So where is that taxcut for the rich I am supposed to be getting. Seems to me unless you have kids, are poor, or own a house, you get no break from uncle sam.
So where is that taxcut for the rich I am supposed to be getting. Seems to me unless you have kids, are poor, or own a house, you get no break from uncle sam.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0) but I'm not sure this is a good way to go about fixing the EIC mis-reporting problem.
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Your rates accroos the board have gone down by at least 2% in every bracket, more in the top bracket. Your capital gains are 15% instead of 20%.... BTW0 I paid more single making half as much...Get a house all you can afford 5000 a month does;nt matter it's free rent and huge tax savings.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
are you stupid? I already paid taxes on my IRA moneys, so I better not be paying no national sales tax on that when I retire.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
I agree with that if you exempt food and housing.
The problem is that I don't want to get no frikken house in bay area right now. This housing market in Silicon valley is overpriced. Also, I am 23, and I really don't want to settle down yet, especially since I might go back to grad school. My beef is when does a single renter like myself ever going to get a break?
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
are you stupid? I already paid taxes on my IRA moneys, so I better not be paying no national sales tax on that when I retire.
a national sales would not likely raise or lower your taxes a great deal.
When you get a house and dependants. The current tax code sucks and it appears no one is really interested in reforming it.
When you have kids or buy a house
It isn't "fair" - i know. Before I got married and had kids I felt the way you do. It's just the way our system works. We need to have a "fairer" and more simple system but nobody in power seems to know how to implement it(or wants it either).
CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Gee the quote disappeared...
the economic stimuli package was demand directed. It increase the Child tax credit, changed the tax table cutoff marginally so everyone earning at that rate benefits and some $ fro the dividend issue... some change to the standard deduction and the exemption w/o.. the package did not provide much else of note.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Thanks. So IYO what would happen if we went back to the taxes of the old days? 91% top marninal rates after WWII till kennedy? From things I've read the econmy grew like never before or since during that time of huge tax on the wealthy. Also, the burden has shifted to filks like me I feel. Now AMT hits us since the rates never changed etc... Do you feel the middle class is getting screwed? Then you have someone like my dad whos income is all LTCG paying only 15%, no ss, no medicaid etc... Just does'nt seem "fair" since he does'nt even spend...Still drives an old beat up 86 roadmaster and lives like a popper.
Edit my tax scheme would have zero taxes below 50 then graduate to 90% after a million? No deductions.
A plan like that killed the Swedish economy because all the rich people moved out of the country.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Zebo said:
Thanks. So IYO what would happen if we went back to the taxes of the old days? 91% top marninal rates after WWII till kennedy? From things I've read the econmy grew like never before or since during that time of huge tax on the wealthy. Also, the burden has shifted to filks like me I feel. Now AMT hits us since the rates never changed etc... Do you feel the middle class is getting screwed? Then you have someone like my dad whos income is all LTCG paying only 15%, no ss, no medicaid etc... Just does'nt seem "fair" since he does'nt even spend...Still drives an old beat up 86 roadmaster and lives like a popper.
Edit my tax scheme would have zero taxes below 50 then graduate to 90% after a million? No deductions.[/quote]
I base my thinking on the absence of a substantial US manufacturing base as existed in the past when I say we need to get manufacturing back and isolate a bit while considering a taxing and spending scenario. We use to make the best of the best, Japan was a joke... tinker toys that broke when touched.. now they and all the rest of the Asian rim make the best and cheapest of what is in demand.... electronics. Mexico has recently lost about 50,000 jobs in the border mfg base which suggests a broader slump than is recognized.
AMT is an alternative tax for tax break issues like excess depr.. if you're into that well I see your point.
Laffer's analysis is correct regarding the revenue/rate correlation.
At this point in time we should strive to employ every one and damn the debt. If we employed everyone we'd have an economy that would be growing (real) over 10% per annum. The revenue would create surplus given we'd enjoy all the full employment dividends and then we'd be able to pay down slowly the debt, revamp SS and the rest. The issue to resolve is employment and that is done through increased manufacturing base. Make taxation help but, provide incentive's to buy American and stimulate our own base and then solve the debt.
I see the economy rides on a circle or wheel... the diameter of which is the GDP ... there is an angular momentum and tangential issues to always deal with. The job of government is to educate the population in an agreed bipartisan manner and then go solve the issue. Whatever the resulting tax and spending issues are not fixing them will result dire and depressive results.
Thanks. So IYO what would happen if we went back to the taxes of the old days? 91% top marninal rates after WWII till kennedy? From things I've read the econmy grew like never before or since during that time of huge tax on the wealthy. Also, the burden has shifted to filks like me I feel. Now AMT hits us since the rates never changed etc... Do you feel the middle class is getting screwed? Then you have someone like my dad whos income is all LTCG paying only 15%, no ss, no medicaid etc... Just does'nt seem "fair" since he does'nt even spend...Still drives an old beat up 86 roadmaster and lives like a popper.
Edit my tax scheme would have zero taxes below 50 then graduate to 90% after a million? No deductions.[/quote]
I base my thinking on the absence of a substantial US manufacturing base as existed in the past when I say we need to get manufacturing back and isolate a bit while considering a taxing and spending scenario. We use to make the best of the best, Japan was a joke... tinker toys that broke when touched.. now they and all the rest of the Asian rim make the best and cheapest of what is in demand.... electronics. Mexico has recently lost about 50,000 jobs in the border mfg base which suggests a broader slump than is recognized.
AMT is an alternative tax for tax break issues like excess depr.. if you're into that well I see your point.
Laffer's analysis is correct regarding the revenue/rate correlation.
At this point in time we should strive to employ every one and damn the debt. If we employed everyone we'd have an economy that would be growing (real) over 10% per annum. The revenue would create surplus given we'd enjoy all the full employment dividends and then we'd be able to pay down slowly the debt, revamp SS and the rest. The issue to resolve is employment and that is done through increased manufacturing base. Make taxation help but, provide incentive's to buy American and stimulate our own base and then solve the debt.
I see the economy rides on a circle or wheel... the diameter of which is the GDP ... there is an angular momentum and tangential issues to always deal with. The job of government is to educate the population in an agreed bipartisan manner and then go solve the issue. Whatever the resulting tax and spending issues are not fixing them will result dire and depressive results.
Well Lunar according to Patrick J. Bush has created those manufacturing jobs....in China.. He also states
As for your 100% employment idea how about this: repeal Number 16. The resulting influx of new enterprise in America would create those jobs. Impose tarrifs to deal with our half a billion dollar trade imbalance. Require a balanced federal budget then roll out a national sales tax with all proceeds going to debt elimination, expiring when the debt is sufficiently neutered.
The average median income level in this country will start to appreciate again as it did from the 40s into the 70s. And because government isn't artificially inflating the prices of just about anything that income will go a lot further. People wouldn't fear job loss because companies would have every reason to stay put right here at home so there'd be plenty of them available. We might produce so much I wonder if we'd actually see a trade surplus for the first time?
But I forget this is no longer the land of dreams.
As for your 100% employment idea how about this: repeal Number 16. The resulting influx of new enterprise in America would create those jobs. Impose tarrifs to deal with our half a billion dollar trade imbalance. Require a balanced federal budget then roll out a national sales tax with all proceeds going to debt elimination, expiring when the debt is sufficiently neutered.
The average median income level in this country will start to appreciate again as it did from the 40s into the 70s. And because government isn't artificially inflating the prices of just about anything that income will go a lot further. People wouldn't fear job loss because companies would have every reason to stay put right here at home so there'd be plenty of them available. We might produce so much I wonder if we'd actually see a trade surplus for the first time?
But I forget this is no longer the land of dreams.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Great article by buchanan. The neocons globalists clintoniskas etc are all anti-american and pose the greatest risk to national security IMO. Not Osama, not ME or whatever imagined threats. (seems everyone forgot about MAD with iraq) These areas are simply wall streets wet dream to control all major industries, access to resourses and supply in those countries. Unfortuantly the press, also a member of the corporate elite wanting control of foriegn markets, has branded him a racist, anti-semite, and protectionist, why do you thnk they are so supportive of Bushs and Cintons invasions? Also Jelly if you speak the way you do you are at risk of being called the same since we are so brainwashed that free trade is the way to go.
The bottom line is we cannot complete with basically unlimited labor pool abroad unless we want to make ourselves competitive by lowering the rates we charge to what they charge. This means no enviromental standards or controls, no heath insurance, no retirement pensions, low wages, no job security until we equilibrate with them. I suppose on one level one could argue what good for the goose is good for the gander. India and China is doing much better economically and has less poverty than it used to so in this way it's good. We on the other hand are starting to suffer a bit because of it. On the whole I guess it's good if one does'nt care about enviroment, quaility of life and living in an ultracompetitive enviroment.
The bottom line is we cannot complete with basically unlimited labor pool abroad unless we want to make ourselves competitive by lowering the rates we charge to what they charge. This means no enviromental standards or controls, no heath insurance, no retirement pensions, low wages, no job security until we equilibrate with them. I suppose on one level one could argue what good for the goose is good for the gander. India and China is doing much better economically and has less poverty than it used to so in this way it's good. We on the other hand are starting to suffer a bit because of it. On the whole I guess it's good if one does'nt care about enviroment, quaility of life and living in an ultracompetitive enviroment.
Nitemare
Lifer
- Feb 8, 2001
- 35,466
- 4
- 76
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Now, I know alot of you think you know how I feel about taxes and credits (net $0
IRS to Ask Low-Income Families for Proof
<snip>
low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
</snip>
I think that taking the "free" money away would do more to help this situation than creating a "certification" program to regulate it. Spend money to save money?
CkG
I believe this has always been the way the IRS operated, that being the burden of proof lies with the taxpayer. This was a hue issue back in the 80's when people were losing everything without notification. Many had a terrible time proving their innocence.
All the more reason to dismantle the IRS and go with a national sales tax.
are you stupid? I already paid taxes on my IRA moneys, so I better not be paying no national sales tax on that when I retire.
a national sales would not likely raise or lower your taxes a great deal.
plus it would give the federal government more money to waste and throw away. We need to transfer power back to the states, Washington has proven that it does not know what to do with all that money.
national salex tax? you people with some money.....you'll do anything to hold on
to it, won't you?
you people with some money.....you'll do anything to hold onto it, won't you?
national salex tax? you people with some money.....you'll do anything to hold on
to it, won't you?
you people with some money.....you'll do anything to hold onto it, won't you?
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Zebo and Jelly,
I know that the very first issue to be resolved is to educate the population.. not the elite, rich power broker... he already knows how to play the game no matter which game is played. And he also knows how to get the umpires to call the strikes and balls in a manner consistent with his liking.. Educate the rank and file. This is a must! With a myriad of Ph.D. Economists having divergent means to solve "The" problem folks are left with no clear path to support... so they opt for what sounds good and often that is near term and a partial truth.
I'm educated in this stuff but so is every one on this board. We each can see reality in the marketplace and we each hear our elected folks propound idea after idea as the means to solve this or that problem... What we don't see is a complete package. I mean by this: We don't all agree with what drives the problems and where to apply the oil.
Pat Buchanan sees the economy as it regards current problems as I do. He gets his info from sources that I agree with. I agree because I can measure it, correlate it and model it and it comes out true.
We have moved much Manufacturing elsewhere. This is reasonable if you buy into the underlying basis that propels the concept. I don't. I don't buy into NAFTA. NAFTA is filled with partial truths and Partial reasoning. I can argue a case for NAFTA if I wanted but, I'd have to leave out the potential bad things... the what ifs that seem mitigated by booms and become dynamic in unbooms... dynamic in the sense that we rely on India to supply cheap tech resources instead of good old USA folks why... it is cheaper. And paying unemployment and welfare and on and on isn't... your taxes fund this! So is it cheaper... maybe, it all depends on who does the looking.
We must get what we consume here provided or generated here. Fix the holes in our ship first before trying to patch up the holes of other nation's ships or we'll all sink in the process.
So In conclusion, I'd simply say. If you want lower taxes have more people paying taxes. If you want lower prices ... you'll have to pay higher taxes... or lets get the US Economic Health sorted out and well pay a fair price and a fair tax and provide for the elderly and the young. Remember there was a time when only Dad worked and you lived in a nice home and all that.... what has changed... and why.
"We had a very low unemployment and hardly anyone was underemployed"
I know that the very first issue to be resolved is to educate the population.. not the elite, rich power broker... he already knows how to play the game no matter which game is played. And he also knows how to get the umpires to call the strikes and balls in a manner consistent with his liking.. Educate the rank and file. This is a must! With a myriad of Ph.D. Economists having divergent means to solve "The" problem folks are left with no clear path to support... so they opt for what sounds good and often that is near term and a partial truth.
I'm educated in this stuff but so is every one on this board. We each can see reality in the marketplace and we each hear our elected folks propound idea after idea as the means to solve this or that problem... What we don't see is a complete package. I mean by this: We don't all agree with what drives the problems and where to apply the oil.
Pat Buchanan sees the economy as it regards current problems as I do. He gets his info from sources that I agree with. I agree because I can measure it, correlate it and model it and it comes out true.
We have moved much Manufacturing elsewhere. This is reasonable if you buy into the underlying basis that propels the concept. I don't. I don't buy into NAFTA. NAFTA is filled with partial truths and Partial reasoning. I can argue a case for NAFTA if I wanted but, I'd have to leave out the potential bad things... the what ifs that seem mitigated by booms and become dynamic in unbooms... dynamic in the sense that we rely on India to supply cheap tech resources instead of good old USA folks why... it is cheaper. And paying unemployment and welfare and on and on isn't... your taxes fund this! So is it cheaper... maybe, it all depends on who does the looking.
We must get what we consume here provided or generated here. Fix the holes in our ship first before trying to patch up the holes of other nation's ships or we'll all sink in the process.
So In conclusion, I'd simply say. If you want lower taxes have more people paying taxes. If you want lower prices ... you'll have to pay higher taxes... or lets get the US Economic Health sorted out and well pay a fair price and a fair tax and provide for the elderly and the young. Remember there was a time when only Dad worked and you lived in a nice home and all that.... what has changed... and why.
"We had a very low unemployment and hardly anyone was underemployed"
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 11K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter