Доцент wrote:Наибольшее послабление получили самые богатые, небольшую подачку верхне-средние, а нормальные средние трудящиеся - шиш. Хотя совершенно очевидно, что массовый рост покупательского спроса, а следовательно и количества рабочих мест, зависит именно от них (не говоря уже о моральном аспекте, тут вообще чудовищно - отбирать последнее у семьи, еле сводящей концы с концами и подкидывать жирному паразиту, который никак не может решить, что ему выбрать - "мерседес" или "корвет").
--------------------2001 2002 2003
Lowest 20% 2.6% 1.9% 2.0%
Second 20% 12.0% 9.3% 9.5%
Middle 20% 18.2% 13.9% 14.2%
Fourth 20% 25.8% 20.7% 20.8%
Next 15% 25.1% 23.0% 23.4%
Next 4% 9.1% 11.8% 11.5%
Top 1% 7.3% 19.4% 18.6%
Уверяю Вас, если Вы посмотрите, кто сколько платит налогов, то выяснится, что top 1% платит ГОРАЗДО больше 7.3% (или даже 18.6%) налогов (а именно - около половины), а такската они получили меньшую долю.
Ctrl-C wrote:Смотрим: семья с менее, чем вдвое большим taxable income (то, что считал Alkiev) сэкономила втрое больше на налогах.
OOOO wrote:Sullen wrote:Gennadiy, ну ответьте, пожалуйста красивой женщине.
Sullen,
я прочитал эту фразу несколько раз но так и не смог однозначно истолковать. У меня возникло ощущение легкого patronising подтекста вроде "милашка, тут мужики серьезный базар ведут" но я конечно могу и ошибаться. Вы не проясните какой именно смысл Вы вкладывали в комплимент внешности уважаемой Елены?
Доцент wrote:Наибольшее послабление получили самые богатые, небольшую подачку верхне-средние, а нормальные средние трудящиеся - шиш. Хотя совершенно очевидно, что массовый рост покупательского спроса, а следовательно и количества рабочих мест, зависит именно от них (не говоря уже о моральном аспекте, тут вообще чудовищно - отбирать последнее у семьи, еле сводящей концы с концами и подкидывать жирному паразиту, который никак не может решить, что ему выбрать - "мерседес" или "корвет").
Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics
Posted Feb. 26, 2004
Insight received the following e-mail recently and wanted to share it with our readers. The e-mail attributes the "lesson" to David R. Kamerschen, a distinguished professor of economics at the University of Georgia.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, 10 men go out for dinner. The bill for all 10 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.
The 10th man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The 10 men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"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 10 only cost $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 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 each 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, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The 10th now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
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 $1 out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the 10th man and exclaimed, "But he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved $1, too. It's unfair that he got 10 times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 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 10th and beat him up.
The next night the 10th man 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 something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our 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. There are lots of good restaurants in Europe and the Caribbean.
Хворобьев wrote:"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."
Alkiev wrote:
[/quote]
Gennadiy wrote:Ctrl-C wrote:Смотрим: семья с менее, чем вдвое большим taxable income (то, что считал Alkiev) сэкономила втрое больше на налогах.
А вас не смущает, что эта семья с менее, чем вдвое большим (а реально всего на 30% большим) taxable income изначально платила более чем в 2 раза больше налогов?
Меня смущает например.
Хворобьев wrote:На всякий случай - привожу:Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics
Posted Feb. 26, 2004
Insight received the following e-mail recently and wanted to share it with our readers. The e-mail attributes the "lesson" to David R. Kamerschen, a distinguished professor of economics at the University of Georgia.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, 10 men go out for dinner. The bill for all 10 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.
The 10th man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The 10 men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"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 10 only cost $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 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 each 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, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The 10th now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
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 $1 out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the 10th man and exclaimed, "But he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved $1, too. It's unfair that he got 10 times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 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 10th and beat him up.
The next night the 10th man 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 something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our 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. There are lots of good restaurants in Europe and the Caribbean.
But somebody wiil be dumb enough not to get this even now. That's for sure. Хворобьев wrote:MaxSt wrote:Вот тут аналогия хромает - в реальной жизни цена увеличилась, а не уменьшилась...
MaxSt,
Вы полагаете, что басня Крылова "Однажды лебедь, рак и щука" поднимает насущные вопросы животноводства?
шпиён wrote:Хворобьев wrote:На всякий случай - привожу:Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics
Posted Feb. 26, 2004
Excellent explanation for... economically challenged.
Как-же, семья с доходом 60 штук получит в три раза меньше, чем семья с доходом 80! Это же несправедливо 
Ctrl-C wrote:Но нам ведь тут пытались показать налоговые послабления на 3К для средней семьи, а это оказалось немного не так. Где-то раза в три.
Ctrl-C wrote:У нас тут, кстати, все больше таких наклеек на машинах: "True republicans don't support Bush".
