当前位置: 首页 > 翻译项目 > Quora问答精选 > 如何向一个五岁孩子解释:对富人征高税不能解决一切?

如何向一个五岁孩子解释:对富人征高税不能解决一切?

如何向一个五岁孩子解释:对富人征高税不能解决一切?

原作者:Matt Dotson 马特·多特森

译者:达妹Dia

告诉你家的五岁小鬼:在家干些活儿来挣零用钱吧。

  • 铺床——5美元
  • 收拾玩具——5美元
  • 把自己的脏衣服放进洗衣间——5美元
  • 按时上床睡觉——5美元
  • 上述事情可以选择也可全做。
  • 爸爸就当政府。

你挣的第一个5美元,爸爸要收1美元,你留着剩下的4美元。爸爸会把这1美元给爷爷,因为爷爷以前为家里做了好多事儿(这就相当于政府的社保支出)。所以如果你做了一件家务活,你就会得到4美元,还要交1美元的税。

你挣的第二个5美元,爸爸要再收2美元,给你留3美元。爸爸会用1美元给你的小妹妹买吃的(相当于政府的食品券[i]支出)。另1美元要给你弟弟,虽然他什么事都不用做(相当于政府的社会福利支出)。要是你干了两件活儿,除去3美元的税,你就挣了7美元。

你挣的第三个5美元,爸爸还要从中再收3美元,给你留2美元。爸爸要用这钱给你的小妹妹再买个新的婴儿床(政府的基础设施建设支出)。这样一来,干完三件活儿,交了6美元的税,你还能挣到9美元。

你挣的第四个5美元,爸爸要从中收取4美元的税,你只能留下1美元。爸爸会用这钱给家里的门换几把新锁(政府的国防支出)。所以干完四件活儿后,你挣了10美元,也交了10美元的税。

要挣多少钱,怎么花,都由你自己决定。假设你想做个有钱人,干了三四件活儿。你有这些选择:

1.  你觉得上面说的都很公平,于是你把活儿都干了,挣个10美元。

2.  你可以只做其中几件,因为你觉得不值得为了1美元就按时上床睡觉

3.  下次家庭会议时,你可以选妈妈来当政府, 因为她向你保证如果你干了四件活儿可以挣到12美元。

4.  你可以给你当会计师的姑姑1美元,因为她告诉给你一项家庭特别细则,那就是干完所有活儿的小孩,可以自己留着13美元,只要交6美元的税,但要给姑姑1美元。

5.  你可以给当游说者[ii]的叔叔3美元,因为他可以说服你爸爸,让他不对你干的第三件和第四件活儿收税。叔叔的条件是,给他3美元,你就可以只交3美元的税,挣到14美元。

你看,因为有钱人总会想方设法让自己不用交那么多税,所以对他们征高税并不能解决经济问题。

希望这个例子可以教给你的孩子:什么是累进税率(如何让富人多交税),富人怎样试图逃税,还有政府将税收都花在那些方面。或许还可以让孩子懂得什么是民主,为什么政府(即爸爸)要是制定了糟糕的政策,你就会投票换一届政府(选妈妈)。或许你家的五岁小鬼还会问,为什么他(她)的弟弟什么都不做还可以拿到1美元。

原文地址:http://www.quora.com/l/boq-matt-dotso


[i] 食品券:美国政府发放给贫民以购买食物的凭证。

[ii] 游说者:(美国)受雇对议员或政府官员等进行游说、疏通,使待决议案通过或废弃的人员。

 

英文原文:

I came across this a while back when I was reading up on this debate from a United Kingdom perspective (so in £ and possibly refers to our tax brackets). It is a great analogy, but uses beer. Perhaps this could be substituted for orange juice at a child’s party(?)

I don’t know for sure how accurate it is – afterall I was looking for information myself when I found it – nor whether the guy who’s name is on it is the guy who wrote it. I’ll let others comment on all that. I just like the metaphor…..

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER

Suppose that once a week, 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.
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 realised 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″
“Yes, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved £1 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 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.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.

如何向一个五岁孩子解释:对富人征高税不能解决一切?
本作品采用知识共享署名-非商业性使用-禁止演绎进行许可。

如何向一个五岁孩子解释:对富人征高税不能解决一切?:等您坐沙发呢!

发表评论

表情
还能输入210个字