[Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics

[Rik Sandberg]

Stick around Alex. I for one, enjoy your attitude.

Rik
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Bell" <alexbell@coastalnet.com>
To: <wwrhodes@rhodes22.com>; "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
<rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics


> Stan,
>
> The only thing I would agree with your commentary is that there's a lot
> of simplistic logic going on.
>
> I am not going to comment on and on about this since I have been
> chastised in the past for any political view I expressed in joke form.
> It amazes me that this joke sent by Paul, with a disclaimer attached to
> boot, would end up becoming a platform for you to express your political
> views. I think you should keep your commentary to the boats you build.
> If the rest of us are supposed to adhere to some kind of non political
> agenda here, then the least you could do would be to refrain from
> expousing your views.
>
> As to debt, I don't want to pay off someone else's debts. I have plenty
> of my own, thank you. I worked for mine. I started out delivering
> telegrams on a bicycle, worked on the L&N Railroad section gang,  a
> spring factory, and road grader manufacturer as a welders helper before
> my education assisted me in better paying jobs. Like Brad said, I am not
> going to apologize for what I've accumulated over the years.
>
> Someone commented on the fabled double tax and capital gains tax. I
> suppose some people might feel that these taxes affect only the rich.
> But it affects anyone who might want to sell a piece of property, only
> to find that if sold, it would cost them dearly. How many people own
> some kind of Mutual Fund? We had some that lost 40% of their value, but
> we had to pay capital gains on them. Aint that great?
>
>  When times are tough, we cut back on spending. Something the government
> programs don't seem to do. I'm tired of the guilt trips people lay on us
> because we want to keep more of our money. I find myself paying taxes on
> money I saved and put away once, and it's getting old. I've left the
> list before because of political discussions, but I think I'll stick
> around and stir the pot for a change. Of all people, I have OPINIONS. If
> someone encourages me, I will be able to supply a full diatribe. So
> there.
>
> To Wally, I say, good job in questioning the written word. You are a
> bright light in a dim day.
> To RIK, he don't apologize for you comments. That first comment was just
> not necessary. The second one was better.
> To MJM, hey where are you?
> To Brad, gee, I wish I had said that. But then I'm not quite as well
> off. But I'm not full of envy. Hard work pays off...twice.
>
> Alex
>
>
> General Boats wrote:
> >
> > With the same caveat that Paul posted, here is a reply from the left.
Don't
> > read it if it moves you to leave the list.
> >
> > Would it only be so simple as the professor from SD makes it.
> >
> > Just three minor complications -  many more can be contributed by musch
wiser
> > economists..
> >
> > a)   50,000,000 of us do not make enough to pay taxes no matter how hard
we
> > work - we are just not that smart. So Tax cuts are not a neutral issue.
Tax
> > cuts invariably mean tax increases for us. With less revenues, services
are
> > diminished.  Cost of education rises. (That is a very costly error - the
free
> > GI educational bill of WW 2 got the US economy roaring).  States find
> > themselves in financial holes and have to make up the shortfalls with
all sorts
> > of increases like higher sales taxes (which have the same rate no matter
what
> > your income), higher real estate taxes - perhaps gas taxes -anything to
raise
> > moneys the income tax cuts have taken from them. So tax cuts are a
double edge
> > sword that not only help those who need help the least, but at the same
time
> > hurt those who need help the most. I know some of you chafe at the idea
of
> > someone getting something for nothing.  But those who take advantage of
any
> > good nature the government shows are in the minority of good Americans
and good
> > policing can wean the freeloaders out. Overkill sooner or later leads to
> > overthrow.   The funny thing about tax cuts is that the very wealthy
think they
> > are a mistake.
> >
> > b)   If you step back and see how the rich got rich, with the exception
of
> > those who stole it and then bought their way in and those who
contributed
> > nothing but happen to be born in the right circle, the majority made it
the
> > hard way, they worked for it.  But they were only able to succeed
because they
> > had the invaluable assistance of the police man and fireman and milkman
(and in
> > my day the iceman) and hosts of others that were needed to create the
> > environment that made the accumulation of wealth possible in the first
place.
> > Part of any money due back the high end is really to be shared with
their
> > silent partners.  President Roosevelt understood this and pulled the
country
> > out of a depression most of you have no inkling of.
> >
> > c)   The Baltimore Sun ran an editorial pointing out that while our
current
> > leader says we should cut taxes because it is their own money we are
giving
> > back to them, he skips saying it is also their debt.  Yet it was and is
the
> > very creating of the debt that paved the way for the accumulation of
wealth.
> > But somehow when it comes to who should pay for the debt, that becomes a
non
> > progressive burden.  We are taught that when we have money we should pay
off
> > our debts and instead our leaders cut taxes - all the interest that
could have
> > been saved could have paid for the next war.  What a shame.
> >
> > Since no one is reading this I'll stop here.  But for the simplistic
logic of
> > our good professor, there are many other avenues of challenge.
> >
> > stan/gbi
> >
> > Rik Sandberg wrote:
> >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > Yeah, I printed that one out. Think I'll frame it and hang it on the
wall
> > > in my office. We had that happen in Minnesota the last couple of years
when
> > > they did a sales tax rebate. People that were living off welfare or
other
> > > gov't programs were all bitching 'cause they didn't get any money
back.
> > > It's amazing how they can translate paying nothing into less of a
benefit
> > > to them than paying less is to someone else. To top it off, it seem
there
> > > really is a fool born every minute, so there's a lot of them out
there. :-)
> > >
> > > Rik
> > >
> > > At 08:00 AM 1/15/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >Before you read this, it is a commentary on taxes & politics.  It is
just
> > > >one guy's opinion (not even necessarily mine) so don't go crazy with
this
> > > >& start a war.  If you don't like this kind of stuff, delete it now
and
> > > >don't read it. - Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >A VERY simple way to understand the tax laws. Read on -- it does
> > > >
> > > >make you think!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that
every
> > > >day,
> > > >
> > > >ten men go out for dinner. 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 $7, the eighth $12, the ninth
> > > >$18,
> > > >
> > > >and the tenth man -- the richest -- would pay $59.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the
restaurant
> > > >
> > > >every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement -- until one
day,
> > > >the
> > > >
> > > >owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to
reduce
> > > >the
> > > >
> > > >cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost
> > > >$80.00.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So
the
> > > >
> > > >first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But
what
> > > >
> > > >about the other six -- the paying customers? How could they divvy up
the
> > > >$20
> > > >
> > > >windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >The six men 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 end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner
> > > >suggested
> > > >
> > > >that it
> > > >
> > > >would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount,
and
> > > >he
> > > >
> > > >proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so the fifth
man
> > > >paid
> > > >
> > > >nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth
paid
> > > >$9,
> > > >
> > > >the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead
of
> > > >his
> > > >
> > > >earlier $59.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued
> > > >to
> > > >
> > > >eat 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,
> > > >
> > > >but he, (pointing to the tenth) got $7!". "Yeah, that's right,"
exclaimed
> > > >
> > > >the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar, too, ........It's unfair that
he
> > > >got
> > > >
> > > >seven times more than me!". That's true!" shouted the seventh man,
why
> > > >
> > > >should he get $7 back when I got only $2?" 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 he
> > > >didn't
> > > >
> > > >show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But
when it
> > > >
> > > >came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was
very
> > > >
> > > >important. They were FIFTY TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Imagine that!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how
the
> > > >
> > > >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 at the table anymore. Where would that
leave
> > > >the
> > > >
> > > >rest?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Unfortunately, most taxing authorities anywhere cannot seem to grasp
this
> > > >
> > > >rather straight-forward logic!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >T. Davies
> > > >
> > > >Professor of Accounting &Chair,
> > > >
> > > >Division of Accounting and Business Law
> > > >
> > > >The University of South Dakota
> > > >
> > > >School of Business
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >========================
> > > >Paul Grandholm
> > > >C&H Technology
> > > >GrandPower Components Div.
> > > >========================
> > > >_________________________________________________
> > > >Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> > _________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list