Silly me for thinking the line labled "Profit Margin" wasn't really "profit margin" as is commonly understood, but is rather "pigdog's term for some number meant to illustrate a mechanism whose value doesn't matter and has nothing to do the term Profit Margin as used in accounting practice."
Silly me.
Silly me for thinking that profit margin was calculated against selling price (selling price becomes "revenue" in the accounting world, once the sale is made;) I should have known you were calculating "profit margin" against cost.
Silly me.
Silly me for suggesting that your example might be a compound interest model (a non-convergent series) even though the formula
FV=P(1 + r)^nEXACTLY reproduced the numbers in your table given you inputs. (BTW the MECHANISM, as you are so fond of shouting, is commonly known as "the magic of compound interest.")
Silly me.
Many people on these threads do not understand how such a mechanism works.
Well, you've certainly proven that!
You're right about one thing ... the "silly you" part. Additionally you've illustrated your complete lack of understanding of how the cascading of taxes works.
There were never any "generally accepted accounting practices" mentioned in explaining the example nor was there ever any thing described as "pigdog's term". What the example meant by those terms could be clearly understood either by viewing the example in #311 (if you bothered to think about what it meant) or by reading the description in #546.
In fact you even more clearly indicated your lack of understanding of the example when you pretended the input price was the real item of interest. Perhaps you really do not understand that "tax costs as % of sell price" is clearly the item of interest since it represents the percentage of tax coss that have cascaded and become embedded into prices and that percentage (which converges asymptotically to a given value as I have said) is what the end use consumer will pay as a percentage of whatever he purchases.
And you're now trying the age-old liberal stunt of trying to impugn someone who does not agree with you. In fact, it's apparent that you do not understand the cascading of embedded tax costs at all. You've clearly shown that without even realizing it.