Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2021 The Somerville Times. All rights reserved.
Somerville Stands Together, a coalition of community, environmental, and labor organizations will launch its grassroots effort to pass the Fair Share Amendment and oppose Uber, Lyft and other Big Tech companies’ Prop 22 clone ballot measure. Both measures will be on the November 2022 ballot.
If passed, the Fair Share Amendment would tax incomes above $1 million and raise approximately $2 billion a year for spending on transportation and public education. If passed, Big Tech’s Prop 22 clone would undermine the rights and benefits of workers, shield companies like Uber and Lyft from liability to their customers, and makes Massachusetts taxpayers pick up the tab.
“The same billionaires and millionaires who support the Uber Lyft initiative will be pouring dark money against the Fair Share amendment into Massachusetts,” said Marianne Walles, an SEIU Local 509 member and long-time Somerville resident. “That’s why we have to get out to talk with voters early, before the deceptive and hugely expensive advertising blitz begins.”
On Wednesday, October 13 at 5:30 p.m., Somerville Stands Together coalition leaders (and many others) will gather in Davis Square’s Statue Park to pick up pledge cards to enlist members of their respective organizations to support the campaign. RSVP on Facebook here.
“We’re stepping up to be part of this campaign because we know how important it is to raise new revenue and to defeat the Prop 22 initiative,” said Rand Wilson, a union organizer and community activist. “We also know that the billionaire class is preparing to spend millions for their side to win. That’s why we aren’t waiting for that vote to start building our campaign in Somerville that will take the Fair Share Amendment over the finish line and stop the big tech ballot initiative in its tracks next November.”
If you found this article of interest, please consider sharing it.
HE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
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 ball. “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 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 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 a higher percentage the poorer he was, 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 (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a dollar 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 a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”
“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $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 night 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 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 may 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
LOL – Oh, believe me, we get it. A pretty long-winded way of reaffirming that right wingers are tax dodging bigots though. Still, feel free to have another beer and amuse us with more of the fancy patter. It’s a slow weekend.
For those of you too busy to read this long-winded, half-baked metaphor, I’ll condense: “I’m going to use this grossly exaggerated metaphor to demonstrate my lack of both empathy for poor people and understanding of the underlying goals of the progressive tax system.”
Not only that, it’s hardly original. This thing has been copied/pasted in one form or another ad nauseam for quite some time. “HE TAX” indeed.
Theo, I just have to laugh at the responses your post garnered from the economically illiterate. It’s amazing that all the responses consisted of were attacking you instead of trying to debate the basic fact that if you raise taxes people will leave and find ways to keep more of their hard earned money.
At this point Somerville is ground zero of the liberal, Marxist movement, so trying to educate these people is a waste of time.
Sorry, but none of us are “economically illiterate” – unlike the gullible masses that have been taken in by the lowlife radical right’s greedy agenda. And for the record, no one was attacked. The simple facts on the matter were presented succinctly and in a civil manner. Lying like this only works on your gullible masses.
You want to leave? Good riddance. Real Americans believe in doing their part to sustain an economically equitable society. You’ll love it in Russia, or Afghanistan, or whatever other corrupt totalitarian state suits your fancy. Enjoy.
I just have to laugh.
Hah! That’s all they ever come back with when their B.S. is checked with truthful info: they’re being personally attacked and everybody outside of their gang are “Marxists”
They’re so desperate now
Reagan made this greed fashionable, and now after Trump they think of it as their right. So yeah, take your “hard earned money” somewhere else. Like Casimir said, good riddance.
In their arrogance, these narcissistic boobs are clueless as to just how stupid this “threat” of moving away is. It’s all they’ve got. It’s no threat, kids, it’s a dream come true. So adios, arrivederci, tot ziens, au revoir, slan, adeus, auf wiedersehen, sayonara, do svidaniya, annyeong, and aloha.
Based upon the current tax law, a person who earns a million a year currently pay 20 times mores that a person who earns 50 thousand a year. If you’re fortunate to build an investment portfolio, your earnings from those investents are taxed at a higher rate than wage income. How is this not paying a “fair share” and greedy?
The long-term problem with this initiative is that it opens a Pandora’s box for any category of income to have it’s own tax rate. The legislature can, and most like will, decide at a future date to add an increased tax rate for families making over 100 thousand or for individuals making over a 75 thousand. It minimizes the protest against a tax increase when you only segment a small group of earners at a time.
All one has to do is look at states such as New York and California where similar tax increases were instituted and tax revenues declined. In today’s era where many people can now work anywhere, legislators need to be cognizant of the potential adverse impact this change can have on Massachusetts’ economy.
As an FYI, I’m not a right-winger nor am I a bigot. My general observation over the years however has been that those who rush to call everyone whom they disagree with a bigot is the actual bigot.
Part 1: Needs to be fact checked (it will be).
Part 2: If it walks like a right winger and a bigot, and it talks like a right winger and a bigot…
While the original post is not really an explanation of how our tax system works, it is a good example of how many people, rightly or wrongly, view their fellow American tax payer.
Ironically, the best real life example that would seem to support the explanation was David Tepper. When he left NJ for FL, there was a lot of worry about the budget shortfall that would result from his move. He then moved back to NJ incurring a huge tax increase.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” – the progressive’s ultimate goal.
Sounds good to me!
Leona go for laugh. Not get.