1 | william

October 26th, 2008 at 7:53 am

I’ll bet the waiter doesn’t wear that tie to work again.

Thanks for the laugh.

2 | Pete

October 26th, 2008 at 7:57 am

That’s hilarious, Rob. A lot of Obamunists (not to mention the rest of us, too) are going to be feeling the same anger pretty soon if we let them take this election.

3 | daveg

October 26th, 2008 at 7:57 am

This is also fun and educational for your kids:

Play Monopoly. Wait until some of the kids start to amass a nice pile of money. As they collect rent, take 36% and distribute it to the kids that aren’t doing as well.

If you’re a parent, you know that screams of “That’s not fair!!” are guaranteed.

Use this opportunity to explain the Democratic (mis)definition of the word “fair.”

4 | richard

October 26th, 2008 at 8:02 am

There is a voluntary custom of “tipping out” in many restaurants. That’s when the server share his tips with others working in the restaurant, including the bus boys, hostess, bar back and even some of the cooks. This is somewhat analogous to private charity. It would be interesting to have all the employees vote and force the server to share more of his earning and see what happens to: 1. the amount of ‘charity’ he now gives and 2. the effects this has on the servers quality of service.

5 | dispatches from TJICistan » Blog Archive » redistribution of wealth in practice

October 26th, 2008 at 8:02 am

[...] http://robertbluey.com/blog/2008/10/25/r…; [...]

6 | Rob Schwartz

October 26th, 2008 at 8:09 am

I am high school teacher- I have done experiments with students’ grades- they have to pay a tax over 80% – with tax getting steeper after 90 and 95%.

I often hear- its not fair- I worked for my grade

7 | el duderino

October 26th, 2008 at 8:14 am

One would hope that the newly enlightened waiter would learn at least a couple of lessons. The first being; if your income depends on the good intentions of others one should avoid campaign buttons that half the country will disagree with and perhaps find offensive. The second, larger issue is one of fairness, industry and incentive. I bet he has learned neither.

8 | Mark Strassburg

October 26th, 2008 at 8:17 am

Just thought I would let everyone know that this story came from The Astute Bloggers site. I sent it to my wife who also felt it was a great demonstration of “sharing the wealth.”

9 | Dave Schuler

October 26th, 2008 at 8:19 am

Fortunately, you didn’t announce your intention while your dinner was being served. Otherwise it’s a pretty good formula for getting your soup spat in.

10 | puditius

October 26th, 2008 at 8:37 am

Just don’t go back to that restaurant again!

Read “Waiter Rant” – http://waiterrant.net/

Or buy the book by the same name.

I think your waiter’s response would be that he already redistributes his income to the busboys. But of course, the real point is that you, as the outside third party, decide how the redistribution will work and who the money goes to. I wonder if he will think that deeply into it. But hey, if he were a deep thinker, he’d be a plumber…

Rob Schwartz’s experiment is nice. But the Obama response is “pass/fail.” It’s a shift into something a little closer to socialism, and points out the real divide here – on the one hand, the people who think that outcomes are fair and those who think that outcomes are arbitrary or at least undeserved to some extent. What Obama believes, I think, is the latter. Not in his personal case, of course.

I wish that I had thought of the Daveg Rule for Monopoly. It would certainly move the game closer to reality! But as it turned out, all of my kids are rational, and therefore not liberal on economic matters.

11 | Pious Agnostic

October 26th, 2008 at 8:38 am

“Well, we can never go back to Denny’s again….”

12 | pst314

October 26th, 2008 at 8:48 am

“There is a custom of ‘tipping out’ in many restaurants…this is analogous to private charity.”

I disagree: The idea is that the customer tips because of good food and good service, which are the responsibility of not just the waiter but the cook, busboys, etc. Therefore they are all entitled to a share as a consequence of their work, not as charity.

13 | DelD

October 26th, 2008 at 8:57 am

I challenge your basic assumption, that the homeless guy “deserves” it more.

He may need the money more, but he certainly doesn’t deserve it.

14 | glenn

October 26th, 2008 at 9:06 am

Problem with Obamannomics is that he’s convinced a lot of people they are going to be receiving not contributing. Since I’m an old retired guy with no grandchildren I don’t really care, but it’s going to be fun to watch.

15 | MarkJ

October 26th, 2008 at 9:08 am

Which all goes to show that the “Obamarian Revolution” will inevitably become a protection racket:

“Nice business you have here. Hate to see anything happen to it. Give us a piece of what you make–on time, every time–and we won’t reveal anything embarrassing about your personal life.”

16 | Steph

October 26th, 2008 at 9:18 am

Great experiment and funny too! Just be careful when you go back as the waiter might spit in your food!

17 | hitnrun

October 26th, 2008 at 9:21 am

As someone who worked in the food service industry, I have to say that that was totally not cool.

On the other hand, he shouldn’t be allowed to wear a political tie on the floor.

18 | Mikee

October 26th, 2008 at 9:22 am

Years ago, as a 15 year old, I worked as a busboy in a busy restaurant. One Saturday night, instead of 5 busboys, only two of us showed up. We busted our asses to keep tables open for the waiters. At the end of the night, the 16 waiters took up a collection from their tips to reward us for our extra effort (the manager gave us nothing extra). I got an extra $2.35 for doing 2.5x the work. That was a valuable lesson: work for free and management will let you do so; appreciation is limited even among those who benefit from your efforts. I soon after found a new job, and have never been shy about negotiating benefits and extra pay up front for extra work.

19 | Jay

October 26th, 2008 at 9:31 am

It’s much simpler than a disconnect between theory and practice.

Basically, he is unprincipled and selfish. He is all in favor of thieving as long as he’s the one getting the bounty.

This attitude is quite common amongst socialists. The trick is dressing it up in rhetoric so that you don’t feel guilt.

The normal trick is to pretend you won’t be the one benefiting, and that you are doing it for “the less fortunate” – failing of course to mention that you count yourself amongst them.

Call it what you want, just don’t call it principled.

20 | Daily Pundit » Here’s A Tip

October 26th, 2008 at 9:39 am

[...] Bluey Blog | Robert Bluey » Blog Archive » Redistribution of Wealth Experiment here is a voluntary custom of “tipping out” in many restaurants. That’s when the server share his tips with others working in the restaurant, including the bus boys, hostess, bar back and even some of the cooks. This is somewhat analogous to private charity. It would be interesting to have all the employees vote and force the server to share more of his earning and see what happens to: 1. the amount of ‘charity’ he now gives and 2. the effects this has on the servers quality of service. [...]

21 | sammytaylor.net

October 26th, 2008 at 9:44 am

[...] This is an entertaining and insightful post: In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference–just imagine the coincidence. [...]

22 | Chris Basken

October 26th, 2008 at 9:48 am

You might have said the homeless guy “needed” the money more, but not “deserved.” Unless you were talking in Obama-speak.

23 | Richard R

October 26th, 2008 at 9:51 am

Explaining Our U.S. Tax System with 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. ‘Since you are all such good customers,’ he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beers 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 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 very 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. [Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full post.]

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

24 | Moptop

October 26th, 2008 at 9:54 am

Maybe you should send this little experiment off to those guys who green light Hollywood movies? Naah!

25 | mndasher

October 26th, 2008 at 9:57 am

Reminds me of the redistribution of GPA, the 4.0 student was told to give away 1 GPA to a 2.0 student who didn’t study. Then they would be both be 3.0 students. That did not sit will with the 4.0 student who worked hard for her grades.

26 | George

October 26th, 2008 at 10:19 am

I’ve been doing my own Anti-Redistribution experiment. I pay tips with cash instead of credit card. Based on the enthusiasm of of the wait staff I suspect that money goes untaxed. The woman who cuts my hair and the guy who trims my trees also seem like to be paid cash.

27 | The False God

October 26th, 2008 at 10:20 am

The difference between “tipping out” and “sharing the wealth” is that the cooks, bus boys, hostesses, and bar backs are often instrumental to your job as a waiter/ress. If the cooks are making awesome food, then you get a good tip. If the bus boys are cleaning everything spotless, then you get a better tip. If the hostess puts everyone in a good mood and handles table arrangements right, then you get a better tip. If the bar back keeps the liquor flowing, then you get a better tip.

The only thing I can say about the homeless guy is that if he doesn’t mug your customer on their way out, then your customer might make a return visit.

Your fellow workers actually contribute to you getting a tip on your job. A homeless guy doesn’t. It’s not charity if you tender a share of profits on the job: it’s good sense in paying for work well done.

However, there’s a difference between giving the cook who makes good food money voluntarily and being forced to give the bus boy money when he was slouching off like a weasel.

28 | The Kaos Theory » Blog Archive » Just Remember, What You Wish For Might Not What You Get Or Want

October 26th, 2008 at 10:21 am

[...] saw this last week but it exemplifies exactly what happens when somebody, who thinks they have YOUR best [...]

29 | RW

October 26th, 2008 at 10:23 am

Might make sense to start your on non-profit organization. Perhaps you can get some of this redistributed wealth. Give your self a salary out of it and do some good.

30 | Pax

October 26th, 2008 at 10:26 am

daveg,

When playing your monopoly game and taxing 36%, you should be pocketing at least half of the money yourself before redistributing to the poor. The politicians and bureaucrats always manage to get paid a hefty share for arranging that particular transfer.

31 | al

October 26th, 2008 at 10:27 am

Re.: “the actual recipient deserved money more” No, not “deserved”. It is wrong word that doesn’t precisely describe the sit. “needed” migh be more accurate. Otherwise it is good and would be very educational for all those presumably educated (a.k.a. those having a paper saying they’ve got a college degree) if they somehove managed not olny to read it but learn from it. Since there are no credits attached, they probably never will. Even on with their own eventual experience.
Thanks for the laugh though.

32 | Chicago Boyz » Blog Archive » Demonopoly

October 26th, 2008 at 10:29 am

[...] a comment for this post [h/t Instapundit]: This is also fun and educational for your [...]

33 | A Few Good Links « West Bank Mama

October 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am

[...] And I laughed out loud at this one. “Socialism 101″ at a restaurant teaches an Obama supporter what spreading the wealth around really means. [...]

34 | no, not THAT Glenn

October 26th, 2008 at 10:41 am

Rob Schwartz:
I am not a teacher. Nevertheless I’m intrigued. How did you operate your tax system?

If you were levying a tax in money I’d side with your students — that would be unfair on its face.

If otoh you were levying a tax in gradepoints, and redistributing the proceeds among the less “privileged,” then I would say you were simply practicing “share the wealth” redistributionism.

Did it result in ideological polarization within the class?

35 | mntx

October 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am

I did something like this with an Obama telemarketer. I listened to her whole pitch, asking ‘undecided’ sounding questions, then I said: “you’ve convinced me, I would like to donate $2300 to Obama’s campaign”. She was very excited. I told her I needed to get my credit card out of my car, and had her hold for about five minutes. When I came back, she was still excited and started asking for my information (I gave her a bogus address, etc.)

When she asked for my credit card number I told her: “here’s the thing, I’ve learned from Obama, therefore, I am requesting you pay my $2300 donation, you can take it from the other telemarketers if you like.” She seemed disappointed but didn’t get the point and asked if I would like to donate a smaller amount. I said sure, but then asked for her credit card number. She sounded confused. I explained, under Obama’s tax plan, you take money from one person and give it to another- so I am just playing along- taking money from her to give to Obama. She was not amused and hung up on me.

36 | Spreading the wealth | Cold Fury

October 26th, 2008 at 10:48 am

[...] Fucking beautiful: In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference–just imagine the coincidence. [...]

37 | iceman

October 26th, 2008 at 10:50 am

try it this halloween, take some candy from the kids that have lots of it and tell them you are going to give it to other children who have a little.

ask them if they declared this “income” and are going to pay taxes on it. get their addresses and phone numbers to report to the IRS

make sure the parents hear this.

dress up as uncle sam or the tax man and really scare them this year

38 | John

October 26th, 2008 at 10:55 am

As I understand it, Obama’s tax plan would basically return rates on those with income over $250,000 per year to the levels they were at during the Clinton administration. I don’t remember that destroying the economy and eliminating the incentive to work.

39 | kcom

October 26th, 2008 at 11:06 am

“It would be interesting to have all the employees vote and force the server to share more of his earning and see what happens to: 1. the amount of ‘charity’ he now gives and 2. the effects this has on the servers quality of service.”

And how about …

3. The camaraderie and pleasantness of the workplace environment.

40 | Mark G

October 26th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Redistribution wealth always sounds better when it is someone else’s wealth.

41 | Hunter

October 26th, 2008 at 11:28 am

I do the same thing to people in public with obama bumper stickers. I simply ask them for $20 in the name of fairness. Needless to say, the response is overwhelmingly negative.

42 | Independent

October 26th, 2008 at 11:31 am

Hey, great idea. I can think of some other great situations where this could be applied. Tenured college professors could be forced to ghostwrite one scholarly article per year that could be signed by, and credited to, one of their non-tenured associates. Hollywood stars could be forced to give up their trailers on the movie set for two days each week for some of the extras to use. And, for that matter, Barack Obama, as the higher-fundraising candidate, could be forced to give 36% of his campaign budget to the McCain campaign!

43 | Coach Bluey

October 26th, 2008 at 11:49 am

Rob,

I love it…..thanks for sharing! I’m going to experiment in my classroom too, perhaps Mr. Schwartz could share more experience with me…..give him my email. Thanks!

Coach

44 | Les Nessman

October 26th, 2008 at 11:56 am

“At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient deserved money more.
”

And as time goes by, the homeless guy will not be grateful for the charity given to him; but will come to expect and demand this welfare, while at the same time hating and resenting the handout.

45 | Scott K

October 26th, 2008 at 12:14 pm

I don’t recall where I first saw this, but I saved a copy:

http://www.srkconsulting.com/soc_cap.gif

46 | Diggs

October 26th, 2008 at 12:31 pm

Cool. Unlike your tip, which was entirely voluntary, if Obama is elected, the next payment you make to the waiter (and the homeless guy for that matter) will be forced, and much greater than 20%. Oh, by the way, the class hatred inspired by Obama this last year will result in the waiter feeling entirely entitled to spit on your food before he brings it out.

47 | Billy

October 26th, 2008 at 12:48 pm

“Spreading the wealth around.” I hope all the NFL, NBA, MLB, and other professional athletes who have worked all their lives from little kids to adults realize what that means. They have sacrificed, aches and pains, going to college, striving to be the best just so Obama can take their hard earned money and give it to people who do nothing to better themselves. After he takes the money from them then he will go after the average Joe(The Plumber) if you will. The person who goes out and works 8-12 hours a day to feed and clothe his family and pay the utility bills. After that there will be no rich , no more, but I bet Obama will still be in his mansion that he bought under market value with a discounted mortgage rate. I guess we will soon see. It amazes me how intelligent Americans are hypnotized and fooled by this guy, Obama. But then again the German people(Some of the most intelligent an innovative people) were fooled in 1936 and look what happened to them. In 9 years their country was destroyed and half of it became Communist.
Billy The Maintenance
By the way I don’t need any handouts. I work for what I have like most Americans.

48 | Accounting Bum » Blog Archive

October 26th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

[...] Instapundit Robert Bluey: In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away [...]

49 | Right Angles » Blog Archive » Lefty wealth-redistribution hypocrisy

October 26th, 2008 at 1:34 pm

[...] it seems like a nice, cuddly idea in theory. But in practice…..: In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away [...]

50 | Don't wait for revolution, start redistributing wealth yourself! - Rapmusic.com

October 26th, 2008 at 1:41 pm

[...] redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application. Bluey Blog | Robert Bluey Blog Archive Redistribution of Wealth Experiment __________________ "Equality draws lines. Freedom ignores them." Obama Syndrome: A [...]

51 | Puttin’ their money where their mouths are « Living IRL

October 26th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

[...] Liberals , Real Life in America , The ONE — Our Naked Emperor , Too-Large-Govt. Read about Robert Bluey’s account of an experiment with “spreading the wealth around.”  Hylarious and so revealing.  I also enjoyed the [...]

52 | Mike Wilson

October 26th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Rob that’s brilliant!

- M

53 | An Excellent Experiment « Tai-Chi Policy

October 26th, 2008 at 3:02 pm

[...] An Excellent Experiment October 26, 2008 Posted by taoist in Capitalism and Economics, Democrats, Obama, Politics. trackback Robert Bluey tells of an excellent experiment with wealth redistribution. [...]

54 | Tanya B

October 26th, 2008 at 3:59 pm

Why doesn’t Obama practice what he preaches right now? He’s got plenty of money and McCain needs some. He said on O’Reilly, “if I can afford it, and the waitress needs it, why not? that’s neighborliness” Well, fork over 36% of the ill-gotten campaign cash to McCain. Doesn’t sound so great anymore, huh?

55 | leanna jackson

October 26th, 2008 at 4:05 pm

awesome.
now i want to try.

56 | Gabriel Hanna

October 26th, 2008 at 4:13 pm

I used to work food service. There were two flavors of tipping out:

1) A cook or a dishwasher does yeoman service when a waiter or waitress needs it, and then as a thank you the waitress gives whatever she thinks is fair. The cook or dishwasher is grateful, because he was not entitled to the tip-out.

2) Tips are pooled and everyone shares alike. Wait staff now conceal the amount of their tips, and cooks and dishwashers are resentful.

In each case we are talking about the same amount of money, probably, going to the back of the house. The difference is in how everybody feels about it.

57 | Joshua

October 26th, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Very interesting. However, I wouldn’t advise the correspondent to go back to the same restaurant again. He may find the quality of service he receives to be much poorer the next time.

58 | E Kasta

October 26th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

If we lived in a perfect world where what you earn is
what you actually get your logic might hold up.

If you are an aware person surely you understand that
in a not so perfect world there are those who get what
they get because they can manipulate the system into
getting more than their “fair” share by way of taking
advantage of their position. I would suggest you
consider the real lesson this type of behavior
reflects.

Here we have a person in a possition of not being able
to negotiate the conditions of a contract before
entering into it (matter of tradition in social
grace). Implicitly the waiter is trusting that the
performace of their job will be rewarded buy their
effort and talent rather than their personal, and yes,
public opinion (supposedly acceptable in our “fair”
society).

The decision to “redistribute” his wealth here is
obviously not one of concern for those who may have
received less than a fair deal from a not so perfect
world but to punish a political point of view and the
courage to display it in a perfectly acceptable way,
even in a venerable situation. Note, the patron
didn’t redistribute the waiters wealth. He keep it so
you could make a donation on his own behalf — braging
rights.

I would say this story makes a far better lesson in
why *some* wealth redistribution is a good thing.

59 | Leroy Hurt

October 26th, 2008 at 4:56 pm

An interesting variation would be to have several people split their tips at different levels starting with say 15% of the tip amount to the homeless person and progressing upward to the 100% amount described above. Then report the reactions to identify the point at which the waiter becomes mad.

60 | D Palmer

October 26th, 2008 at 5:21 pm

Funny anecdote, but the writer should have told he server he was going to only tip him 50% of what he normally would and give the remainder to the homeless guy.

Even Obama doesn’t advocate 100% taxation.

61 | juandos

October 26th, 2008 at 5:25 pm

Notice to All Employees

As of November 5, 2008, when Obama is officially elected into office, our company will instill a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales commissions into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are under achieving a “fair shake.”

2. All hourly employees will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are “too busy for overtime” to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as “the government.” We will not participate in this “pooling” experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.

4. The “government” will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging its workers to continue to work hard “for the good of all.”

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s “good to spread the wealth.” Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an
opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more “patriotic.”

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don’t feel bad though, because President Obama will give you ‘FREE’ healthcare, ‘FREE’
handouts, ‘FREE’ oil for heating your home, ‘FREE’ food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our democratic congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to a flat screen TV and a nice looking hair?) !!!

If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to re-think your vote on November 4th.

62 | Spreading the wealth around in practice… - Daily Steven

October 26th, 2008 at 6:54 pm

[...] they believe Uncle Sam is a better steward of your money then you are.  I found a blog written by Rob Bluey in which he posted the following [...]

63 | Andrew Berman

October 26th, 2008 at 7:56 pm

Great post. I hope you do not mind, but I used it in one of my posts (with the proper credit and links given of course). You can see it at Berman Post: Spreading the Wealth Around Experiment.

64 | Enableate » Blog Archive » Baracking the Wealth

October 26th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

[...] Bluey passes on an email he received: In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had [...]

65 | Ryan

October 26th, 2008 at 9:01 pm

I imagine that the waiter was mostly upset because he works for $2.50 an hour and is dependent on your tip to pay his power bill or feed his family.

I wonder, did the button on his tie say he supported Obama AND he made more than $250,000.00 a year?? If it did, then he likely didnt need the $10.00 as much as the homeless man outside. If he really is working class and trying to make ends meet on your tip, then your experiment failed miserably.

66 | Notes from the weekend | cynics and skeptics

October 27th, 2008 at 6:04 am

[...] economics experiment you can try at home! Redistribution of Wealth Experiment This was written by cranberrycynic. Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008, at 08:03. Filed under [...]

67 | >bt: Fairness

October 27th, 2008 at 6:24 am

[...] (Hat tip: Robert Bluey.) [...]

68 | Two stories on taxation « The Norwegian Rat

October 27th, 2008 at 7:12 am

[...] 20081027 I found this little tale on Obama and redistribution of wealth from a post at Davids. In the comments, there is an equally interesting story explaining [...]

69 | Right Wing Nation » An Experiment

October 27th, 2008 at 8:04 am

[...] Rob Bluey, courtesy of David Thompson. In a local restaurant my server had on an Obama 08 tie; again I laughed as he had given away his political preference – just imagine the coincidence. When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need – the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight. I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I’ve decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful. [...]

70 | Just shut up already « The Quick and the Dead

October 27th, 2008 at 8:51 am

[...] at least she wasn’t on the job, unlike this fellow, who seemed to think that wearing an Obama tie would increase his tip. Unfortunately for him, his [...]

71 | Muse

October 27th, 2008 at 9:30 am

E Kasta -

The problem with that is that the plan doesn’t account for that. It just automatically assumes that anyone making a certain amount got more than their share.

So while you are punishing a very very small minority of people, you are also punishing a huge majority of people who deserve what they earn.

72 | Sheesh

October 27th, 2008 at 9:44 am

I think this is what you would call an Obamanation (Abomination). His policy is seriously Wrong!

73 | commentor

October 27th, 2008 at 12:06 pm

Young woman: Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . .
McCain: Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.

Sounds a lot like redistribution of wealth to me

Thomas Jefferson once said:
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”—Thomas Jefferson—The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

What? is Jefferson espousing socialist ideas? Say it isn’t so.

74 | Serena

October 27th, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Aargh! I get so sick of random people making complete generalizations and everybody else bobbing along like it’s fact just because you are too lazy to look into something for yourself. Stop being sheep. Do your homework and try having an educated opinion of your own sometime.

75 | Captain America

October 27th, 2008 at 3:56 pm

Great fun….

But in actual terms, you will not be permitted to spread your wealth. That role will be filled by the government.

In Obamworld, your tip will be collected by the government who will determine, in the interest of “fairness,” who the recipient will be.

76 | deafears

October 28th, 2008 at 12:31 am

Is everyone pretending they make more than 250k so they can make this experiment work? I just don’t get the reasoning. Not paying high taxes in a low income bracket is not socialism. This whole Joe the Plumber argument doesn’t make any sense.

You can’t just say, this policy is hurting me because if I were someone else, it would be hurting me. I am a poor plumber-but if I were a rich executive I would pay higher taxes – and being that I am a poor plumber, I can’t afford it.

If my income were to suddenly be multiplied by 6 for no reason, it would be no reward at all, because I would pay higher tax. I would actually decline that opportunity, because I know that the tax rate I would be paying would be higher than people who make much less than me.

Thus I will opt NOT to make that leap into upper 5% income bracket – because my life decisions are all based on tax parity. I will only choose to opportunities in life where the tax is the lowest.

So – “No Deal” America! I’m going to stay in the blue collar workforce just to spite you! I could have been prosperous, but the thought of paying higher taxes has soured that idea completely. In fact, I don’t know ANYONE who wants to be prosperous now. In fact, I’m going to become homeless! Because they get all the perks. Life is so easy and lavish, its like living in a 4-star hotel with room service and a pool.

Because that’s what Obama is going to do. Reward the undeserving exponentially, while punishing anyone with any gumption with ruinous penalties and confiscation of property. There will be maniacal laughing too, because it is a sinister plot hatched by the marxist-muslims. Haven’t heard of them? Well neither has anyone else who lives in reality.

77 | Obama Supporters - Tyresmoke Forums

October 28th, 2008 at 11:00 am

[...] idea, reported here: [...]

78 | Illustrating Obama’s Tax Plan « Truthseeker

October 28th, 2008 at 12:49 pm

[...] This story well illustrates Obama’s socialist plans that he has for your money:   [...]

79 | Redistribution of world-views « The Norwegian Rat

October 28th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

[...] by Obama’s gaffe on ‘redistributing‘ in the Plumber Joe case, and the reactions this garnered. The idea that a president-candidate should focus more on redistributing wealth than [...]

80 | Around the Web - 10/29/2008 at Ray Fowler .org

October 28th, 2008 at 10:08 pm

[...] Redistribution of Wealth Experiment. A restaurant diner “spreads the wealth” by redistributing his tip to a homeless person outside. [...]

81 | MikeNKnoxville

October 29th, 2008 at 7:23 am

Follow up to this:

How Taxes Really Work
To start with . . . .
In the US and throughout most of the rest of the world, the tenth man would have paid off a politician for $10 to get a beer subsidy of $30 per night (to create jobs for the bartender). Of this $30, $10 of course would have covered the lobbying expense, $10 would go in his own pocket, $1 would go to the bartender to keep his mouth shut, and $9 would go to the bar.
The Bar would give him a kickback of $10 each night for bringing in his 9 buddies to make them into alcoholics, repeat customers for life.
The Bar would then raise their prices to $130 citing inflation and higher taxes.
The tenth man would then secure his finances in a Dutch Holding Company managed by a trust in Ireland which invests in Chase and Bank of America. He would then explain to his buddies that he is as poor as the rest of them and can’t afford to pay himself as he cries into his beer that night citing his latest financial report which shows him to be broke on paper so that he doesn’t have to pay taxes in the United States ever again.
Citing his former generosity, the other nine men would agree that the tenth man can now pay nothing like the 4 poorest.
The others would then be faced with an adjusted amount of
• The fifth would pay $3.
• The sixth would pay $10.
• The seventh would pay $22.
• The eighth would pay $38.
• The ninth would pay $57.
Now the group would recognize that this is not fair and so would lobby the Government for an Earned Drinking Credit for the Poorest men. The government would oblige and give the four poorest men $2 each, but they would tax the 5th – 9th men $2 each as well.
• 4 men receive a total of $8 and 5 men pay $10.
The adjusted amounts would then look like this for all 10
• First Receives $2 pays $2 | Net 0
• Second Receives $2 pays $2 | Net 0
• Third Receives $2 pays $2 | Net 0
• Fourth Receives $2 pays $2 | Net 0
• Fifth Pay $1 to bar pays $2 to tax | net paid $3
• Sixth Pay $8 to bar; pays $2 to tax | net paid $10
• Seventh Pay $20 to bar; pays $2 to tax | net paid $22
• Eighth Pay $36 to bar pays $2 to tax | net paid $38
• Ninth Pay $55 to bar; pays $2 to tax | net paid $57
• Tenth Man: Tax Credit Received: $30 ;
Pays $10 to politician;
$1 to bartender;
Receives $10 from Bar
Net RECEIVED $29 per night and free beer
Of course this can not go on forever as the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth men can’t afford to pay those rates forever. So they start paying with their credit cards held by Bank of America and Chase.
The tenth man would start demanding a higher Return on Investment from his investment managers, who would be hearing similar requests from all of their other investors. They would then expand their holdings into mortgaged back securities where a good deal more profit could be made.
Meanwhile the Fifth through ninth men are racking up debt on their credit cards from drinking every night, their health care costs are increasing as their liver fails, and they are also spending more on gasoline as they drink and drive as they can no longer afford to cab it.
Ultimately, they end up refinancing their credit cards into their house where they have equity. The mortgage broker promises them a 4.9% interest rate on the refinance which sounds good as their credit card interest rate is up to 21%. The broker promises them that they will not have to verify their income, provide W2’s nor copies of their tax paper work.
Their mortgage broker doesn’t tell them, but lies about the value of their house in order to refinance their credit and help them avoid paying private mortgage insurance. At their current income levels, and without verifying their income, their mortgage would be classified as Sub Prime and the interest rate would be 10.9%
The mortgage officer lies about their income levels as well to boost the internal credit scoring mechanism and get them financed, not at 4.9% but 5.9%, which is better than 10.9% and happens to pay the mortgage broker a higher commission than a loan at 4.9% that is not sub prime.
The mortgage broker also promises them a payment of $900 per month, but fails to mention the balloon payment of $50,000 in the 5th year and doesn’t mention the adjustable rates in year 3.
The men separately show up with a hangover and sun glasses on the date of their close for their new mortgages. They trust their broker and do not read the paperwork in detail flipping and signing almost as fast as they could raise a beer bottle to their lips.
The loan closes, the mortgage broker gets a fat commission, the bank securitizes the mortgages by selling them to an Irish Hedge Fund and pockets collectively a billion dollars in profits that year.
The hedge fund holds the investment for a year, shows a 35% gain on paper and starts selling shares to retirement funds and 401ks in the US that the Sixth through 9th men just happen to have the rest of their life savings sitting in.
The tenth man sees the writing on the wall, literally magic marker on a stall in the restroom of the bar.
“The end is Nigh”
He pulls his money out of the Irish Hedge fund invested in real estate and invests in Gold at $600 a troy ounce.
Meanwhile, he lobbies congress to tighten bankruptcy laws for credit cards which he still has a sizable investment in. Congress tightens bankruptcy laws and makes it impossible to absolve credit card debt, forcing people into chapter 13 where they must pay off the debt within 3 years or go to debtors prison where they can work it off in 7 years.
Gas prices are still going up so the President ignores a minor terrorist threat, allows the terrorists to blow up a major building and then goes to war with the terrorists home country where there is no oil, and simultaneously with a country that sits on 10% of the worlds oil reserves that has a decimated military infrastructure.
Oil prices shoot through the roof with Gold following close behind. The President whose family comes from oil barons make a fortune and become famous at their skull and bones country club outside of Yale.
Meanwhile our famous 10 guys, start paying even more money at the pump. The first 4 guys end up taking second jobs working at Wal-Mart and have to give up drinking at the bar so that they can try and beat their teenage kids out of a promotion.
The fifth and sixth guys get foreclosed upon. They were forced to stop paying their mortgage payments so that they could pay their mandatory credit card payments as required by the new bankruptcy law.
The seventh, eighth and ninth men all previously traded up their homes for McMansions that they can not afford with interest only payments of $2300 a month. When foreclosures start happening their plans on flipping their McMansions and cashing in on the equity slips through their fingers.
To make matters worse seven and eight get laid off from the companies they work for when their jobs get outsourced to China. The ninth man keeps his job at a law firm, but fails to notice that his 401k fund is slipping and has lost 10% in the last year. Things are looking up as his law firm seems on the edge of landing a big contract with Merrill Lynch.
Then the real estate crash and sub prime mortgage scandal erupt. Banks start dropping like flies to be saved not by the cash strapped government that can barely afford the war for oil any longer, but by China. Oil and Gold soar, Gold hits $900 a troy ounce and Oil hits $130 a barrel (about the same amount for 10 rounds of beer prior to the crash). Beer prices hold steady for the first few months, but then start to edge up as gas prices for delivery creep into the bar owners expenses.
Then the first four men one night remember their favorite bar. They sneak around back around 4:30 am and steal 50 empty kegs that just happen to be made of pure aluminum. Those kegs are now worth about half the value of a keg that is full in scrap metal prices or about $80.
They are not stupid and don’t want to get caught turning the kegs in at the dump where the police are already looking for keg thieves. So they head out to the closed down manufacturing plant where they used to work. They start a big fire, and melt down the aluminum into big messy aluminum splashes on the cement.
They turn in the aluminum for cash and get caught up on their back alimony and child support before heading back to work at Wal-mart where they now work for their teen age kids that beat them out for that promotion earlier in the month because their job skills weren’t as good as recent high school graduates. They then begin dreaming of new ways to find aluminum alimony allowances.
Meanwhile, the banks and mortgage companies lobby congress spending about $10,000 a head in an election year to bail out the economy. Congress provides the major banks with government backed loans to refinance the bad sub prime loans so that the government can personally guarantee those bad loans. They also put $100 billion of actual cash into the hands of Americans hoping to stimulate the economy.
Americans however, are all in debt up to their eye balls and use the extra $1200 they receive to make 2-3 credit card payments. They take the $300 for each kid and buy groceries for the month and then they start worrying about next month.
The banks get away free as they have Chinese financing now and no bad loans as they have refinanced them over to the US Government. The US government had to print more money to pay for all of these actions and so Gold goes up to $1500 a troy ounce.
The tenth man is now worth Billions and moves to Costa Rica to retire taking the new trophy wife that used to be the bartenders girl friend with him.
The first four men end up going to county prison for 3 months for stealing aluminum dog crap receptacles after running out of kegs to steal.
The fifth and sixth men end up living in an apartment and then homeless after they lose their jobs at Wal-Mart.
The seventh and eighth men whom we previously left hanging in our story after they lost their jobs and ability to pay for their homes, end up losing their homes, and their kids. They and their spouses are each convicted of mortgage fraud by the FBI in a major sting operation after it is revealed that they lied on their mortgage applications. Their mortgage brokers who actually did the paper work cop a plea agreement in exchange for immunity with the Feds and rat out each of their unsuspecting customers.
The ninth man ends up losing his entire retirement fund which took a big hit as the dollar rapidly plummeted into free fall. He ends up refinancing his own house under a government backed loan for $650,000. Unfortunately, a tornado comes through that winter in a freak coincidence and levels the home. FEMA promises to provide assistance but never shows up and the ninth man freezes to death attempting to salvage the shreds of his belongings. His home insurance policy refuses to pay as they claim that his house was over valued and then they prove it with comparables studies from his own mortgage brokers database.
The tenth man ends up dumping his new bride a year later, moving back to the states a year after that when the US appears to have hit rock bottom and he leads up a Chinese real estate investment initiative in the states. He makes another $10 billion in ten years, but is then executed in Beijing for espionage.
Meanwhile, the bar tender goes on to win American Idol and sleep with Paula Abdul. They are now blissfully happy, doped up on anti-psychotics, and the biggest two idiots the world has ever seen.

82 | gnikttam

October 30th, 2008 at 10:58 am

There you go, just go ahead and screw the guy. The idea is to take it from big business and corporate america that has gotten us into this mess in the first place. Let them pay for there damn bailout with a tax hike. I am for it. I make enough money that my taxes are unaffected by either candidate, but if you are going to squander pensions and a monster loan from china and and other countries, damn straight, pay up!! As for you, that was a pretty lousy way of screwing a hard working person and I would advise, if you don’t want pubes in your food (or for all you know, he may have told other friends in other restaurants-birds of a feather fly together-what you look like) so if were you, I’d start cooking!!! Camera phones are pretty handy!!!

83 | Obloodyhell

October 31st, 2008 at 7:41 am

> As I understand it, Obama’s tax plan would basically return rates on those with income over $250,000 per year to the levels they were at during the Clinton administration.

That, John, is because you don’t understand it.

Which is sorta the point, innit?

84 | Obloodyhell

October 31st, 2008 at 7:44 am

> There you go, just go ahead and screw the guy. The idea is to take it from big business and corporate america that has gotten us into this mess in the first place. Let them pay for there damn bailout with a tax hike.
.
And, of course, neither do YOU Get It, either, any more than John does –
.
There IS no “big business” or “corporate america” to screw in this sense. Tax them, they will do nothing but raise the price of the goods they make and the services they provide to cover the increase in taxes.
.
In the end, YOU AND I pay the taxes.

85 | Andy

October 31st, 2008 at 5:40 pm

In response to:
“There is a custom of ‘tipping out’ in many restaurants…this is analogous to private charity.”

I disagree: The idea is that the customer tips because of good food and good service, which are the responsibility of not just the waiter but the cook, busboys, etc. Therefore they are all entitled to a share as a consequence of their work, not as charity.

I disagree with your disagreement. You see, the cook and likely, the busboy, are revcieving an hourly wage according to the minimum state or federal wage standards, which are about 3X the amount a waiter or waitress would receive. The waiter or waitress is trying to insure the best service for all of thuer customers, and needs the tips from the customers to make up for the paultry 2.19 per hour they typically make.

All that being said, I like the analogy, and it certainly fits Obamanomics

86 | Phaedrus

November 4th, 2008 at 10:54 am

Remember that time when you stiffed that guy who makes less than minimum wage, just to prove a point which you intentionally misunderstood and which didn’t apply to the situation, and then you gave that bum way more money than you would have left for a tip anyhow? Yeah, that was hilarious.

87 | Robbie, Great Lakes, IL

November 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am

Funny how this stuff works. I often see people in warm coats and fancy cars that often turn their heads away from the homeless combat vet that fell on bad times and is living on the streets. (And believe you me, there are more than you would care to know)

Who gives a rat’s azz about the Vet’s? I support them, I have a bumper sticker on the back of my car that say’s that I “Support the troops.” But, when it is time to put actions before words, you all turn your backs and mumble why you can’t help, or not today is the pat answer.

I might not be rich but, I will help out when needed. I do not give money, I will, however, give a coat or buy a meal. That makes me far more richer than the majority of those who could give but chose not to.

I do pay it forward.