Skattelettelser (in Danish)

Denne her historie er meget tankevækkende:

Der var engang ti mennesker, som sammen gik på restaurant hver eneste dag. Den samlede regning lød altid på 1.000 kr., og da de var opfostret i et velfærdssamfund, blev de enige om, at de gerne ville dele regningen efter samme model, som vi betaler skat. 

Det betød derfor, at de fire første – de fattigste – slap for at betale noget overhovedet. Den femte skulle betale 10 kr., den sjette 30 kr. og den syvende skulle betale 70 kr. Den ottende betalte 120 og den niende 180 kr. Den tiende, som var den rigeste af dem alle, skulle betale 590 kr. 

Sådan spiser de sammen hver dag, og alle er glade for ordningen, så det går rigtig godt. Lige indtil den dag da restauratøren beslutter sig for at give dem rabat, fordi de er så gode kunder. De 10 får 200 kr. i rabat på middagen hver aften, så det nu kun koster 800 kr. for de ti at spise på restauranten. 

Rabatten ændrer ikke ved, at de 10 fortsat er enige om, at regningen skal betales efter samme model, som den vi betaler skat med, og at de første fire fortsat ikke skal betale noget. Med andre ord er situationen uændret for dem. 

Men hvad med de tilbageværende seks personer – dem som hidtil har betalt regningen? De regner på tingene og prøver at dividere de 200 kr. med seks og kommer frem til, at det giver 33,33 kr. pr. person. Hvis de trækker det beløb fra hver enkelt persons hidtidige bidrag, betyder det, at den femte og den sjette person nu ligefrem skal have penge for at spise med. 

Restauratøren foreslår, at de i stedet fordeler rabatten nogenlunde jævnt og igen efter samme model som skattebetalingen. Resultatet bliver, at nu kan også den femte person spise gratis. Den sjette person slipper med 20 kr., den syvende person skal fremover betale 50 kr., den ottende person 90 kr. og den niende person 120 kr. Den tiende skal i stedet for 590 kr. nu betale 520 kr. Alle seks betalende personer slipper med en lavere pris end hidtil, mens de første fire fortsat slipper uden at skulle betale. 

Da de kommer udenfor restauranten, er der pludselig én af de ti, som begynder at sammenligne, hvad hver enkelt har fået ud af de 200 kr. i rabat. 

“Jeg fik kun 10 kr. af rabatten,” siger den sjette person og peger på den tiende person, “men du fik 70 kr.”

“Ja, netop,” siger den femte person, “jeg sparede også kun en tier, men han fik syv gange så meget som mig. Det er jo uretfærdigt.”

“Det er sandt,” råber den syvende person, “hvorfor skal han have 70 kr., når jeg kun fik 20 kr. De rige får altid mest.”

“Hør lige et øjeblik,” skriger de fire første, “vi fik faktisk slet ingenting. Det her system udnytter de fattigste.”

Det ender i opstandelse, og de ni personer omringer den tiende og giver ham tæsk. 

Næste aften kommer han slet ikke til middagen, men de ni andre sætter sig til bordet og indtager middagen som sædvanligt. Da de får regningen, opdager de noget … 

Der mangler 440 kr.

Lederen ovenfor er fra 180grader.dk
 

“I dag bringer vi en lidt speciel leder. Vi ved ikke, hvem forfatteren er, men rygtet vil vide, at han eller hun nok er amerikaner. Vi ved heller ikke, hvem der for nogle år siden oversatte den til dansk og sendte den ud i noget, der ligner Danmarkshistoriens første og mest effektive virale kampagne for et politisk synspunkt. Men nogen siger, at det var ansatte hos Venstre på Christiansborg, der stod bag. Historien er en kommentar til de senere dages debat om det rimelige i, at folk, der har indkomster på middel og højt niveau, får mere ud af regeringens skatteomlægning, end folk der har små (overførsels)indkomster.”

  1. Henrik avatar

    Originalen er da vaesentlig bedre, og moralen mangler paa dansk:

    “Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics

    Sometimes politicians, journalists and others exclaim; “It’s just a tax cut for the rich!” and it is just accepted to be fact, without questioning it. But what does that really mean? Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, the following might help.
    Let’s put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. 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 first four men (the poorest) would still pay nothing.
    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, PhD
    Professor of Economics
    University of Georgia”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *