Bar stool economics

[Surgenator]

How are you defining "marginal tax cut"? I take it you mean a reduction in the marginal tax rate?

Whatever the percent pay distribution was for the $100, apply that same percent distribution to the $80.

So if the richest man paid $60 dollars when the bill was $100 he should pay $48 dollars when the bill is $80? The richest man still gets the biggest refund or biggest liability drop in dollar terms looking at it from that way.

Why did you change your standard of what was considered fair? You first measure of what was considered fair was how much % savings each person got. Now your considering the total amount saved. You have to be consistent if we want to get anywhere. That was one of the criticism in the link I gave you about this bar stool economics.

This is what a marginal tax cut would look like if you matched it the % spend.

Original Cost -> New Cost -> % Savings
$59.00 -> $47.20 -> 20%
$18.00 -> $14.40 -> 20%
$12.00 -> $9.60 -> 20%
$7.00 -> $5.60 -> 20%
$3.00 -> $2.40 -> 20%
$1.00 -> $0.80 -> 20%

Yes, the rich and poor do share some services. Here are some that they don't.
http://business.time.com/2013/01/30/bad-...oure-rich/
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_2...gage-rates

I skimmed these and they aren't about government services. One claimed rich people pay less for auto insurance and another claimed rich people get better interest rates on mortgages.

I already gave you links in my previous post on how the rich get tax deductions that are not avaliable to the rest of the population. A tax deductions is effectively a tax cut. These other links show how business are unfairly burdening the poor.

You have to ask yourself, Heywood, what should be the standard which we base our tax rates on? For me, it is effort+ability = financial mobility. And there has to be a minimum effort+ability that gives you a living wage.