Tax Cut - $1.35 Trillion

[BRiT]

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010526/ts/congress_taxes_dc_51.html

The biggest tax cut in two decades, the compromise package would give households a refund of up to $600 this year, would reduce most income tax rates across-the-board by three percentage points starting July 1, 2001, and create a new 10-percent bracket.

In a move that Bush said would give the U.S. economy ``a much needed shot in the arm,'' the bill calls for the government to send out some 95 million refund checks to taxpayers this year, mainly in August and September.

Single taxpayers would receive a lump-sum refund of up to $300 this year, single parents up to $500 and married couples up to $600.

<IMG SRC="http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20010526/compromise_taxplan_graphic.gif" border=0>

--|BRiT|

 

[jadedskies]

Wouldn't there be better things to use this money on?

------------------
PsychoticIckyThing.Com

 

[KNSinatra]

Originally posted by PsychoticIckyThing:
Wouldn't there be better things to use this money on?

It's our own hard-earned money, PIT. Why shouldn't we be allowed to have it?

------------------
In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man;
if you want anything done, ask a woman. -Margaret Thatcher

Work like you don't need the money, love like you've never been hurt, and dance like no one is watching.

En fuego, bebé.

 

[meezercat]

Well, ALL taxes come from our hard-earned money, so maybe we just shouldn't have to pay taxes at all, and we'll have no government, no government services like police and fire protection, not to mention social security, unemployment benefits (AHEM to anyone who would deny me that while I've been unemployed), Interstates, the list goes on and on.

I suppose we could go to some sort of anarchist life where it's every man for himself... :/

 

[Diesel]

Originally posted by hermanm:
I suppose we could go to some sort of anarchist life where it's every man for himself... :/

Let's all move to Montana and write manifestos!!!

------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[Diesel]

back on topic:
These quotes are what concern me...

``This is good short-term politics. It is disastrous long-term policy,'' said Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.

Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland called the tax cuts a ``time bomb ... that will blow up for generations yet to come.''

Of course, that's just politician-speak, so I take it with a grain of salt, but the likelihood that this could be a short-term fix that is more damaging in the long run is a very real possibility.


------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[Prox]

I think that that money could easely have gone to better uses. I mean look at a teachers salery. They make almost nothing, and yet they are some of the most important people in our country. And Isnt social security on its way to bankrupsy. That wouldnt be good as many of our grandparents, and great grandparents depend on that money to buy their perscriptions and survive. Honestly if that money was truly a surpluss then our education system would be much better funded, social security would have nothing to fear, there would be a better government medical system, and the list goes on and on. I would much rather see the money spent on something to improve the country then tax cuts. But thats just me.

------------------
Mother Should I Trust The Government - Pink Floyd

Everything under the sun is in tune but the sun is eclipsed by the moon - Pink Floyd

Those times I burned my guitar it was like a sacrafice. You sacrafice the things you love. I love my guitar - Jimi Hendrix

 

[Diesel]

BRiT&gt; The government has already demonstrated that it cannot be run as a business. It would've been condemned as a miserable failure a long time ago if it had.
It hasn't been able to make money at anything, no matter how much it tries.

Tax Cuts&gt; Despite the fact that these tax cuts are being waved in the face of the public as a great thing, it's really nothing more than a veil to prevent the common person who doesn't look past the face value of anything from seeing that the government is still taking more out of his and her pockets then they ever have.

What good is a tax cut that returns $300 to someone if the taxes themselves are still taking about 50% of their paycheck? Federal Income Tax took way more than $300 out of my last paycheck alone. Big deal that, at the end of the year, I'll get that back.

IOW, if I take the amount taken out in federal income tax from this paycheck, and multiply it out for the year, they will be taking over $12k out of my annual salary in Federal Income Tax alone, and I'm supposed to be excited that they'll give me back $300 at the end of the year?!?

I would've earned more than that in interest on a CD if I'd been able to keep that money and invest it. Look at it this way... if the government were to send you a check every month for $25, would you get terribly excited, if you understood that they were taking over $900 each month? When you're realize that you're still $875 in the hole EACH MONTH, a $300 tax cut doesn't seem like some great governmental triumph.


------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[BRiT]

Social security would have nothing to fear if it was using a system that works. The current implementation is faulty. They need to reimplement the system to achive acceptable results.

Why continue feeding a system that is flawed? Must be something akin to why people continue to pour money into a lemon of a car or stay in a disfunctional relationship.

I think the money could be better spent on all the technical professionals, afterall they are the ones who innovate new solutions to make the world a better place.

Yes, teachers barely get paid what they should. Do you also pay the janitors more for providing a clean learning environment. Or how about the drivers who transport the children to work? Or what about the public transportation workers, who deliver some of the adults to work? Or what about the gas station attendent who makes sure the gas station is functional so the vehicles have sufficient fuel to transport people? Or what about the sales clerk at the local store who rings up consumer purchases that help to keep people happy and prevent them from snapping and going postal. But if you decide to pay teachers more, where do you draw the line at who receives the additional money? There are so many people in our society who are important.

--|BRiT|

 

[Diesel]

Originally posted by BRiT:
Do you also pay the janitors more for providing a clean learning environment.

Bad example, since many janitors make a killing for the amount of work they do. I know, for a fact, that there are many janitors in the NYC public school system, who are making well over 6 figures for what amounts to less than 40 hours of work per week. When leveraged against the amount of hours per week a teacher puts in, that can be more than quadruple what the average teacher takes home.

I know that this is not limited to NYC, but it's a good example of how screwed up the priorities are when it comes to people getting their fair share.

I agree with Prox that teachers deserve better than what they are getting. BRiT makes the point that there are plenty of deserving roles in our society (please correct me if I mis-interpreted your statements), but teachers are, outside of parents, primarily responsible for turning children into those productive members of society. Furthermore, they have to do so under horrendous conditions, against a beuracracy that doesn't support them, and for less pay than most people can support themselves with.

Yes, there are many important people in our society who play important roles, but I can't think of any who face as much of an uphill battle as teachers.

------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[BRiT]

Alright, so janitors were a bad example. So how about the people who serve lunch?

Its just that as soon as one group is provided a benefit, you will have the other groups making demands to have similar benefits. Its human nature to always want what others have or are getting.

Originally posted by Diesel Dan:
BRiT&gt; The government has already demonstrated that it cannot be run as a business. It would've been condemned as a miserable failure a long time ago if it had.
It hasn't been able to make money at anything, no matter how much it tries.

Dan&gt; I couldn't agree more. I beleive this merely shows that the government is flawed and should be majorly revamped. Afterall, what other organization (and I use that world loosely) was allowed to spend money they don't have?.

Most of this tax cut is a farce. Even at the end when it's in full swing [in 2006?], (using current salary range) I'll at most see a "savings" of $3.4K a year. Nevermind that I will still never see over $29K a year that is taken out involuntarily and paid to other parties. But I'll take anything they are willing to give back to me.

--|BRiT|


<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">[This message has been edited by BRiT on May 27, 2001 at 01:44 PM]</font>

 

[Diesel]

Originally posted by BRiT:

Its just that as soon as one group is provided a benefit, you will have the other groups making demands to have similar benefits. Its human nature to always want what others have or are getting.

Perhaps you misunderstood my comments. I wasn't suggesting that teachers be given preferential treatment, but that more attention be paid to what they are being paid to do a very difficult job that requires skill.
Teaching is an important job in our society, but many people who would make capable teachers don't enter the field because they know they would struggle to make a living. It's a sad commentary that people qualified to be teachers instead find jobs as secretaries because it's an easier way to make a living.

Those who do choose teaching as a profession are facing the challenge of overseeing a classroom that's filled with more children than it should be, working ungodly hours both in the classroom and at home preparing lesson plans, having to deal with a bureaucracy that inhibits their ability to do their job, and if all of that weren't enough, they must do so at a pay rate that's proportionally significantly lower than other professions that their education level qualifies them for.

No one is asking for them to be treated differently, but rather for them to receive what is fair for the work that they do.

------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[BRiT]

Oh, I couldn't agree more with you Dan. Teachers are really getting a raw deal and have been so for such a long time. However, I think others will see it as the teachers getting preferential treatment. I see it as them getting one step closer, but still a million steps away, to where they should have been long long ago. Teaching in junior highschool and highschool environment is a dangerous and mostly thankless job. Those few who do decide to go into teaching usually opt for the university setting for the additional salary and benefits or R&D funding of their projects.

--|BRiT|

 

[BRiT]

Did forget to mention earlier, that there is one portion of the tax cut that I do indeed like. The uping of 401K contribution limit from $10500 to $15000.

--|BRiT|

 

[Diesel]

BRiT&gt; I like that as well, but that won't help me personally for a good few years from now. Most people won't be able to get anywhere close to that point, because most 401k plans top off at 10-15% of your pre-tax pay, which means that at the maximum contribution, someone would have to make $100k/yr. in order to hit the ceiling.
Even at the old ceiling, someone had to be contributing the maximum at an annual salary of 75k/yr., which most American families can barely manage with 2 incomes.

Is it a good thing? Yes.
Will most people ever see a benefit from it? No.

In essence, like the rest of the tax cut, it looks great on paper, but when you dig a little deeper, it loses it's appeal.


------------------
Alien Soup Folding@Home Team Leader

Are <u>You</u> Folding@Home for Team Alien Soup?

(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ~ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´·.¸¸ Diesel Dan ¸¸.·`»
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ ~ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)

 

[KNSinatra]

Its a given that if you leave a surplus of money within the hands of government, let alone the federal govenment, politicians will find ways to spend it. And more often than not, for pork-barrel politic pet projects, and not benevolent altruistic large-scoped projects. Get the money back directly to the citizenry as soon as possible, to avoid this *usual*.

I'm not going to engange further within the present discussion, although I'm very very tempted. Rather, I choose to raise hypotheticals -- to bring the issue at hand back down to basics -- that is, the fundamentals, principles, and philosophy. Premise.

Hermie, to say that a person is entitled to their property, is not to negate the importance of government. We all relinquish certain rights, and proprietary goods (in the form of taxes most oftenly), as a trade of sorts -- in exchange for the protection that only govenment can offer, and carry out effectively.

However, people come before government -- government is but a tool for us to utilize -- it ought not be a monolith that oppresses us unduly, and strips us of property that is not necessary for it to usurp. If there is a surplus, that proves that the government has carried out its plans -- and had in fact overestimated what it would require to acheive those plans. Like in any other business-type relationship, do we not request our change back when we find ourselves overcharged? Do we not expect to be reimbursed for stipends that turn out to be unused?

Especially within the scope of a federal govenment -- a centralized institution, often so detatched from our diverse and expansive demographic. Why let Washington spend our money -- why allow our income to be spent by remote control? I know how to best put my money -- my PROPERTY -- to use in a way that will best benefit me. That is all I want -- the right to be able to do so.

With this reality in mind,

------------------
In politics, if you want anything said, ask a man;
if you want anything done, ask a woman. -Margaret Thatcher

Work like you don't need the money, love like you've never been hurt, and dance like no one is watching.

En fuego, bebé.

 

[BRiT]

Social security is such a farce as it is, and I wont go into details on how the other items are a farce as well.

The government is too large as it is. It needs to be scaled back to the basics. Would you prefer to do a million things half-baked or do about a couple hundred thousand things with extreme excellence?

If the government really wants to have money to spend, they need to start making money.

The should run a gasoline company. They're having record profits in the millions.

--|BRiT|