BS: Bar Stool Economics!!!

Subject: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: GUEST,chuck hemrick
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 12:10 PM

I am reasonably certain that most of you have seen this. I know you understand it or you would
not be in my address book. If you think Man #10 got what he deserved---the beating---please let
me know so I can do further adjustment. I DO NOT begrudge #10 his $10, but a lot of people do
not look at it this way. When I was trying to run a band, I had to deal with this. I had two guys,
each of whom played a half a show and one, at least expected the same amount as those who
played the entire show. Isn't that what Karl Marx decided should be the case?

I DO like the last statement!!
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not
> understand, no explanation is possible.
>

Bar Stool Economics



















Subject: Fw: Bar Stool Economics

A different way of looking at it.............
----- >
>
> Perhaps this will stimulate some reflection among the thinking persons who currently call themselves liberals.
>
>
> 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.
> But what about 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, ladies and gentlemen, 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.

chuck hemrick

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: wysiwyg
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 12:43 PM

One of the hardest lessons I've been trying to learn, these many years at Mudcat, is when to start a new thread with my latest "brilliant" comment and when to add it to an open thread like any other regular wonk.

This thread lacks even the comment, and begins:

I know you understand it or you would not be in my address book.


It's pretty hard for me to pretend this was composed as a Mudcat post when it says right at the top: "I know you understand it or you would not be in my address book.." Don't we have a thread where this could have been added as a mere contribution to an existing discussion, istead of blared as a thread of its own?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: Ythanside
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 07:45 PM

Go easy, Susan, the guy's perched on a bar stool (or even a BAR STOOL!!!), and he's clearly having a bad day. Let's just tiptoe by and be thankful that we're not in his address book. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: The Badger
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 08:01 PM

The point is - he is right.
You appear to have missed the contents for the packaging. Bless.

The Badger

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: bobad
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 08:15 PM

Hark! Is that the distant sound of wealthy whiners I hear.

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:07 PM

Thank you, guest Chuck!
I have been considering where to cast this pearl since so many here are undeserving.
The great western pioneer and LDS church leader Brigham Young gave this advice as part of a speech to the assembled saints in Salt Lake in 1853.

"Some persons will perhaps say- "I do not know how good and how high a fence it will be necessary to build to keep thieves out." I do not know either, except you build one that will keep out the devil. Build a fence which the boys and the cattle cannot pull down, and I will ensure you will keep your stock. Let every man lay his plans so as to secure enough for his present necessities and hand over the rest to the laboring man; keep making improvements, building, and making farms, and that will not only advance his own wealth, but the wealth of the community.

A man has no right with property, which, according to the laws of the land, legally belongs to him, if he does not want to use it; he ought to possess no more than he can put to usury, and cause to do good to himself and his fellow-man. When will a man accumulate money enough to justify him in salting it down, or, in other words, laying it away in the chest, to lock it up, there to be doing no manner of good either to himself or his neighbor.

It is impossible for a man ever to do it. No man should keep money or property by him that he cannot put to usury for the advancement of that property in value or amount, and for the good of the community in which he lives; if he does, it becomes a dead weight upon him, it will rust, canker, and gnaw his soul, and finally work his destruction, for his heart is set upon it. Every man who has got cattle, money, or wealth of any description, bone and sinew, should put it out to usury. If a man has the arm, body, head, the component parts of a system to constitute him a laboring man, and has nothing in the world to depend upon but his hands, let him put them to usury. Never hide up anything in a napkin, but put it forth to bring an increase. If you have got property of any kind, that you do not know what to do with, lay it out in making a farm, or building a saw mill or a wollen factory, and go to with your mights to put all your property to usury.

If you have more oxen and other cattle than you need, put them in the hands of other men, and receive their labor in return, and put that labor where it will increase your property in value."

From the "Journal of Discourses," published in Liverpool, England, from 1854 to 1856. The Journal contains speeches by fifty-five people, including 390 given by Brigham Young.

The story of this publication, important in Utah and western history, was outlined in an article by Ronald G. Watt in "Utah Historical Quarterly," Spring 2007, vol. 76, no. 2.

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 09:53 PM

References for the Brigham Young excerpt:
Utah Hist Quart

Jour Discourses

(Note: The article containing this extract is "Use and Abuse of Blessings," Brigham Young, 1-248. He made similar comments on wealth several times. Some Saints began to accumulate wealth soon after settlement in Utah, and he worried about how they would treat their new wealth. Anyone interested should look into the Journal of Discourses, which is online in its entirety).
Journal of Discourses

Subject: RE: BS: BAR STOOL ECONOMICS!!!
From: Ythanside
Date: 18 Nov 07 - 10:52 PM

Absolutely spot on, Bobad.

Sorry Badger, I perhaps didn't make myself clear. I did read the entire content, and judge it to be of the tabloid tosh variety designed to reinforce and justify the selfishness of the 'let them eat cake' brigade. The kind of people taken in by that thread use phrases like 'these single parents with huge families are bleeding the country dry', or 'I never buy a Big Issue because the vendors just spend the money on drugs and alcohol', sometimes followed by 'did you read about that street beggar who has a Rolls Royce and a big house in Surrey? Making three grand a week he is, the work-shy bastard. Tax free.'

Q, that is most certainly a pearl, a real eye-opener that shall be brought to the attention of some LDS elders of my acquaintance. As a dedicated and life-long swine I shall enthuse over Brigham Young's communist views, and await their reactions. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Bar Stool Economics!!!
From: Peace
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 02:11 PM

And I'm sure that's the point chuck was trying to make with his first post. Thank you for explaining, GUEST.

Subject: RE: BS: Bar Stool Economics!!!
From: GUEST,pattyClink
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 02:32 PM

Here's another story for you, chuckybaby.

40,000 people are sitting on bar stools. The one at the end is a CEO and took home 24.5 million last year. He also laid off 20,000 of the people on the barstools. 500 of the people are executives and lawyers, and they think the economic system is working great, and another 1000 are yuppies who think they have a shot at the 24.5 million someday. That leaves 18,949 who are jerked-around schmucks taking home less after inflation than they did 30 years ago. And actually, everybody's paying for their own drinks. The mathematical question at hand is: how many of the 18,949 give a damn about the problems of the one at the end?

Subject: RE: BS: Bar Stool Economics!!!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 02:38 PM

A beautiful rejoinder, Patty.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bar Stool Economics!!!
From: polaitaly
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 02:47 PM

Chuk, if
"they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes"

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.

it would have been because

The first four men (the poorest) had drunk a teaspoon of beer each
The fifth had drunk a very small glass of beer
The sixth had drunk a small glass
The seventh had drunk a medium glass
The eighth had drunk two medium glasses
The ninth had drunk two large glasses
And the tenth man (the richest) had drunk a barrel

And yes, the man #10 got what he deserved.