I shouldn't have to show you anything to prove to you, skrum, that rich people spend less of their income. Being rich/wealthy by definition means you have a high net worth. An average guy has a shit net worth. That is to say the average person either doesn't earn very much income in their lifetime or they don't save much of it - meaning they spend a larger proportion of their money.

You don't see millionaires with debts. The average American has debt. That should be enough to proof.

Boner:

You are confusing marginal and average propensity to consume. The typical individual, rich or poor, has a consumption function of the form constant + disposable income x marginal propensity to consume. Very low income people, such as college students, spend more than their income. They have negative saving. They have to borrow, dig into their cash reserves, or get money from their parents. Their average propensity to consume is more than 100%. When they graduate and go into the job market, their average propensity to consume starts to fall, and drops below 100%.

Reworking previous example. Suppose rich guy spends $1,000,000 and has total income of $2,000,000. Rich guy's average propensity to consume is 50%. Poor guy spends $10,000, his income is $10,000. His average propensity to consume is 100%. Both guys' marginal propensity to consume is 80%. Make a big transfer this time to illustrate the numbers.

Take $10,000 from rich guy and give to poor guy. Rich guy's total income is $1,990,000. Poor guy's total income is now $20,000. Rich guy's consumption is now $992,000. Poor guy's consumption is now $18,000. Rich guy's average propensity to consume is now a little larger than 50%. Poor guy's average propensity to consume has fallen to 90%. Total consumption has not changed.

I know the difference but I didn't think I had to explain that someone in debt obviously had a much higher marginal propensity to consume then a multi millionaire. Prove to me rich people have the same marginal propensity to consume as poor people.

If someone is starving and you give them $10 they will likely spend all of it on food. Give a millionaire $10,000 and he likely won't spend any of it, at least on anything he otherwise would not have spent money on.

Boner, you are the one who put forth the argument that rich people have a lower marginal propensity to consume. Show me the data. Which is what I asked for in the first place.

Jesus you have to be kidding me skrum. I google this for you and I get like online text books and high school teacher's power points. It's almost laughable how purposely ignorant you're being. But to humor you here you go:
https://docs.google.com/a/nd.edu/viewer?a=v&q=cache:LZDc5n8R960J:www.uvcms.com/mhol/econ/Econ/Schiller_Macro%252010e/Chapter%25209/Instructor/IM/Chap009.doc+rich+people+marginal+propensity+to+consume&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiM8h11h6n9eFEDTGY1sraO4SwTLD6wdhyLBFlIMfe89KGiUA-ZRrxZnu1sT1dhPOuXFitlP7qnjgSw3TN1qvO4EdAmCNz5Q1RnJvkB16D2YCWTn7_KROpc1oWtEoQXV6PgrJKn&sig=AHIEtbSCUX8JWLDos34s5XNR-BslolnVdg&pli=1
From a mother fucking economics text book. Feel free to read the whole thing if you want to teach yourself basic economics.

By the way here's an eloquent wikipedia post on why we need high tax rates for the highest marginal tax rates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_condensation

Relink: https://docs.google.com/a/nd.edu/viewer?a=v&q=cache:LZDc5n8R960J:www.uvcms.com/mhol/econ/Econ/Schiller_Macro%252010e/Chapter%25209/Instructor/IM/Chap009.doc+rich+people+marginal+propensity+to+consume&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiM8h11h6n9eFEDTGY1sraO4SwTLD6wdhyLBFlIMfe89KGiUA-ZRrxZnu1sT1dhPOuXFitlP7qnjgSw3TN1qvO4EdAmCNz5Q1RnJvkB16D2YCWTn7_KROpc1oWtEoQXV6PgrJKn&sig=AHIEtbSCUX8JWLDos34s5XNR-BslolnVdg&pli=1


Simply search "rich people" to find a direct refutation of your idea that rich people and poor people have the same marginal propensity to consume. If you even think about it's obvious they don't but fuck I have to find a text book to prove it to you. It's ridiculous arguing with you-- it's not even worth my time anymore if you can't even pretend to have a real discussion with me.

if you don't buy that I'll take a page from chloe's book: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=rich+have+low+mpc

I used chloe's cite because it was shorter. The results were not encouraging. For example, here is one of the top 10 that were googled:

This makes understanding the spending patterns of the rich critical to analyzing the ... (If you consume only half your income, you have an MPC of .5. ... in the hands of people who will re-spend it (moderate & lower income) and the ...
www.alternativesmagazine.com/25/beaton.html - Cached - Similar

in other words, a confusion of MPC and APC. One of the papers refers to long-run (patient) versus short-run (impatient) MPC which is a well-known element of MPC theory. Your poor man, for example, might spend only one tenth of the $10 you give him if he doesn't expect to come across another $10 for a while, while the man might spend all of it if you tell him he will be getting an extra $10 each day forever.

Google doesn't have a truth checker.

You linked to some bullshit magazine, I was using textbooks and academic sources. Furthermore do you not understand that average propensity to consume is a FUNCTION of the marginal propensity to consume? Like how the formula of a line is a function of the slope. The APC is greatly affected by the MPC, so even if you couldn't prove the rich have a very low MPC (which is a retarded nonsequitur i'm sure you realize) then you'd still have to reconcile it with the APC you admitted is lower for the rich. You can deny reality all you want but the truth is the truth and I will champion it as long as I am alive.

Here's a fucking powerpoint: http://www.ecb.int/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp1117.pdf

It's a fucking .int website so it's run by the international community, if you don't take that as gospel then I give up.

It says that the wealthy have a lower MPC because of their weaker precautionary motive. That is to say they do not have to protect and support their basic necessities like someone with an average income would. How the fuck does this not make sense? The more I talk to you skrum the more I lose my faith in humanity.

Holy shit what am I doing, just read the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_propensity_to_consume

By fucking definition MPC is lower if you have a higher income. CHALLENGER DEFEATED.