Fed to match your bonus

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Nope.

OK
here it goes
No one is entitled to anything
But that is the way it is

If you have a problem with it
Then its your problem
😀

 

[Garfield1966]

OK
here it goes
No one is entitled to anything
But that is the way it is

If you have a problem with it
Then its your problem
😀

No. I disagree.

A business can be run by it's owners or management as they see fit. They have the gold and they make the rules. It is not a democracy and my vote does not count.

Government on the other hand is representative. We are the bosses. We put them in power. The Congress works for us and are subject to our collective will. If the people unite, we can actually change the path of the nation (Civil rights and Viet Nam come to mind). If enough people do not like having their money diverted from the tax pool to certain causes that can be changed.

 

[Bob Owens]

And to think that previous generations were able to raise families with out tax incentives. Why is that?

Could be because back when your parents raised you max Social Security was around 2% , or a third of what it is now (less if they made more and capped out before the year was out), full medical coverage was common and most people never made it out the 10% Federal tax bracket. In other words they paid less taxes.

So I not only get to pay taxes to educate your children (I get no break on that even though I do not get nearly the benefit that someone with children does) but I get to pay extra tax so that you can get $300 a kid? What entitles you to more of my money?

In many places School tax is paid by property owners who choose to live in an area where there is a school tax. Even on Long Island there are towns where there is no school tax. If paying for the education of other peoples kids bothers you so much find an area where there is no school tax. The thing you should remember is that when you were young people other than your parents were paying to make education available to you.

It is nice to see that the entitlement mentality is alive and well. If the government wants to give a credit to everyone, fine. But to steal from me to give to you smacks of socialism and I do not like it.

First of all we are not stealing from you. Us breeders-who carry the financial burden of providing for the next generation, are simply getting more of the taxes we paid back than you are, and we should because our overhead is more. Now, for those who dont pay taxes and are getting a refund you may have a gripe but I've always felt it was good policy not to complain about people who are less fortunate than yourself. As far as us getting more of our taxes back why is it that you are so outraged about a couple of hundred dollars while corporations, who only pay taxes on their net instead of their gross like us ,get the best deals going on taxes but that doesnt bother you a bit? You are chasing pennies while the dollars are blowing away.

You could look at it this way, a company with a higher overhead and a lower profit gets even bigger tax breaks than one with lower overhead and higher profits because all of the money that it takes in and spends on overhead is tax free. Corporations get to spend the money they take in tax free and the only taxes they pay is on the extra money they didnt spend. Legally a corporation is a person, like you and me-yet we have to pay taxes on the money we take in even if it doesnt cover the expenses of maintaning ourselves, these corporate 'persons", corporations, get to take the money they take in and spend it as lavishly as they like and only have to pay tax on whats left over, then they complain and distort the facts that say that they pay 35% in taxes while most people only spend around 15%. If I only paid taxes on my net I wouldnt be paying any taxes-like a lot of corporations. The reason why you pay more isnt because us breeders are getting a deal, I pay more than previous generations did, its because corporations arent paying their fair share anymore.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

You could look at it this way, a company with a higher overhead and a lower profit gets even bigger tax breaks than one with lower overhead and higher profits because all of the money that it takes in and spends on overhead is tax free. Corporations get to spend the money they take in tax free and the only taxes they pay is on the extra money they didnt spend. Legally a corporation is a person, like you and me-yet we have to pay taxes on the money we take in even if it doesnt cover the expenses of maintaning ourselves, these corporate 'persons", corporations, get to take the money they take in and spend it as lavishly as they like and only have to pay tax on whats left over, then they complain and distort the facts that say that they pay 35% in taxes while most people only spend around 15%. If I only paid taxes on my net I wouldnt be paying any taxes-like a lot of corporations. The reason why you pay more isnt because us breeders are getting a deal, I pay more than previous generations did, its because corporations arent paying their fair share anymore.

You forgot to mention one VERY important part. The owners of the corporation (i.e. stockholders) are taxed on their dividends and on the sale of the securities. That is AFTER the company was already taxed at the corporate level. It isn't peaches and cream.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

We are never going to have a president again who hasn't done drugs of some kind in their past. That 60s and 70s crowd is moving heavily into politics, so any of them that says they haven't you can bet is pretty much blowing wind up your skirt!

It's just not a big deal.

 

[Garfield1966]

Could be because back when your parents raised you max Social Security was around 2% , or a third of what it is now (less if they made more and capped out before the year was out), full medical coverage was common and most people never made it out the 10% Federal tax bracket. In other words they paid less taxes.

My folks were single income and my dad paid for our own health care.

In many places School tax is paid by property owners who choose to live in an area where there is a school tax. Even on Long Island there are towns where there is no school tax. If paying for the education of other peoples kids bothers you so much find an area where there is no school tax. The thing you should remember is that when you were young people other than your parents were paying to make education available to you.

And the fact that someone else paid for my education makes me paying for your kids education right? My parents should have been forced to pay for mine or at the very least a larger portion of my education than those with out children.

First of all we are not stealing from you. Us breeders-who carry the financial burden of providing for the next generation, are simply getting more of the taxes we paid back than you are, and we should because our overhead is more. Now, for those who dont pay taxes and are getting a refund you may have a gripe but I've always felt it was good policy not to complain about people who are less fortunate than yourself. As far as us getting more of our taxes back why is it that you are so outraged about a couple of hundred dollars while corporations, who only pay taxes on their net instead of their gross like us ,get the best deals going on taxes but that doesnt bother you a bit? You are chasing pennies while the dollars are blowing away.

You could look at it this way, a company with a higher overhead and a lower profit gets even bigger tax breaks than one with lower overhead and higher profits because all of the money that it takes in and spends on overhead is tax free. Corporations get to spend the money they take in tax free and the only taxes they pay is on the extra money they didnt spend. Legally a corporation is a person, like you and me-yet we have to pay taxes on the money we take in even if it doesnt cover the expenses of maintaning ourselves, these corporate 'persons", corporations, get to take the money they take in and spend it as lavishly as they like and only have to pay tax on whats left over, then they complain and distort the facts that say that they pay 35% in taxes while most people only spend around 15%. If I only paid taxes on my net I wouldnt be paying any taxes-like a lot of corporations. The reason why you pay more isnt because us breeders are getting a deal, I pay more than previous generations did, its because corporations arent paying their fair share anymore.

You seem to have difficulty with staying on issue huh? I am not talking about lower income. I am not talking about corporations. Those are separate issues and can be dealt with at a different time. The only thing I am dealing with now is the fact that a person who decides on their own to have a child is getting more money back in the form of a tax refund. I have yet to speak to a person with a child who when asked why they have a child replied that "they were supplying seeds for the continuation of man kind". While that is true, people have children because they want a family. It is done for primarily for selfish reasons. If the children are for societies benefit then one could argue that the society should raise them.

You are a perfect example of why the idea of a flat tax is becoming so popular. No exemptions, no deductions.... just a flat rate. A family with 10 kids would pay the exact same tax as little old me and my wife.

The bottom line is that just because you choose to have children does not in any way shape or form entitle you to more of my money. I help pay for your kids education. Fine. Theoretically the child will grow up to be a benefit to society and not a liability (BTW, do I get a refund if you raise an idiot? Just curious). Why you should get $300 a pop on top of that is beyond me.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

The bottom line is that just because you choose to have children does not in any way shape or form entitle you to more of my money. I help pay for your kids education. Fine. Theoretically the child will grow up to be a benefit to society and not a liability (BTW, do I get a refund if you raise an idiot? Just curious). Why you should get $300 a pop on top of that is beyond me.

While discussing other tax issues, I could agree with you to a point Garfield. But this is about a stimulus package. The stimulus package only has a chance of working (if it will work at all) if it is put into the hands of people who will spend the money immediately. Hence, the cut-off at $75k and $150k for individuals and families respectively. It is all about spending it fast.

I am assuming that the plan takes into account the likelihood that a low-earning family may spend the additional money immediately, while an individual may hoard the extra cash. So, the plan doesn't -- and shouldn't -- consider the "who deserves it more" variable as much as the "who will spend it all the quickest" variable. They don't leave the first variable completely off the analysis, it is just lower in priority.

 

[Garfield1966]

Good point.

Question. Wouldn't people who are more strapped for cash be more likely to spend it on bills and living necessities as opposed to some good(s) that will stimulate the economy? No idea what goods would do that but I know that the checks for my self and my wife will go towrad paying down debt. My sister-in-law/brother - in law will go toward our Mexico trip this summer (they have 2 kids so they get more). A single friend here at Crew skd will be taking his money to Paris on vacation. That's 5 down right there.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Good point.

Question. Wouldn't people who are more strapped for cash be more likely to spend it on bills and living necessities as opposed to some good(s) that will stimulate the economy? No idea what goods would do that but I know that the checks for my self and my wife will go towrad paying down debt. My sister-in-law/brother - in law will go toward our Mexico trip this summer (they have 2 kids so they get more). A single friend here at Crew skd will be taking his money to Paris on vacation. That's 5 down right there.

Yeah. You would think so right? I would HOPE so. Unfortunately, many Americans will not be as wise as you and your wife.

Part of the reason we are in this mess is because people were living beyond their means, using the widely available credit for so-called sustaining power. History repeats itself; and I would venture a guess that many of those same people will take this $300 or $600 and spend most of it at Walmart (or wherever, leaving only a small percentage to pay down debt or save). Bad for those people; good in the short-term for our economy; potentially bad long-term for economy if the pendulum is not normalized.

Obviously this brings to question the wisdom of using known poison to lessen the sting of a recession... but it is a catch-22. Let's hope that many Americans take an insightful look at this windfall, and use it accordingly as you plan.

 

[Garfield1966]

Yeah. You would think so right? I would HOPE so. Unfortunately, many Americans will not be as wise as you and your wife.

Part of the reason we are in this mess is because people were living beyond their means, using the widely available credit for so-called sustaining power. History repeats itself; and I would venture a guess that many of those same people will take this $300 or $600 and spend most of it at Walmart (or wherever, leaving only a small percentage to pay down debt or save). Bad for those people; good in the short-term for our economy; potentially bad long-term for economy if the pendulum is not normalized.

Obviously this brings to question the wisdom of using known poison to lessen the sting of a recession... but it is a catch-22. Let's hope that many Americans take an insightful look at this windfall, and use it accordingly as you plan.

I think it would be funny as hell if everyone who got one of these checks sent it straight back to George and endorse it over to the feds with instructions to pay down the debt or help pay for vet care, or something like that.

I know it would never happen but it would be nice to see the expression of his face.

 

[local 12 proud]

I think it would be funny as hell if everyone who got one of these checks sent it straight back to George and endorse it over to the feds with instructions to pay down the debt or help pay for vet care, or something like that.

I know it would never happen but it would be nice to see the expression of his face.

So whats stopping you?

 

[WingNaPrayer]

I know it would never happen but it would be nice to see the expression of his face.

I think the "duh" look that he has now is pretty much permanent. Any monies anyone sent back to him for the vets would end up as additional money spent on the Iraq war. This president has done more to cut benefits for vets and their families than take care of them. And now he's got his beady little eyes on Iran too? Jesus! Please take him now!

 

[Bob Owens]

You forgot to mention one VERY important part. The owners of the corporation (i.e. stockholders) are taxed on their dividends and on the sale of the securities. That is AFTER the company was already taxed at the corporate level. It isn't peaches and cream.

You forget that a corporation is a legal person. I was comparing what people pay and what corporations pay.

Stockholders should pay tax on dividends and the sale of securites because its unearned income, like gambling winnings and they did not pay tax when they bought them. If I buy a car or a TV set I pay tax on it, and I'm paying for it with money that was already taxed, if its value goes to Zero, which it inevitably does, I cant write it off on my taxes as a loss either,I cant even get credit for the tax I paid for it, but you can with stocks, in fact you only pay tax if the stock makes you money. Stockholders get a more than fair deal on taxes.

Implying that since the corporation, a legal person, paid tax on their profits that the stockholders shouldnt is absurd. Thats like saying if your business partner paid taxes you should get credit for it. When you become a stockholder your ownership liability extends only to the money you put in, you are not held liable beyond that, yet you think that separation should not come at any cost and that taxes paid by the corporation should be credited to returns on your investment in the corporation. Thats extremely unfair to those who have to work to get money.

 

[Bob Owens]

So whats stopping you?

I think he meant to say "everyone else"

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Implying that since the corporation, a legal person, paid tax on their profits that the stockholders shouldnt is absurd. Thats like saying if your business partner paid taxes you should get credit for it. When you become a stockholder your ownership liability extends only to the money you put in, you are not held liable beyond that, yet you think that separation should not come at any cost and that taxes paid by the corporation should be credited to returns on your investment in the corporation. Thats extremely unfair to those who have to work to get money.

I am not implying that stockholders should not pay ANY taxes on their profit. What I am saying is that a few posts ago you were making a bad comparison.

And in this post you are making another bad comparison. In a partnership, there is only ONE taxation, and both partners are liable. In a corp., the corp is taxed originally at the corporate level, and then when the owners want to take their profit, they are taxed AGAIN. Their profit is lower originally from the corporate tax, and then, when they finally see that taxed profit, they are taxed on it again when they want to liquidate it. Everyone knows that double taxation goes hand-in-hand with corporations, otherwise there would not have been the surge of LLC and the like. Again, I not making an argument that stockowners should pay taxes.