For example, in a graph about market caps of companies compared to Apple, the kids were mostly way off target (understandably so). Common: no idea what market cap was….the most common comments implied that Bank of America actually had its $321 billion of cash, for example (“how do they spend it?”).

I think of your other blog – try to deal with student mistakes differently, try to start with the question they are correctly answering. But often you can use that technique in a few seconds, productively.

So I wonder how to start a conversation being swept up in the needed background knowledge which might take several minutes, expanding constantly with relevant student questions, whereby the lesson never really gets back to the graph at hand….

It is probably interesting to note that the current MTR does vary continuously with income level. If we figure out total federal income tax owed (based of the MTR tax table) and divide by gross income, then the percent of income paid towards federal income tax does continuously change even within a given marginal rate.

I’m an old soul! I prefer to ask questions first, Google later.

I thought millennials were supposed to know how to use Google, Brock!

Mike, if it were possible to like comments on this blog, I would like yours. In fact, I would create multiple accounts so that I could like it multiple times. I think the politics should be brought in. Math is a tool to talk about the issues, and important issues are by definition a part of politics. Teachers (and politicians) should lay both sides on the table. When only one side of the story is cast, most arguments are convincing. …But nothing is ever that simple. Thank you.

Another fair question to ask is, “Why would someone want to turn a $10,000,000 company employing 50 people into a $50,000,000 employing 250 people (creating 200 more jobs) if they will automatically lose 70% of their profit? We could go on to ask the kids to calculate how the additional tax would / could be added to the price of the product / service. Ask the kids about the costs of doing business (e.g., labor, rent, equipment, tax bill…). There are arguments that math can tell that says taxes are just another cost of doing business. There are other math stories that show taxes as being completely different and NOT a true cost of doing business since it is only applied AFTER the profit has been determined. It just depends on how the tax is implemented.

We could go on to ask the kids to calculate the taxes generated by the employees and their wages. This would involve students having to make some reasonable and varying assumptions, an important enduring skill in itself. What tax revenue could be generated if the employer increased his payroll and staff and compare that to the tax paid by business owner…

As you can see, lots of good math here but if paint this with one dimensional brush strokes we will turn a lot of people off and lose influence.

I hope you two can find each other somewhere else on social media and I look forward to hearing one day about what you both resolved.

Statement 1:
Nordic countries had a top marginal rate that was too high.
Reason:
Based on the premise and the observable fact that Nordic countries reduced their highest marginal tax rates (citation needed)

Statement 2:
If the US raised their top tier marginal tax rate, the rate would be too high.
Reason:
The US rate would be higher than the rate of the Nordic countries, which are too high.

Conclusion:
US should not raise their top tier marginal rate.

P.S. I’m in the middle of a unit on proof writing, so I’m hypersensitive to the formulation of arguments. My wife told me she loved me this morning and I didn’t believe it because there was a flaw in her argument. So don’t take this as a personal attack, just some recreational fun that caries a high price when held up against our social constructs.

P.P.S. This “proof” might be misrepresenting your reasoning, feel free to revise.

I’m not arguing they’re the best, I’m arguing that your argument is a lousy argument.
(Pointing out really, but I sooo wanted to use the “argue” THAT many times!!)