the Democrats' version of tax refunds, maybe this will help explain it. 50,000 people went to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due.

The team was about to mail refunds when a group of Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out the ticket refunds based on the Democrat National Committee's interpretation of fairness.

Originally the refunds were to be paid based on the price each person had paid for the tickets. Unfortunately that meant most of the refund money would be going to the ticket holders that had purchased the most expensive tickets. This, according to the DNC, is considered totally unfair.
A decision was then made to pay out the refunds in this manner People in the $10 seats will get back $15. After all, they have less money to spend on tickets to begin with. Call it an 'Earned Income Ticket Credit.' Persons 'earn' it by having few skills, poor work habits, and low ambition, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.

People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because it 'seems fair.' People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don't need a refund. After all, if they can afford a $50 ticket, they must not be paying enough taxes.

People in the $75 luxury box seats will each have to pay an additional $25 because it's the 'right thing to do'.

People walking past the stadium that couldn't afford to buy a ticket for the game each will get a $10 refund, even though they didn't pay anything for the tickets. They need the most help. Sometimes this is known as Affirmative Action.

Now do you understand?

If not, contact Representative Nancy Pelosi, Senators Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama for assistance. More government will mean better lives!

Where did you copy that from? Was it pertaining to the " Stimulus Package? " or are you trying to talk about delegates? Or something else?

By the way, that's not how Democrats do math. But it's a cute story.

The fucki*g Republicans have starved educational funding to the point where math is a foreign language to many students in the U.S. The humor in Deane's post is really an indictment of the poor performance of GOP politicians and leaders. Thanks for reminding us Deane what a bunch of tripe everything that comes out of the mouth's of Republican dogs is. The No child left with a mind program of Bush & Co. is an absolute joke, thanks again for pointing that out.

We all know what happens when we vote for Republicans, don't we?

Nice bit Deane!

Repbublican Math:

If you don't understand the Rebublican's version of tax refunds, maybe this will help explain it. 50,000 people went to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due.

The team was about to mail refunds when a group of Congressional Republicans stopped them and suggested that they send out the ticket refunds based on the Repbublican National Committee's interpretation of fairness.

Originally the refunds were to be paid based on the price each person had paid for the tickets. Unfortunately everyone would get a refund equal to what they paid. This, according to the RNC, is considered totally unfair.

A decision was then made to pay out the refunds in this manner: People in the $10 seats will get back $5. After all, they paid for the cheapest seats and probably don't mean much to the broader economy. Call it the "fair refund program". After all, they are lucky to get anything at all since a rain-out technically doesn't require the refund of your money.

People in the $25 seats will get back $20 because the middle class will take what they can get and don't have any way to challenge it. People in the $50 seats will get back $75, because more money in their pocket will mean greater prosperity for all for those that didn't receive a full refund. After all, the extra money we reward them will help out the economy.

People in the $75 luxury box seats will each get back $150, because they paid the most, so they should get the biggest refund. And again, it will help the economy.

People walking past the stadium that couldn't afford to buy a ticket won't get any refund, but will be asked to pay back the deficit the RNC has created with their refund program that refunds more money than was originally paid into the ticket revenues.

Now do you understand?

If not, contact your local GOP reps. More money in the hands of the wealthy means better lives for all!

Why is it that the Democrats are so afraid of someone making a lot of money and becoming rich?

If someone comes up with a good idea, produces it, markets it and becomes filthy stinking rich from it, GOOD for them.

That’s capitalism and the American way at it’s finest?

Why does that scare the Democrats so badly?

Democrats aren't afraid of someone making money. That's a GOP fallacy that's simply not true. Democrats understand that for the money it takes to run our government, people that make more have to pay more. Otherwise it's a tax increase on yourself because the extra money will then come from the lower earners. If you want to pay more so someone earning $2 million per year can pay less, be my guest. That kind of math logic doesn't fly in my household.

Republicans are too scared to actually make money for fear of having to pay their taxes. I see it all the time. You make the dough, you pay the ho. It's that simple.

"Why is it that the Democrats are so afraid of someone making a lot of money and becoming rich?"

They aren't. What is feared is the extent to which Republicans will break the laws, corrupt themselves, cheat, steal and lie like vermin in order to "make a lot of money."

"If someone comes up with a good idea, produces it, markets it and becomes filthy stinking rich from it, GOOD for them."

I agree. As long as they didn't steal the idea, outsource its production to the third world where inferior materials will be used in its manufacture and low pollution standards will allow for less cost, and markets it honestly (a foreign idea to a Republican).

"That’s capitalism and the American way at it’s finest?"

In the hands of Republicans it's more a case of capitalism at its worst. In a viable economy for today's market, consumers would own a share of what they buy through their purchasing dollar. Capitalism under the Republicans does not allow enough consumer input prior to production of goods. So, corporations continue to maximize profits for themselves and shareholders, without regard for social or environmental justice.

Why does that scare the Democrats so badly?"

It doesn't scare Democrats. It pisses them off. Soon, the GOP will be out of power and the ship of capitalism will begin to right itself from its current state of near shipwreck, heavily listing to the right.

…..people that make more have to pay more.

WHY?

Just because they can? Talk about a Robin Hood syndrome. What added benefits will they get that you or I don't get because we don't pay as much?

Or do they just have to pay more for the privilege of earning more?

Otherwise it's a tax increase on yourself because the extra money will then come from the lower earners.

No it's not. The percentage should be the same straight across the board, with some qualifiers for the lowest of income earners.

Let's use 15% as a good round number (not saying that's the correct number, just easy to do the math with)

If I earn $50,000 I would pay $7500 in taxes. If I earn $500,000, I would pay $75,000. And so on.

How is that a tax increase on lower income people? There is already a point where the lower income people get a break and it should be kept.

You make the dough, you pay the ho. A fitting description of the IRS!

They pay more because they consume more, period.

They pay more because $7500 to someone who is making $50k is a bigger chunk out of that persons ability to live than $75k is to someone making $500k.

Also, someone making $500k has more financial options available to lower the taxable income, meaning someone earning $500k is actually paying a rate much lower than 15%.

Bill, unless you are willing to put the flat tax rate at the very top of the scale, it will result in the top earners paying less, therefore, in order for things to remain revenue neutral, people like you and me would have to pay more to fill the gap. You can't reduce someone's taxes and not increase someone else's.

They pay more because they consume more, period.

Please explain.


Also, someone making $500k has more financial options available to lower the taxable income, meaning someone earning $500k is actually paying a rate much lower than 15%.

That's why a flat percentage would work best. No deductions, no IRS!

one for you
one for me
two for you
one two for me
three for you
one two three for me

^^ Government Math ^^

Bill, you would pay more under the flat tax, period, end of story. Are you willing to pay more just to have a flat tax?

The infrastructure we have built up is the commons we all use to help build wealth.

For some guy working somewhere, his use of that commons is light, and the return is light. Simple time compensation, maybe expenses.

For the business owner that guy works for, the use of the commons is far heavier. And with that increased use comes a greater return.

Our commons must be maintained over time as well, or we all lose the benefit of it.

Those that are making the most from it, really should carry a more significant burden for maintaining it. They place more wear, per dollar earned, on it as well.

Now let's look at what fraction of income is liquid --as in the person gets to choose what to do with that income. They could buy things, invest, save, etc... all their choice.

Your guy making that 50K / year working only has a small fraction of that income with with to make his choices. Say it's 5K / year.

The owner he works for may well make many times that.

Again, greater use, greater return.

Now, a $100 / month tax bill increase or decrease becomes very significant to the 50K person. It's likely to impact a core life choice. It will absolutely impact some lesser life choices.

For some, it might mean keeping the lights on -vs- getting health care for the kids.

The people they work for do not make those kinds of choices. Their choices are where to invest and how much. Get both new cars this year or just one? Expand the business, or bank some money for a slow time.

Having the lower wage earners pay the same as the higher ones ignores their greater use burden on our commons as a whole. That's our roads, our courts, our electric, etc...

Additionally, placing the tax burden at a point where common people can actually make choices is more or less a prerequiste to demanding they then make them!

Put into perspective, 40 percent of every tax dollar goes to war related stuff. Social services is maybe 15 - 20 percent, with everything else falling below that.

Let's say we somehow erase the war. So, the average joe sees maybe 1K / year relief. That's huge right?

Well, so is that same burden in reverse.

On the other hand, our high dollar earner gets 2K or 5K. Is that huge to them?

In absolute dollars it might be, but in terms of a percentage of their liquid income it's minor league.

As Vitalogy said, it's a zero sum game. There is a burden to be met. Most of the stuff that people point to and say, "I'm paying for that" is a small fraction of the taxes as a whole.

War related stuff is completely dominant right now, with nearly half of every dollar paying off the cost of the war.

One could double education, for example, and not make a significant tax change. ie: approaching half.

Those people profiting the most from the commons need to pay to maintain those commons. It's an investment in their future ability to build wealth in those commons and that's a cost of doing business.

We don't pay our taxes, so that some of us can set up shop and get a free ride. Everybody pays so that everybody gets a better standard of living.

Consumption tax.

Word.

I hate chain mail.

I hate chain mail.

Yeah, but it protects you in a sword fight!

Here's the thing, if rich people don't like paying "more" taxes, then they should do what they need to do to covert more poor people into rich people -- this way the rich people will have more votes and be able get things going their way.

In the mean time, poor people RULES! So, rich people, stfu!

EXTREME RIGHT math...

SPEND SPEND SPEND

DEBT DEBT DEBT