The Dinner Tab (Tax 101 for Liberals)

interesting how the "tax lovers" on the Left who are REALLY wealthy, like the Rockerfellers, Kennedy's, etc, etc, aren't taxed on their trust millions...and the wealthy Lefties are the most likely to try to "hide" income...

Look at Hillary and Bill...what did they ever do before they got to the WH to make money? Answer CHEAT! Now they are multi-millionaires. Wasn't there something in the news today about Hillary's income statement not including some of Slick Willie's income, earned by doing nothing but flapping his lips?

They only want to tax income earned "the old fashioned way"...gag...

.. and he just Shrugged, and went to eat at a restaurant in the Cayman Islands!

Well written, Scottie.

I will post a link to this article on my blog. BTW, I now have you on my Blogroll.

You are correct, the scheme is to tax income, not wealth. The Kennedy clan practically owns Fiji with all of the millions and millions they have stashed away there in offshore trusts. It's a regular American success story; climb to the top of the ladder, then pull the ladder up behind you.

I am flattered you've added me to your blog roll. Thank you. I guess the thrust of this article could be considered a bit Randian. On my way over to your blog. Let's see what you've got kid.

I recently met a lib acquaintance at a restaurant. He pulled into a handicap parking slot, hung a handicap tag from his mirror, and he and his fiancée exited the vehicle without assistance. Before the meal, I agreed to pay the tab, & he stated he’d cover the tip. I paid the tab of $71.00+ while he left a tip of $2.00 (approximately 2.9%). Proved to me that libs are neither caring nor giving.

They were now $52 short!?!?

He charged them the same as if there were ten. Dinner should of be $72, so they were only short $44. Or are they supposed to fill out a rebate form?

A predictable response from you. I'm sure you will both enjoy my next post as well as its evisceration. But the point is still made.

And since I have a few minutes, did you consider that they might no longer got the discount and the bill could now be $90? They could just as easily be $62 short. It's unlikely they will get the discount once they fail to pay the bill.

As to your last poke at me, REBATES! THERE's NO REBATES IN PARABLES! (with apologies to Tom Hanks.)

Scottie, Great story! I have another one for you. Suppose the 10 go to eat dinner and 5 eat for free and the other 5 pick up the tab. Split it up among the paying 5 however you like. Now the owner comes along and says I am going to cut the cost of the meal and you are only going to have to pay $80, but his son comes out and says "Dad, don't do that, because we will have to lower the quality / quantity of the meal." The dad and son have a debate about the merits of lowering the price of the meal and decide to put it up to a vote among the 10...guess which way they are going to decide. The 5 that are paying nothing have no reason to see the price of the meal lowered if it might possibly mean less or a poorer quality meal.

Now take a look at these quotes by Alexis de Tocqueville and what percentage of Americans pay taxes. If you add in illegal aliens who reap the rewards and don't pay income taxes the below percentages are even worse.

quotes:

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.

A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it.

Tax Burden:

Top 10% of wage earners pay 68.19% of income taxes

Top 25% of wage earners pay 84.86% of income taxes

Top 50% of wage earners pay 96.70% of income taxes

Bottom 50% pay 3.30%

Scary.

Publius

great parable.

And maybe they eat family style. Price is the same whether 9 eat or 10.

Well said, but the thrust of the parable remains the same no matter how we tinker around the edges with the percentages. If you cut taxes, those paying the lion's share will benefit more in absolute dollar terms.

Another thing that is often overlooked is that the rich don't call for these tax cuts, the government inplements them to stimulate the economy and in so doing increases its tax revenues. The benefits to "the rich" are incidental. Of course the most productive will derive greater benefit if the government eases off on the economic brake.

One could say they eat and pay for the meal in true Marxist style. From each according to his ability (to pay), and to each according to his needs (to eat). You could make the case that the whole tax system is Marxist in its philosopy.

Scottie/Cynewulf...Eating in true Marxist style, the other 9 storm the 10th guy's home, confiscate his property, drag him to the restaurant, force him to serve the dinner and then stiff him on the tip. Oh...and then throw him in prison for being a greedy exploiter of the people and not quick enough with the salads.

That's not Marxist, that's Stalinist!

How 'bout this...Stalin planned the dinner party after watching Karl Marx Living on cable.

I think Bernake was speaking to congress on C-SPAN one afternoon and stated that while capital gains tax rates were cut total revenue from capital gains taxes went up, not 100% sure of this but I think it is accurate, I will have to research a little. however if it is an accurate statement, all the calls for a roll back on the tax cut are more a punishment or vice tax on investments, kind of a class envy tool, kind of like cutting off ones nose to spite the face type thing. but the un-informed think it is a great idea, only the "rich" have investments.
hopefully in 08 we will have a president who dosen't look to either Karl or Groucho Marx for economic policy.

Karl Marx Living on channel 1. You had to watch it because it was the only channel!

BTW, I read somewhere that solviet TV's couldn't be left on for too long or they would catch fire.

Welcome to the Heartland. Come back often.

As for only the wealthy owing investments, aren't we overlooking the HUGE middle class investment in the stock market held in 401K's and other retirement vehicles?

An investment has to produce a gain after inflation and taxes to be attractive. If you lower the taxes, you make the investment more attractive, and thereby increase the level of investment.

Now hold this egg beater steady and drop the ramp, we're approaching the drop zone . . . AIRBOoooone . .

That's weird...I heard if you left a Soviet TV on too long you'd get shot.

it's always the salad course that gets you.

....were the patrons smoking?

If they were in Indiana they probably were. What if they were in Texas? [lob]

That really captures the complexity of our tax system. Who can understand it?

You are dealing with reality again, which is pointless when attempting to inform those on the left. However, if anyone here knows how to educate those fuzzy thinkers, please let me know. The only thing that seems to work is catastophic and personal disaster. Being mugged, 9/11, stuff like that. And even disaster doesn't always work.

Been digging through the archives I see. Well, it really takes two things to get a liberal to see the light. First, they have to mugged by reality as you said. Second, they must find it impossible to find a way to blame somebody else for their own misguided thinking. This is why the BDS evident in the current crop of Lefties leads to so many spectacular non-sequitors.