The Tax System Explained – Using A Beer Analogy. Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beers, 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. And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59. So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20.” Drinks for the ten men would 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 not only would the first four men still be drinking for free, but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay. And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a 100% saving). The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving). The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving). The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving). The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving). And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving). Each of the last six was better off than before, with the first four continuing to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got £1 out of the £20 saving,” 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 £1. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefits than me!” “That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next week the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their 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 to pay for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
The Tax System Explained
Threat Levels
The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist threats and have therefore raised their security level from “Miffed” to “Peeved”. Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to “Irritated” or even “A Bit Cross”. The English have not been “A Bit Cross” since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from “Tiresome” to “A Bloody Nuisance”. The last time the British issued a “Bloody Nuisance” warning level was in 1588 when threatened by the Spanish Armada. The Scots have raised their threat level from “Pissed Off” to “Let’s get the Bastards”. They don’t have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years. The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from “Run” to “Hide”. The only two higher levels in France are “Collaborate” and “Surrender”. The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France’s white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country’s military capability. Italy has increased the alert level from “Shout Loudly and Excitedly” to “Elaborate Military Posturing”. Two more levels remain: “Ineffective Combat Operations” and “Change Sides”. The Germans have increased their alert state from “Disdainful Arrogance” to “Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs”. They also have two higher levels: “Invade a Neighbour” and “Lose”. Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels … The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy. Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from “No worries” to “She’ll be right, Mate”. Two more escalation levels remain “Crikey! I think we’ll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!” and “The barbie is cancelled”. So far no situation has ever warranted the use of the final escalation level.
A Knock On My Door
I had a knock on my door the other day and discovered the ‘creationists’ were in town. I was presented with a book called the Bible and I was informed that the Earth was no more than 5000 years old and the story of Genesis was undeniably true because it was the word of God. Ever since I had a Mormon bloke come around many years ago, introducing himself as ‘Elder Berry’ (I found it funny – he didn’t), I have always liked to have a bit of harmless fun with these people. Now, please understand me, if you have a belief and/or faith, that is your right, and I will fight for your right to have that faith, but don’t expect me to welcome those beliefs when I was having such a peaceful morning minding my own business. I simply asked if ‘Adam had a belly button?’ She was puzzled but said she presumed so. I then explained that he must have been born rather than created, you know, the umbilical cord and all that. I also asked how a whole race of billions of humans could have derived from just one couple. Apparently, the Bible doesn’t explain everything, and I must have faith. My faith was restored when she buggered off! Since this episode, I have been searching for the answer to life, the universe and everything (I know it’s 42) and have at last found something worthy of my belief and faith. I have become a ‘Pastafarian’ and now worship The Flying Spaghetti Monster. It would appear that it is He who created the world and I am now glad I have been touched by his noodly appendages. For more information, please visit The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and for God’s sake, please keep an open mind and accept the site for what it is. I don’t have a problem with faith, but I do have a serious problem with blind faith and organised religion. 20 people believing in some supernatural being is called a CULT. 20 million people believing in the same thing is called a RELIGION. Question to most religions – Please explain where the fuck Dinosaurs come into play.
What Is A Billion?
The next time you hear a politician use the word ‘billion’ in a casual manner, think about whether you want the ‘politicians’ spending YOUR tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases, as follows: a) A billion seconds ago, it was 1959. b) A billion minutes ago, Jesus was alive. c) A billion hours ago, our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. d) A billion days ago, no one walked on the earth on two feet. e) A billion Pounds ago was only 13 hours and 12 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it. Stamp Duty, Tobacco Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Income Tax, Council Tax, Unemployment Tax, Fishing License Tax, Petrol/Diesel Tax, Inheritance Tax (tax on top of tax), Alcohol Tax, V.A.T., Marriage License Tax, Property Tax, Service charge taxes, Social Security Tax, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Workers Compensation Tax, and more! A Billion is not that big a number in the context of Government spending. Scary, isn’t it?
An Open Letter to Laura Schlessinger
In her radio show, Dr Laura Schlessinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr Laura, written by a US man and posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as informative: Dear Dr Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination … End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness (Lev.15:19-24). The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev.1:9). The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev.11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination? 7. Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here? 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? 9. I know from Lev. 1:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16). Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, as we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I’m confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging. Your adoring fan. James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia PS (It would be a damn shame if we couldn’t own a Canadian)
Why can’t I be English?
It seems these days that the English identity is being eroded. For some reason, we have to be British first and English second, whereas the Welsh and Scots (and quite rightly so) are Welsh and Scottish first and British second. When there is an international sporting match (let’s use Rugby Union as an example), the announcement comes across the stadium ‘please be upstanding for the national anthems’. The Welsh have their anthem – ‘Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau’ and the Scots have ‘Flower of Scotland’, and it’s quite right that they should have these anthems. England does not have a national anthem of its own. God Save The King is the national anthem for the United Kingdom. Why should the Welsh and the Scots have a national anthem and not the English? Perhaps a little poem might explain it a bit better:- OUR ENGLAND Goodbye, my England, so long, old friend Your days are numbered, being brought to an end. To be Scottish, Irish or Welsh, that’s just fine, But don’t say you’re English, that’s way out of line! The French and the Germans may call themselves such, As may the Norwegians, the Swedes, and the Dutch. You can say you are Russian or maybe a Dane, But don’t say you are English ever again. At Broadcasting House, that word is taboo, In Brussels, they’ve scrapped it, and in Parliament too. Even schools are affected; staff do as they’re told, They mustn’t teach children about the England of old. Writers like Shakespeare, Milton or Shaw, Do pupils not learn about them anymore? How about Agincourt, Hastings, or Mons? Where England lost hosts of her very brave sons. We’re not Europeans; how can we be? Europe is miles away, over the sea! We’re English from England, let’s all be proud. Stand up and be counted, shout it out loud! Let’s tell Whitehall and Brussels too. We’re proud of our heritage, not just red, white, and blue. Fly the flag of St. George AND the Union Flag! Let the World know ENGLAND is back!
