Monday, October 10, 2011

OWS: Better Reporting Than You'll See in the NYT

There is a bit of self-congratulation in this piece, but it's merited, as the writer did far better work on the OWS protests than any of the newspaper stories that I've seen.

Elsewhere, Robert Samuelson has a "pity the poor rich" piece in the Washington Post, which is worth reading for laughs. It's a fine example of how to fudge with statistics, for he parrots the line that "the rich pay a lot of taxes." Yeah, so what? Let's look at that, shall we?

A hedge fund operator who takes home a billion a year is taxed at fifteen percent, because they construe it as "income on long-term investments", not pay. Yes, 15% of a billion is a lot of money, $150 million. But if that were taxed as wages, even at the current low tax rate for the rich, he'd have to pay $350 million. At fifteen percent, he's paying less taxes, as a percentage of income, than somebody who makes $36,000.

It's not the amount that's important, it's the percentage. Say Mr. Hedge Fund buys a sports car and goes speeding down the highway, and does 90mph in a 65mph zone. Between the fine and court costs, that'll run him maybe $350, plus his insurance will go up because he'll lose his "safe driver" discount.

$350 is probably a lot of money for you. It is for me. But for Mr. Hedge Fund, hell, $350 probably doesn't cover his wine bill for dinner. His bookkeeper will probably write the check after Hedgy throws the ticket at her and tells her to pay it.

Now say that the speeding fines were based on income, and say that you made $35,000 last year. Let's set the fine for driving at 25mph over the limit at 1% of income. You get dinged for going 90 in a 65 zone, you'll pay $350. Still hurts, right? That ticket would cost ol' Hedgy ten million bucks.

Care to bet that now he'll pay close attention to his speed?

This is why the apologists for the wealthy, like Samuelson, are so wrong. It's not the amount that matters, it's the percentage. And when the rich are paying less, as a percentage of their income, than secretaries and truck drivers, something is seriously wrong with the tax code.

Update: Got a mention in memorandum. I think that's a first for this blog.
on or about

2 comments:

  1. Stewart Dean10/11/2011 8:14 AM

    "Now say that the speeding fines were based on income, and say that you made $35,000 last year."
    That's the way it is in Finland:
    =================================
    A director of the Finnish telecommunications giant, Nokia, has received what is believed to be the most expensive speeding ticket ever.

    Anssi Vanjoki, 44, has been ordered to pay a fine of 116,000 euros ($103,600) after being caught breaking the speed limit on his Harley Davidson motorbike in the capital, Helsinki, in October last year.

    Police say he was driving at 75 km/h (47 mph) in a 50km/h (31 mph) zone.

    In Finland, traffic fines are proportionate to the latest available data on an offender's income.

    Mr Vanjoki has announced he will appeal, because his income has since dropped.

    Mr Vanjoki had to pay a fine equal to 14 days of his income in 1999, which was about 14 million euros ($12.5 million).
    =================================
    'Course Finland socialist and we wouldn't want that........

    Google search on the key words:
    speeding fine finland harley nokia

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stewart Dean10/11/2011 8:21 AM

    And switzerland (where every able-bodied man has a fully automatic SIG ? assault rifle in the closet as a reservist), too!
    ==============================
    One Swedish motorist could be facing a gargantuan speeding fine — up to $962,000 — after he was caught driving 180 mph along a Swiss motorway.

    Police seized the Swede's driver's license and 570-horsepower black Mercedes-Benz after he was released from police custody, The Local, a website that covers Swedish news, reported. He could face a penalty of up to 1 million Swiss francs — or $962,000 — depending on his income level, The Local reported.

    In Switzerland speeding fines are based on the severity of the offense and the offender's income level.
    ===============================
    http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/15681934

    ReplyDelete

House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.

In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.

All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.

(Please don't feed the trolls.)

中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。

COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.