Beer and Taxes
A friend sent me the thought experiment below in an email.
I will say this about it. Although I think the core idea or argument is pretty compelling, I don’t agree necessarily with the conclusion. I intend to follow this up with another blog post explaining why I don’t have a problem with progressive taxation and where I think this falls short.
That being said - I think it might generate some interesting discussion so here it is.
——————————————–
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and 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 would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar 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 beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $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 drink for free. What happens to the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They 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 drink his beer. So, the bar 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 pay $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 tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink 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. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’ ‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’ ‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? 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 the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers 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 anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
Posted in politics

April 10th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Sadly, the beer story explains our screwed up American tax system very well. And… I would vote for a flat tax w/little hesitation.
April 14th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Okay, I’ll admit I don’t know a ton about how our tax scale works exactly, but don’t you think in the example that’s probably a little wacky that the 10th guy is paying $59?? I mean, in our real tax system, he’d be off donating a bunch of beer, or putting it into his retirement beer fund to drink after he turned 65 so that he really only paid about $25 out of pocket to the bartender.
And then in the second scenario, they’re only splitting 9 beers, because the 10th guy didn’t show up, remember?
Maybe I’m one of those people who doesn’t understand, so no explanation is possible. Or maybe the scenario is flawed…?
April 17th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
It may approximate the income tax system, assuming the couple guys at the top don’t know how to shield their money. However, it completely ignores the Social Security/Medicare tax system, which eats huge amounts of money, and overtaxes the poor. Because unlike income tax, you are taxed on your first dollar UP TO a max amount in Social Security. So if you make over the max, it is social security tax free. And Medicare is a flat tax, which I pay for something that the politicos, the insurance companies, and the drug companies will destroy by the time I get there.
So you have to add the fact that the bottom 5 guys need to pay a 6 dollar cover charge to sit in the bar, the next three pay 6.50 to sit in the bar, and the top two pay 7 bucks for the vip lounge.
Not to mention those top guys, yeah, they have income to burn that they are investing. And money made from investments is taxed at a way lower rate. And ONLY when you sell, so you can make money for years and if you don’t sell the stock you don’t pay on the gain. So the bottom five are paying 15 dollars for their fish and chips, the next three 12, and the top two 8, but the top two are paying 8 in 2025 dollars so it is more like 3.
Taxes are necessary. Taxes are unfair. Two facts of life. If we could just get over ourselves and actually TALK about these two facts, we could try and make them the least unfair to the folks that can least afford it and concentrate on what is really necessary.
My vote for cost cutting is the farm bill (a few billion in subsidies for corn while it is at record highs anyone?)
-A