There must be some good empirical tests of the marginal utility of a dollar to a poor person.Would you spend a dollar on a cheeseburger, even though you are already fat?Would you spend a dollar on a lottery ticket, even though your chances of winning in this life time are insiginifcant?Would you spend a dollar, on an impulse, on some nonsense you see on TV?If you had only one dollar in the bank, would you a) save it for a rainy day, or b) spend it on malt liquor before Monday?Would you bet a dollar on a 50% chance to win $1.50, with a 50% chance to lose it all?If your utility bill has a $1 late fee, would you a) pay it on time, or b) pay it a day late and incur the $1 late fee?Would you wait until Cheetos are on sale and save $1, or just buy Cheetos without hesitation whenever Chester Cheetah winks at you?

What would you say to the theory that people will acquire and save money up to the point where their marginal utility for a dollar is equal?So if one person saves $100 in the bank, and another person saves $1000, that reveals that the first person's 101st dollar is worth the same as the second person's 1001st dollar?In both cases, the marginal utility of that first unsaved $1 is less than or equal to the first unit of whatever you can buy for $1. The first person will give up his 101st dollar for the same cheeseburger that the second person will give up his 1001st dollar.Can I get "universally accepted" status for this theory? Or does nobody really have any incentive to promote and latch onto this theory, since you can't use it to buy majority votes and generate revenues?What is the relative marginal utility of this theory, compared to your theory, from the vantage point of a politician, or the vantage point of an economist who indirectly works for a politician?

QuoteOriginally posted by: DavidJNHow is it that people who are plainly rude and ill-mannered are allowed to post on this website?Participation based on merit. What do you think of applying this policy at grocery stores and emergency rooms?

Can anyone name a bad behavior in the US - a behavior with financial implications - where the cost has not been collectivized?

QuoteOriginally posted by: DavidJNFrom Wikipedia here are the tax calculations for a person with $40,000 income for the year 2009 tax year:Single taxpayer, no children, under 65 and not blind taking standard deduction;$40,000 gross income - $5,700 standard deduction - $3,650 personal exemption = $30,650 taxable income $8,350 × 10% = $835.00 ($30,650 - $8,350) = $22,300.00 x 15% = $3,345.00 Total income tax is $835.00 + $3,345.00 = $4180.00 (10.45% effective tax) Note that in addition to income tax, a wage earner would also have to pay FICA (payroll) tax (and an equal amount of FICA tax must be paid by the employer):$40,000 (adjusted gross income) $40,000 × 6.2% = $2,480 (Social Security portion) $40,000 × 1.45% = $580 (Medicare portion) Total FICA tax = $3,060 (7.65% of income) Total federal tax of individual = $7,190.00 (17.98% of income) How is it that people who are plainly rude and ill-mannered are allowed to post on this website?How is it that people who are arrogant lying frauds are allowed to walk down the street without being required to wear a pink hat?From Yahoo:QuoteIn recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.

What I would be curious to hear from DavidJN, is why he imagined he was in any position to have anything to say about the income tax on people making $40,000 a year at all? Obviously the combination of DavidJN's smarts plus Wikipedia's information, produces wrong answers. But the real interesting question is why did he imagine he would get it right? I have prepared tax returns for people in that income range, so I speak from experience. I am curious to hear what DavidJN's reasoning is, that he thinks he has anything to say at all. What lead's people to be wrong? Probably people will be wrong when they perceive no cost to themselves for making bets, or when they imagine they are smarter than they are, or when they are just misguided and dumb.From Yahoo:QuoteIn recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.