I was sent this in an e-mail and found it both educational and insightful.

An Economics Lesson

Here are the thoughts of David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D., Professor of Economics, University of Georgia on taxes, etc.

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, thats 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, Im going to reduce the cost of your daily beer 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 everybodys 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 mans 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, thats right, exclaimed the fifth man. I only saved a dollar, too. Its unfair that he got ten times more than I! Thats 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 didnt 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 didnt 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 important. They didnt 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.

Is Chivalry dead?
My psychology research methods class is asking this question and I’m sitting here in a Quizno’s watching people to see if I can observe any acts of Chivalry.  So far, three patrons, two female, one male.  The male came in separate from the females and did not commit any chivalrous acts.

However, the other day, I was with my step-dad and mom and I observed many chivalrous acts.  What defines a chivalrous act?  Is it as simple as opening the door for a woman?  Is it an attitude defined by demeanor?

Chivalry can be defined as acts of protection, love, and honor (respect) by a male towards a female or weaker individual.  Anyone out there have a definition they live by?  Post a reply.

I think some of the best chivalrous acts are the mundane.  For instance, opening a door for a woman.  Say you’re approaching the door to a fast-food place (if you’re a grease junky like me).  There is a woman approaching at a diagonal and will arrive shortly before you.  You have a choice.  You can speed up and beat her to the door to open it for her, or you can slow down and defer to her.  The culture of the U.S. tells you this woman is more than capable of opening the door herself, and some in the culture say you would respect her by deferring to her.  You have a choice.  You can exhert yourself for her and spare her energy spent, showing a small, yet measurable amount of love for her and, in a small way, telling her someone out there desires to spend his strength to make her life easier.  Or, you can relax and let her do it herself, reinforcing in her that she is on her own, she must do for herself, because no one will do it for her.

In a way, Chivalry is us showing Christ to those around us.  God did not owe us anything when He sent Jesus.  We do not owe the woman we open the door for anything.  The question arises in my mind, then, if limiting Chivalry to women or those weaker among us is adequate.  Maybe Chivalry should be extended at any opportunity to anyone, male or female.  Indeed, I think it should.

Honor all people is not a gender specific command.