An amusing story, which has been circulating for years (see http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp) - mostly by right wing advocates of the affluent.Let's put this in a slightly more realistic way.
The accuracy of the numbers is in doubt. At least a few of the very richest would be included in those who are paying nothing for lunch. And even minimum wage workers pay social security, state and local taxes - no free lunch for them. In fact, a much higher percentage of low income workers discretionary (not for essentials) income goes for taxes.
> 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 poorest people at the dinner can select only certain items from the menu, which are of smaller portions, and may or may not be made from the best or freshest raw materials.
The richest man at the dinner lets the waitstaff know that, if he doesn't get larger portions in his dinner, as well as a free dessert, he will take his business elsewhere. He also slips small payments to certain waitstaff people to ensure that he gets larger portions, that his wine glass is kept filled, that infants are not seated nearby, and that nobody around him lights up a cigarette. He also insists that his share of the bill be reduced, probably citing the "$59 out of $100" story as evidence that he's being charged unfairly. He may even have set up an arrangement with the waitstaff where the other customers' bills total up to the full $100, and his payment is quietly refunded to him when no one else is looking.
---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
