[Rave]

By golly,things are really gittin better every day,if they got much better I don't think I could stand it!

[AKHunter]

Some fuel for the fire. If anyone else drives a diesel they may have noticed that diesel fuel jumped 27 cents since friday!

[Sins-of-Mosin]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Cyrano

That presupposes you actually receive anything, Mosin. I got a form letter from the IRS today. I love this paragraph from it: "For taxpayers with adjusted gross income (AGI) of more than $75,000 (or more than $150,000 if married filing jointly), the payment will be reduced or phased out completely." What that means in all likelihood is that even though we don't make $150,000 combined a year, the IRS will find some pretext to diddle us out of the $1,500 we allegedly qualify for. I have no confidence in Bush's 'rebate' at all. The last time Bush arranged for a rebate to the taxpayers, we were supposed to get about $400, and we never saw one penny of it. I don't know where Bush is getting the money for these rebates, either. Curious George is trying to fight the war in Iraq on credit for all practical purposes; his general incompetence has thrown our entire economy into a tailspin; his bailouts may be helping the banks but are not helping the people; his administration's failure to make sure lenders were behaving in a sane fashion has more than a little to do with the stagflation/recession we are in right now; and yet he's going to hand us back money? When will the bill for these rebates come due, and just who is holding the note on it?

I used the calculator at the IRS website. If you have filed your taxes already and have that 1040 still around, you can punch in some numbers and get your estimate. Takes a few minutes, heck, they even got a schedule based on the last two digits of your SSN. I'm in the first batch!

[troy2000]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Casull

Yep Troy, you're right. We should tax the rich until they become poor. Teach them to be successful. And, it will help ............. wait a second, exactly who will it help?

Where did I say we should take all their money away from them? I didn't. But common sense says that if the government is going to raise money so it can keep functioning, it should get it from the people who have it.

And folks out there carry the idea of supply-side economics into the ground. You can overdo anything. It's like, "gee...cutting taxes some looks like it may have actually raised revenue instead of lowering it, because it improved the economy. I'll bet the more we cut, the better it'll work. So let's cut them more and more, and more...eventually we'll be taxing them nothing, and getting unlimited revenue in return!"

For those who believe that will work, I have a perpetual-motion machine I need financial backing for. As a matter of fact, it's better than perpetual motion, because the less energy you feed into it the more comes out. Email me for the investment brochure...

[Casull]

Quote:      

Where did I say we should take all their money away from them? I didn't. But common sense says that if the government is going to raise money so it can keep functioning, it should get it from the people who have it.

Two problems with your "common sense" there Troy. First of all, there just aren't enough rich to bleed them for the amount that the country needs. Secondly, if you bleed them too much, there is simply no incentive for them to continue to be productive. As someone else mentioned, just how many jobs are created by the poor. The problem is not a lack of funds going to the government, but a lack of spending control. If we send more money to Washington, they will simply spend too much, both democrat and Republican.

[Rave]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Casull

Two problems with your "common sense" there Troy. First of all, there just aren't enough rich to bleed them for the amount that the country needs. Secondly, if you bleed them too much, there is simply no incentive for them to continue to be productive. As someone else mentioned, just how many jobs are created by the poor. The problem is not a lack of funds going to the government, but a lack of spending control. If we send more money to Washington, they will simply spend too much, both democrat and Republican.

You got THAT right!

[Pred]

The tax hike that Obama and Hillary both signed(if either of them get into office it will go through) will add taxes to anyone who makes about $31,800. Because as we all know, $31,800 a year is just way to much to live on.

[LarryO1970]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Pred

The tax hike that Obama and Hillary both signed(if either of them get into office it will go through) will add taxes to anyone who makes about $31,800. Because as we all know, $31,800 a year is just way to much to live on.

... further proof that the Democrats are planning to tax the hell out of the middle class. Hey, wait.... this is not the top 1% that the Democrats are referring to?!

So exactly what is this tax hike supposed to pay for?

This just cracks me up ... the Democrats are supposedly the "Champions for the Middle Class" ... is this how they prove it?

[TXplt]

The only way to do this whole thing successfully is limit taxes, simplify taxes (i.e. flat tax with around 35,000-40K exemptions NTE 15% thereafter. NOT "double" taxing individual income from savings, investments etc., only original income. Same as for corporate income -- NTE 15% on profits), and balance the budget (i.e. limit spending with balanced budget amendment). When you're FORCED to be frugal you can make better choices (buy food instead of that shiny new watch). Nothing forces anyone to act wisely with OUR $ when they can jail you for not paying them.

I'm the middle class, and I'm the one who always pays more for tax hikes. These also ripple through everything I buy in the middle class.