In class today, I had my KT Extinction debate. In it, I had to be an expert witness, testify to a lobbyist and the Senators, all fellow classmates. My expertise was in the defense systems and the budget set in the debate parameters, which was $250Billion. I ran down the list of possible things to move asteroids off their trajectory and/or destroy them, along with a tax plan.
I'm posting the tax plan here, because I wanna see if it was a good argument to make, or if it wasn't worth bringing up.
U.S. Population - 307,006,550
U.S. Working Population ? 277,226,915
Poverty Line - $22,050
$25,000 to $50,000 (26.65%)
$50,000 to $75,000 (18.27%)
$75,000 to $100,000 (10.93%)
$100,000 or more (15.73%)
28.42% not being taxed
For the purposes of our logic, let's use:
$37.5K (26.65%) - 277,226,915 * (.2665) or 73 880 972.8
$62.5K (18.27%) - 277,226,915 * (.1827) or 50 649 357.4
$87.5K (10.97%) - 277,226,915 * (10.97) or 30 411 792.6
$175K (15.73%) - 277,226,915 * (.1573) or 43 607 793.7
Goal - $250 Billion in 40 years
[73880972.8(37,500*X)+50649357.4(62,500*X)+30411792.6(87,500*X)+48,292,130(175,000*X)]40 = 250,000,000,000
X = 0.000366606
Tax = 0.0366606 %
[73880972.8(37,500*X)+50649357.4(62,500*X)+30411792.6(87,500*X)+43607793.7(175,000*X)]10 = 250,000,000,000
X = 0.0015405
Tax = 0.15405%
I'd like to have you guys review of this, and I'm not using your advice to better my grade, so I'm not cheating.