84 votes

The math of your slavery.

[Thanks again to all. The math is complete! I just need to plugin and hookup all the footnotes. I promise to do that as soon as I can. In the meantime, if you have any questions on a specific line, please ask. Also, if you think of any costs that I forgot, or have an issue with one of my figures, please let me know.]

Your slavery is well hidden. Not everyone understands it when I say that the government steals 70%+ of your life because they haven't seen the math. So I am going to break this down for everyone. I will try to reference sources where possible. Instead of going into long explanations for each item, I will foot note the explanations.

Before I go into it though, something which you need to understand is that no one up the food chain pays for anything. All extra costs and expenses are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, so you may not understand that $3 of that milk price is government theft, but it is.

Also, I am not going to differentiate between local, state, and federal taxation. It is all government theft and I see no reason to make a distinction.

Average Household Gross Income : $62,857.00+
Federal Income 25% Bracket (-----) : $ 6,876.00-
Estimated State Tax Bracket ( 5%) : $ 3,142.00-
Social Security Tax (12.4%) : $ 7,794.00-
Unemployment insurance, etc ( 2%) : $ 1,257.00-

---
So your estimated "net" is : $43,788.00+
Inflation*1 ( 10%) : $ 4,378.00-
Sales Tax ( 6%) : $ 2,364.54-
Compliance SOX* ( 0.1%) : $ 43.00-
Compliance General ( 0.5%) : $ 218.00-
---
Adjusted Spendable "wealth" : $36,784.00+
---

[Vehicle Ownership]
Gov Taxes Vehicle Ownership : $ 200.00-
Gov Extortion(1 ticket/y) : $ 300.00-
Gov Mandate (Insurance $150/m) : $ 1800.00-
Fed Fuel Tax ($.495/g, 15g/w) : $ 386.00-

After Vehicle Taxes/Theft : $34,098.00+

[Housing Costs]
Property Taxes ($150k@1.5%) : $ 2250.00-
Ordinance Compliance*2 ($5k/y@2%) : $ 100.00-
Trash/Water Service (used or not) : $ 480.00-

After Housing Taxes/Theft : $31,529.00+

Wow, we haven't even fed ourselves and the government has already looted around 50% in DIRECT and easy to understand costs. Just wait until we get to the indirect costs!

[General Living]
Food Price Controls* ($300/m@10%) : $ 360.00-
1 Week Vacation (Hotel $100/n@15%) : $ 105.00-
School Supplies (2 Children $100/c) : $ 200.00-
Utility Taxes ($300/m@10%) : $ 360.00-

Which brings our total wealth to : $30,504.00+

Whew... That's it right? It's been rough but we seem to still have some left. First, you have to remember that the above is JUST what government takes, forces, or controls. That doesn't include ANYTHING tangible, just the taxes on tangible goods and services! And unfortunately, we aren't done.

[More pain]
Healthcare Mandate (Family Plan) : $14,700.00-
(Or if you opt for the fee, it can be considerable but somewhat cheaper!)

Government taxation and compliance however is not a "specific" cost. It, in fact, has would I call a 10% life. At each stage, it has an impact. For instance, when you buy a stereo, you are also paying for fuel taxes in transportation, tariffs on import, regulation and compliance overhead for that company. Who in turn, is paying the same costs for their suppliers, etc. The ability to calculate this 10% life in the form of higher prices is almost impossible in complexity. But given the number of hands that these things pass through before you ever see it, I think it is more than fair to take off about 10% of our initial "Adjusted Spendable Income" of 36,784.00 creating a cost of $3,678.00.

Actual wealth after gov interference to : $12,126.00

In closing, I want to say this. What prompted me to do the math is that when I started to do well ($60k range), my friends who were still making 15-20k looked at me like I was rich, but for some reason, I always seemed to be just as bad or worse off than them. Some of the math is impossible to know, and so where there is no clear answer, I made a conservative guess.

So in actuality, you are only circulating about $12k if you make/spend 60. The rest belongs to our masters. And don't even get me started on the corporate masters which take away what little is left.

I have no clear way to correctly estimate what the cost of goods and services would be without this interference but what I can say is that they leave you with only 19.2% of your initial "wealth".

This is why we can't have nice things. :)

Various Sources:

http://fairmark.com/reference/index.htm

http://budgeting.thenest.com/average-american-household-budg...

http://taxfoundation.org/article/state-individual-income-tax...

http://www.ehow.com/how_4828711_calculate-social-security-ta...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_tax#United_States

http://www.auditnet.org/articles/Sarbanes-Oxley_Implementati...

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/falling-prices-why-is-...

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-24/health/health.care.penalt...

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/15/business/fi-hiltzik15

Edit:
Thanks to Dr.No for pointing out that I had left off an inflation chart from the references:
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"It removes the dollar from

"It removes the dollar from both sides so that it can be seen independently. You do see why that matters? So long as the value of the dollar in relation to itself is what you are attempting to calculate, then you must find a reasonable mechanism to isolate it. The CPI does this by averaging pieces of data that make it look favorable. The old system, did it in a more honest fashion."

Your claim that the CPI is making itself look favorable is just that, a claim. The old system made it more unfavorable, by not looking at how the market values something. The hedonic methods used by the CPI take into affect how the market values something..they actually look at how the market applies its capital to products.

"The metals approach eliminates more variables than even the old CPI does."

Yeah, no it doesn't. You above just said how gold/silver are subject to price shocks.

"If you want to prove it wrong, do the math, and prove me wrong, but simply saying you "think" I am wrong is not good enough."

I've done the math in plenty of posts. It is up to you to look at it...

Again, I will leave you with this: Price of gold has gone up 5x since 2000. Price of silver nearly 10x. Has the dollar llost 90% of its value? Has it lost 50% of its value?

"In fact, the data you have put out there, claiming it debunks my metals approach, actually prove it, if you took the time to go do it."

I'm not going to prove your point for you. Do the math.

"Shadowstats mechanism is -not- throwing on some random number. Your quote doesn't even come close to saying that, but once again you attempt to infer something without out right lying about it."

Yes, that is exactly what the quote says. He adds an arbitrary number to the government-reported number to get his value. That is why the graphs can be overlayed on each other perfectly.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

wolfe's picture

"I’m not going back and

"I’m not going back and recalculating the CPI. All I’m doing is going back to the government’s estimates of what the effect would be and using that as an ad factor to the reported statistics.”"

There is your quote again. Not what you claim it says.

http://www.kitco.com/scripts/hist_charts/yearly_graphs.plx

Ummm... Not sure what the hell you are talking about. You do know that 10x is multiplier, correct? 10*9=90. If you can find a place to sell gold at $90/oz PLEASE tell me!

Once again, you throw out garbage, expect to not get called on it. And yes, in terms of the economy, I do believe that it has lost that much value.

Or have you not been paying attention to all of the devaluing via printing and credit that has been taking place?

And you saying, "this spike happened which would have made everything else out of whack" IS NOT doing the math. It's only one half of the equation, and it ignores the averaging that I said to do.

Do both sides of the equation, after averaging, and show me where it is consistently wrong. Consider it a challenge. I am more than happy to admit it is a bad indicator if you can do that. Problem is, you still haven't.

I am also not sure why you keep referencing gold. I never said gold was a good indicator, and in fact said precisely why it wasn't.

Silver and cheaper/plentiful metals on the other hand, are perfect.

What I am talking about is the exact same thing that is done to calculate the value of the USD, except that they use other fiats (so it only calculates it's value in relation to the slide of other currencies so is not valid). Or against the CPI which is a pick and choose, weighted system designed to put the government in the best light.

The only real difference, is that I am suggesting you use something that has a constant value, not effected by new technologies as much, and not effected by the gradual slide as other FIAT's are.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

"'I’m not going back and

"'I’m not going back and recalculating the CPI. All I’m doing is going back to the government’s estimates of what the effect would be and using that as an ad factor to the reported statistics.'"

AD FACTOR is the key term here. Look at the graphs. He is simply adding a fixed percentage to the government's reported values. You are ignoring this point

"http://www.kitco.com/scripts/hist_charts/yearly_graphs.plx"

Broken link.

"Ummm... Not sure what the hell you are talking about. You do know that 10x is multiplier, correct? 10*9=90. If you can find a place to sell gold at $90/oz PLEASE tell me!"

You fail at math. My point is that the price of gold has gone up 5x since 2000. If that tracks with inflation, the dollar must have lost 80% of its value. Same with silver; which has gone up 1x. Has the dollar lost 90% of its value?

"Once again, you throw out garbage, expect to not get called on it. And yes, in terms of the economy, I do believe that it has lost that much value."

Yes, you believe. That it is. What price indications show that this is the case? Do cars all of a sudden cost 150,000? Is the average house price now 2 million? Does milk cost 20 dollars a gallon?

"And you saying, "this spike happened which would have made everything else out of whack" IS NOT doing the math. It's only one half of the equation, and it ignores the averaging that I said to do."

It is over a ten year period. Here, look at this:
http://www.garynorth.com/public/3416.cfm

"Do both sides of the equation, after averaging, and show me where it is consistently wrong. Consider it a challenge. I am more than happy to admit it is a bad indicator if you can do that. Problem is, you still haven't."

"The only real difference, is that I am suggesting you use something that has a constant value, not effected by new technologies as much, and not effected by the gradual slide as other FIAT's are."

See, to you, silver and gold have constant value...because you say they have constant value. Your logic is circular. Silver and gold do not have constant value.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

"is better than, you say "my

"is better than, you say "my bullshit" number?"

Yes. 10% inflation/year is absolutely insane.

"My metals approach is best averaged over the years to account for weird spikes, and it is not always accurate due to other factors, as we have covered, but is far more accurate than the Core CPI will ever be."

You haven't conclusively proven the latter half of the statement. These aren't wierd spikes, these are major spikes.

Again, from 1985 to 2005, the price of silver was very constant. However, prices went up, the money supply went up, etc.

"In 1930 $0.12 purchased a loaf of bread. Calculated against it's silver content (90%), that was worth about $2.00 in today's silver market.

Not sure about you, but that is about what I pay for my bread. Give or take based on coupons, etc."

Purely anecdotal. I can get a loaf of bread for 99 cents somewhere. Other places it is 4.00. Anecdotes aren't data. Heck, the .12 cent number you are getting comes from government numbers. Using your own numbers, you can see how the math does not add up with many things. From 1970 to 1980, the price of silver went up 10x. Did costs of things go up 10x? Another example; silver has gone up nearly 10x in the past 22 years. Have food prices gone up 22x? Have gas prices? Have housing prices? Have hamburger prices?

"Is it always accurate? No. Is it better working with a softened average to account for spikes/dips. Yes. Is it more accurate than what the government tells us, yes."

What the government literally does is calculate inflation, by, you know, looking at the actual numbers. The government literally looks at the .12 cents in 1920 and the 4 dollars today and says, hmm, 3000% inflation. You would look at the price of silver and say because the price of silver has gone up 2300%, that must be how much the price of bread has gone up. It is intellectually lazy.

"The USD is what loses value via inflation."

True. But the most meaningful way to look at real inflation, is to look at wages/price. That tells you how valuable your labor is. That is the key principle. If we didn't have inflation, do you think wages would have risen as much as they did? Do you think, as Ron Paul does, that gas would be 12 cents a gallon with personal income at 50,000 if only we hadn't had inflation all those years? It is a ridiculous supposition.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

wolfe's picture

Interesting...

You call it anecdotal and yet it is pulled from aggregated data. Including government tracking for the cost of goods, because we have no other source for that data.

But we do have a source for metals. What's interesting to note, is that yes, in fact 70-80, the cost of things DID go up that much, or do you not recall the the price fixing that government implemented in order to STOP "inflation" from going to the actual place it was supposed to be at?

1985 to 2005 was actually a fairly flat economy in general. As I said, the price of silver better reflects the state of the economy than pretty much anything else.

Food is a semi-arbitrary measure. Being a staple and volatile in terms of turn over makes it one of the best indicators, as well as gas, and home values.

The Core CPI, excludes all ACTUAL living expenses to show that magic <4% number.

Further, when you do a year over year average, it normalizes the comparison well more than enough to be representative of the actual economy. As opposed to taking one off examples from snapshots, which are more subject to other market values.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

"You call it anecdotal and

"You call it anecdotal and yet it is pulled from aggregated data. Including government tracking for the cost of goods, because we have no other source for that data"

I call YOU saying the price of bread is 2.00 anecdontal. Don't put words into my mouth.

"But we do have a source for metals. What's interesting to note, is that yes, in fact 70-80, the cost of things DID go up that much, or do you not recall the the price fixing that government implemented in order to STOP "inflation" from going to the actual place it was supposed to be at?"

According to the very website you provided, they didn't.

"1985 to 2005 was actually a fairly flat economy in general. As I said, the price of silver better reflects the state of the economy than pretty much anything else."

Oh man, this is gold. Flat economy? Are you kidding me? What does that even mean? Are you saying GDP didn't go up (it did). Are you saying that there was no money printing (there was). Are you saying prices didn't go up (they did)? Are you saying buying power didn't go up (they did).

"Food is a semi-arbitrary measure. Being a staple and volatile in terms of turn over makes it one of the best indicators, as well as gas, and home values."

Food is an indicator. Gas is an indicator. So are other things. Food and gas are both subject to supply shocks. It is foolish to only use a few things as an indicator of inflation.

"The Core CPI, excludes all ACTUAL living expenses to show that magic "

Core CPI includes home values/rent. Just not food or energy, because they are incredibly volatile.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

wolfe's picture

ok...

We'll have to agree to disagree since you don't want to do any of the actual research:

"According to the very website you provided, they didn't."
Since you didn't actually read what I said. Maybe, you will listen to these guys.

http://www.econreview.com/events/wageprice1971b.htm

Wage/price controls coupled with a disconnection with the gold standard allowed for the government to hide a great deal through controlling the economy directly and subsequently creating bubbles. As the years go by, the bubbles have less and less positive impact to counter the effects of previous bubbles. The first bubble after disconnection was almost a flawless fix.

"Flat economy? Are you kidding me? What does that even mean? Are you saying GDP didn't go up (it did). Are you saying that there was no money printing (there was). Are you saying prices didn't go up (they did)? Are you saying buying power didn't go up (they did)."

Really? It was flat in terms of standard of living. Things got to a pretty good place, early on, and then stabilized. Most people's standard of living did not fluctuate greatly over that period of time, for better or worse.

"Food is an indicator. Gas is an indicator. So are other things. Food and gas are both subject to supply shocks. It is foolish to only use a few things as an indicator of inflation."

So why exclude them?

"Core CPI includes home values/rent."

Weighted. Included, but given little importance. I would have to fact check that because it has been a while, but am pretty confident of that.

"Just not food or energy, because they are incredibly volatile."

Volatile = Intimately subject to market conditions... i.e. first indicators of inflation.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

"Since you didn't actually

"Since you didn't actually read what I said. Maybe, you will listen to these guys.

http://www.econreview.com/events/wageprice1971b.htm

Wage/price controls coupled with a disconnection with the gold standard allowed for the government to hide a great deal through controlling the economy directly and subsequently creating bubbles."

I don't see how the above has relevance to inflation in the current era. OK, there was inflation in the 70s. What is your point?

"As the years go by, the bubbles have less and less positive impact to counter the effects of previous bubbles. The first bubble after disconnection was almost a flawless fix."

How did the talk of bubbles come into this? The federal reserve and monetary policy do far more to create bubbles than inflation.

"Really? It was flat in terms of standard of living."

Proof? This is a ridiculous assertion to anyone who lived during that time. The standard of living was on the whole going up, up, up during that time.

"Things got to a pretty good place, early on, and then stabilized. Most people's standard of living did not fluctuate greatly over that period of time, for better or worse."

In any case, the price of silver should have been up, then stabilized. Instead, it was just stable. Also, you never claimed that silver correlates with standard of living. You claimed that silver correlates with the value of the dollar. The money supply was expanded during this time, and prices went up...so clearly any way you slice it, the dollar lost value. So the silver should have gained in value, but it didn't.

"So why exclude them?"

Because they are subject to supply shocks. Remember, the CPI reports data season to season not just year to year. The MIT billion prices project shows that if you smoothen the volatility of goods including energy and food, year-to-year, the inflation difference compared to the CPI does not change very much.

"Volatile = Intimately subject to market conditions... i.e. first indicators of inflation."

Or just very susceptible to supply shocks. When war in the ME broke out and gas prices quadrupled over a month's span, was that an indicator of coming inflation or an indicator that there was an oil supply shock.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

wolfe's picture

"I don't see how the above

"I don't see how the above has relevance to inflation in the current era. OK, there was inflation in the 70s. What is your point?"

Umm, that was the point. And the point was that inflation was actually much greater than illustrated by simple price/wage calcs because there were controls in place.

"How did the talk of bubbles come into this? The federal reserve and monetary policy do far more to create bubbles than inflation."

The point was that they used those first few bubbles in the 70s to mask how horrible the economy was doing in terms of inflation.

Seriously, enough talk on this. If you want to prove me wrong, do the math as I described and prove me wrong. I have no problem admitting that I am wrong, if you can prove it. I simply know that I am not because I have done the math, and been double checked by people much better at it than me.

But this crap of constantly trying to shift the subject is irritating. Either you can prove me wrong or not.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

Sorry, but that is just

Sorry, but that is just grossly incorrect. Of course, it depends on how long you live, but on average, you get 85% of your Social Security back (this includes what you pay, what your employer pays, and 5% growth per year). Women live longer and get closer to 100%; Blacks live less and get closer to 70%, just for comparison.

Social Security grows a decent bit more than inflation. In fact, in the 60s Social Security growth was purposefully capped; any growth over a certain amount is confiscated by the government.

I will look over your inflation statitistics and get back to you.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Good breakdown and comments

However, there is much more that can be shown without too much extra trouble. I've done this one a few times...

First off, I don't place all the blame on the government because of two factors. 1. The banks promote (buy) the system of corruption that chases that last vote or three needed to pass some legislation so their buddy pharma industry can maintain their monopoly. (replace with any other industry) 2. The ultimate profits of the corporations of any industry mostly all filter back to the banks at some point.

Back on gov mandated costs...
Because we have let our government install a private central bank whose system constantly inflates, we have numerous other costs. Those are passed on to the customers in the form of every single expense embedded into a given product or service. To add to that, this money is devalued cumulatively.

Before I outline that, let's look at disposable income which is what people really think of in terms of their wealth. If I earn $100k and have $400/month left over after mandatory 'living' expenses, then $4,800 is what I feel like my wealth is. It's also what I can freely spend money on, save or invest. If my mandatory expenses go up 1% on something that's already 30% of my gross, that's $300/yr or $25/month expense. At this point, I have lost 6.25% of "my wealth". If my mandatory living expenses went up by the inflation rate (realistically, 5%) and what I wanted to purchase rose in cost by 25% (which is ONLY based on what "I" purchase), my wealth now seems to be $40/year or $3.33/month (not $4,800/yr). This means the true inflation rate related to what I feel like I have left over is 92% per year!

But that's not all...
Our purchasing power (spendable income) vs. inflation is further undermined by the fact that our incomes have not changed much over that time. If we count this, we have to add the culmination of each year's inflation on top of the following years. Thirty years ago, I made more doing concrete construction on day one of the job than my kids do now after 3 years seniority. Twenty years ago, my fiance made 30% more as a general 'nurse' than she can now because she's not a full RN. 10 years ago, I made 60% more as a programmer than I do now with my duties outsourced. Over those decades, my mandatory expenses have gone up roughly 25% and my discretionary spending costs have inflated more than 200%. Running those numbers, I should be way more in debt than I am.

Now for the good side...
The good news is that nearly 1/3rd of our non-government spending goes to banking of some kind and another 1/3rd to insurances. If we can save half of the banking expenses, that's more than double the extra disposable wealth. If we then take that and use it to STOP ALL INTEREST PAYMENTS, we get most of the rest back. If we continue save-stacking like this and cut insurance costs, repeated 'planned obsolete' purchases, and other monthly social 'dues', we can increase our final net disposable income up to 4-5 times.

This correlates well with the amount of dollar deflation, the man-hour productivity increase and the increased product purchasing trend over the entire last century. It also correlates with the increased relative wealth of the banks vs. the general population.

Well Stated wolfe :

Puts things in perspective.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

It's about time to seriously

It's about time to seriously consider taking our skills to another country.

Umm, if I'm a slave, then how

Umm, if I'm a slave, then how come 98.7% of my income is unearned?

there was an article on this on giavellireport

Basically as a 100k a year californian (lower middle class unable to afford 700k housing) it breaks down like this

Fed Tax: 30%
State Tax: 10%
SS: 12.5%
Unemployment/disability: 2%
------------------------------
57.5% = you keep 52.5 % or $52,500

Add to that inflation of 10% a year. So basically in the past decade prices have doubled. 2 dollar gas to 4 dollar gas. 50 cent candy bars to 1 dollar candy bars. So this rate of inflation takes half of your pay.

25,000

Ok now lets deduct the property taxes which pay for all your vehicles

25,000 - 5,000 = 20,000

OK now lets deduct mandatory insurance: property and auto

20,000 - 2000 = 18,000

Let's assume you spend 100 a month on gas. deduct 30 bucks for gas taxes. Thats 360 a year

$17,640

So without even getting into expenses related to living, you receive only 17k out of the 100k you originally earn.

Unsurprisingly, that is

Unsurprisingly, that is terrible math.

Inflatnoi is being grossly, grossly, overstated. For the most part, inflation keeps up with wage increases. Prosperity increases come from production gains; ie, the cost of living goes down.

Hell, the price of gas in the 70s was more than it is now. The price of milk has gone up about 4x since 1950, even though income has gone up 30x.

The fed targets mild inflation. Businesses know that they can expect a mild amount of inflation each year; before this policy, there were wild swings year-to-year. I guess they could target mild deflation, but this has many problems itself (punishes spenders, punishes borrowers, hurts trade, and has a natural end, etc. etc.)

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Sir

with all due respect I make double what by parents made and I am no where close to he standard of living that they achieved 30 years ago.

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

That sounds like an

That sounds like an anecdote.

The average American makes 4 times as much as what he made in 1980 (30 years ago). http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104652.html

Median income is up about 2.5x since 1980. Without inflation, it has been flat.

Americans can buy more with their labor than they could in any time in history (excluding the period between 2007-2009). This is true even though American labor has lost strength to China, India, and Europe, and even though demand from those three places has risen in the marketplace, causing price increases everywhere.

Think about it this way. Food is much cheaper than it was in the 80s, in respect to wages. Technology is way, way, up. Your parents didn't have access to the internet. Your computer and car would put theirs to shame. Your cell phone/tablet etc. would do the same. You have access to medical care they could only dream of. You can fly anywhere in the world for less than what your parent paid, even in 1980 dollars. Etc. Etc.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

If you're paying that much in

If you're paying that much in taxes, then you need to fire your accountant.

I Think You Forgot Some

Everything you purchase has the cost of all those taxes included.

When you buy insurance, you have to buy more to cover the cost of the taxes you'll pay to replace a loss.

They say that when half your income is taken, most will stop working. And, when half the people work to support the other half, they will stop working.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

i think it comes down to the life they leave you with

If after what they take you can afford a decent house in a decent neighborhood, a beer with friends every now and then, a nice meal every now and then.

lets look at california. A starter house is 500k and thats a ramshackle shack. in a better neighborhood its closer to 800k. Mortgage on 800k house is 5000 a month. taxes and insurance add another 1000. so 6,000 a month. If you earn 120k a year, you will take home about 5,000 a month. So all single people and single worker families have no chance in hell of getting housing. OK assume the wife works and makes another 80k. Even taking home 9,000 a month, it's very tight to buy a starter house. So if one person ever gets out of work, forget it.

IMHO

I recommend renaming the article 'The Calculus of Your Slavery'.

"The casualty of partisanship is objectivity."

reedr3v's picture

After working through the constructive

critiques below, your work deserves wider publication. It would be great to team up your analysis with a graphic chartist or a Y.T. video producer.

wolfe's picture

Thank you.

And I want to make sure it is clear that I appreciate the criticism, so I don't want anyone to stop. Questions and comments will result in either footnoted explanations in the final work, or modified numbers.

I appreciate all the comments, including and especially the criticism. Only a fool never wants to hear opposing viewpoints, because that is what helps us strengthen our arguments.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

I handed out some copies of this at the

wolfe's picture

That's awesome...

:) I hope the next revision would make an even stronger impact.

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/

From my Central Committee Chair

They responded immediately:

Interesting breakdown. Recognizing that these are “best guestimates” and in some cases overly broad, as I worked my way through the numbers I couldn’t resist making some comments. They also appear to be for a working person, not a retiree (some 20%+ of the population) For example:

1) Fed Income tax (25%), with deductions for homeowners and other itemization this can be significantly lowered to the 5%-10% range ( I now because my Fed taxes work out to that range);

2) Social Security Tax is 7.65% the other half is paid by employers unless the person is self-employed.

3) I think Unemployment Insurance is also paid by the employer not the employee.

4) Inflation hasn’t been in the 10% range since the days of Jimmy Carter. 1%-2% is more realistic as 3% is considered “optimal”. More recently the CPI inflation has been coupled with the “Quantitative Easing” which is devaluing the dollar at an uncertain percentage.

5) As of July 1, Sales Tax in Fort Bragg is 8.875%

6) The number of people getting one ticket/year is small. Most tickets are gathered by a relatively small number of people so this should not even be a factor. The last time I got a ticket was in November 1995 (although I did get pulled over and given a warning a couple of years ago).

7) Federal Gas Tax is 18.5 cents/gal and 35.3 cents/gal CA state tax (total 53.8 cents/gal) PLUS the state and local sales tax, which at $4/gallon would add an additional 35 cents/gallon (@8.75 %)

8) The Obamacare Health Tax hasn’t yet gone into effect and wouldn’t reach $2,000/year until 2016. But what is really galling for all the promises that taxes would not be raised for those under whatever income level you choose, the reality is that Obamacare has caused insurance premiums to skyrocket thereby becoming a “tax-in-kind”.

9) And these are just the obvious comments.

Nonetheless, the point of the breakdown is well made.
..........................................................

I share this so you can see, being on a Central Committee, like DP, has it's benefits in resources.

TOTALLY WRONG!

1) Fed Income tax (25%), with deductions for homeowners and other itemization this can be significantly lowered to the 5%-10% range ( I now because my Fed taxes work out to that range);

NO! Anyone at lower middle class level (aka 100k) hits the 32 % tax level. Deductions? Ha! 4,700 bucks? doesn't make much a dent in the rate.

2) Social Security Tax is 7.65% the other half is paid by employers unless the person is self-employed.

Well true but many of us ARE self employed.

3) I think Unemployment Insurance is also paid by the employer not the employee.

Well 2% for disability/ssdi is the same as original post

4) Inflation hasn’t been in the 10% range since the days of Jimmy Carter. 1%-2% is more realistic as 3% is considered “optimal”. More recently the CPI inflation has been coupled with the “Quantitative Easing” which is devaluing the dollar at an uncertain percentage.

Utterly wrong. shadowstats.com. Just because the govt lies about it doesnt make what they say correct. Our inflation is 8-10% a year. But that doesn't mean that its simply 10% less income. Because incomes are static. If you take the case from 2000 to today, the dollar has lost half its value but salaries are the same. Therefore, its roughtly a 50% loss due to the the federal reserve and inflation of the money supply.

Here are a couple things

2) The employer "pays" for this, but how do they do it? It is a cost that gets transferred on to the employee in the form of a lower wage. It's the same mentality as the customer having to pay for the gas tax of gas used in the truck to transport the goods.

3) Same situation. It's paid for in lower wages.

4) Mentioned below by wolfe

6) I don't know how wolfe calculated this, but it is revenue extracted through force so it needs to be mentioned. If you take the total amount of ticket fines divided by the # of people is the most honest way. Obviously individual readers can recognizance how "average" they are in that area.

wolfe's picture

I have good explanations for some of your comments.

For instance, reported inflation is at around 4%, but this is a lie as the CPI does not include food and fuel. The most hit inflationary items. I prefer using a Burger King index :). How much more does my lunch cost than it did last year. This is what hit's middle class people the most, and if that is the gauge, the number is MUCH higher than 10%.

Unfortunately, I am on my way out so can't go into more detail at the moment, but will as soon as I can.

Actual inflation as reported by trusted sources hovers close to 10%.

And that is the 25% Tax Bracket. This is an IRS fixed bracket. However, 25% tax bracket does not mean they take 25% of gross. It is slightly more complicated than that. The IRS takes about 10% in the upper end of the 25% tax bracket (which is the cost listed, not 25%. I used the IRS tables to get the figure). If you review the comments below, several others have been confused by this. I wish there was something I could do to make that more clear, but that is the way the IRS works.

Edit: I keep adding to the explanation, but I really do have to run... :) I will come back and address the rest of your concerns as soon as I can...

The Philosophy Of Liberty -
http://www.thephilosophyofliberty.com/