Let's talk about taxes

[bitteroldhag 0]

Filing single also means you're taxed more.

As if you had more money being single???? :faint:

I note that single people are not buying those big houses around here. It takes two wage earners to make that much money. I live in a former government house which I have fixed up some. It's fine for me, but we have really poor people here with 7 people living in an 1100 sf house. Being a pinko commie pig, I oppose a flat tax. I think them that's got should give to them that haven't got. Isn't that what Christ proposed? That's why I oppose the flat tax idea. Ten percent of $10,000 is $1,000 while 10% of $100,000 is $10,000. One family has $9,000 left while the other has $90,000 left. I think the folks making 10 grand are going to miss that $1,000 a lot more than the people making a hundred grand are going to miss ten grand. I was very poor as a graduate student and I remember it. My students are poor. I don't want to make their lives worse for a couple of thousand bucks that I can now afford though I don't make anywhere near $100,000. I think that people who profess to be Christians, yet want to keep every dime they make, should study what Christ had to say. My God, I forgot to wrap the prime rib in foil! I've got to do that now.

[BJean 16]

Very funny.

[gadgetlady 4]

Isn't that what Christ proposed?

I think that people who profess to be Christians, yet want to keep every dime they make, should study what Christ had to say.

I don't think Christ envisioned a government bureaucracy as the most effective way to be generous. In fact, it's clearly not. Bureaucracy is by nature wasteful and inefficient.

A lot of wealthy Christians give a lot of money to charity -- in addition to all the money they give to the government. If I didn't have to pay as much in taxes I'd be MORE generous to charity than I already am.

IMO, welfare is forced charity. And no one should be forced against their wishes to give.

[Carlene 12]

IMO, welfare is forced charity. And no one should be forced against their wishes to give.

Would you prefer children begging in the streets, like third world countries? That would say a LOT about our great "Christian" nation, wouldn't it?

IMO, billions of tax dollars spent to wage war on Iraq is forced manslaughter, and no one should be forced against their wishes to kill other people.

[dpingl 0]

I feel obligated to gripe at least once between November and March about the differentiated tax brackets. (I was once anti flat tax out of obligation, because my livelihood depended indirectly on the tax business, but I no longer have that obligation!)

I hate the fact that tax rates are increased as your taxable income increases. I have no problems paying more taxes than someone else, but I mind having to pay a higher percentage than someone else.

I feel better now.

Should higher incomes have to pay higher percentages of their income, or is it enough that they pay more money?

Wheetin,

My thought is since you ask is.... Lets says you have three different people. (Very simiply stated) Two choose to go to work right out of high school, no college, the other chooses to spend the next 5-8 (plus lots of money) becoming educated. Lets Dick HS Grad get's lucky and makes 35-45K a year. HE is at about a 24% income tax. The we have Jane who either is not able or not willing to work at all. She actually has a negative tax responsiblity. Then we have Judy who got her degree and is make $130,000 a year @ almost a 45% TAX RATE?

Whats fair here? NOT MUCH! ( I am middle class and feel for the weathly and huge tax burden they face as a penalty for their ambition! As well all know WEALTHY AMERICANS pay the majority of income taxes collected in the US.)

I am defiantly a proponet of FLAT TAX, The weathly still pay more because its based on income. But everyone pays based on income. The main pay off here is that we drastacly reduce red tape! Save MILLIONS of tax dollars per a much simplified system. It just makes so much sense!

[mousecrazy 2]

I still maintain that it is not anti-Christian to be wealthy and successful. I believe that success is the result of committment and dedication and preparation. I do not believe it is the responsibility of ambitious and dedicated people to completely equalize the situation for those who do not care to invest in their own future. I am sure some of you will not believe this, since I am a capitalist pig (being a public school teacher and all) but I am very generous to charity groups such as Habitat for Humanity, the local food banks, Marine Moms, and other people I just happen to know personally need a little help. I wouldn't normally say anything about it, but in this context I felt it necessary. I agree with the poster above; government is absolutely not the best vehicle for achieving and processing the help that others require. I do not mind paying a fair tax for true governmental responsibilities, and I expect the government to exercise restraint and frugality. What I object to is the waste and over-spending...the unnecessary jobs and bureacracy that is created...the jobs created to oversee the jobs that oversee the actual programs that might help a few people. Cut out the middle men...and let our money actually go to the people who need it. Are we the better judges of that, or is the faceless, soulless government?

I support a flat tax; we'll save money right off the bat, just drastically reducing the IRS.

[Carlene 12]

When I said I support a flat tax, I meant it. But I also meant corporations, too. Of course, you have to give them deductions for their manufacturing costs. Otherwise, service only businesses would have a huge advantage, as would all non-manufacturing corporations. But no more deductions for corporate jets, etc.

I also would only support a flat tax if it applied to SS and Medicare tax, with no ceiling. If you make $100 K you would pay your 10% income tax, your 7.5% SS tax, and your Medicare tax on your total income. That would make your tax bite approximately $19,000 on your $100 K income.

[HarleyNana 10]

I agree with Cindy, but I'd also like to see this country have health care for everyone. How can a country as rich as ours NOT make insurance available to everyone. The poor are taken care of, the rich can pay their own, but what about the hardworking middle class people who struggle to make ends meet in order to have insurance.

You can't even deduct medical expenses unless you're in a lower tax bracket.

Well, that was my dime's worth.

[Carlene 12]

I still maintain that it is not anti-Christian to be wealthy and successful. I believe that success is the result of committment and dedication and preparation. I do not believe it is the responsibility of ambitious and dedicated people to completely equalize the situation for those who do not care to invest in their own future.

I have a very good friend who is a very good Republican. Between them, she and her DH earn over $200 K per year. Their college educated, single, unemployed daughter got pregnant. They had 3 choices: (a) mom and dad could foot the bill, ( county prenatal clinic and county hospital for delivery, or © Medicaid. They chose Medicaid.

Their grandchild was born very early, with a heart problem common to premature infants. She spent a month in NICU and required coronary surgery, performed by a very expensive pediatric specialist. The bill was staggering. Medicaid, meaning the taxpayers, paid every dime.

My friend is still a Republican. However, she no longer delivers long, raging tirades against lazy women who produce babies they can't afford to take care of. She has developed a great deal of empathy for children unlucky enough to be born to people who suck at parenthood. She is a huge proponent of children's health care.

My point is that people who favor specific spending programs, or tax reforms, only support the ones that benefit themselves, or someone very close to them. People rarely vote to raise their own taxes. People who have never had a child or grandchild go without dental care are generally the only ones in favor of limiting Medicaid benefits.

My friend never in a million years would have thought that her daughter - educated at a small private college to the tune of $24,000 per year in tuition - would end up on the dole. Just goes to show you....never say never.

[green 6]

There is this issue of the deserving poor and those whom we might consider undeserving. Though some people may be stupid and lazy and stunningly inept at taking control of their own lives, there are also those individuals who have landed in the quagmire of poverty through no fault of their own. I believe that many of these people might be women who have married the wrong men, had children with them, and then find themselves in the position of being single mothers. Their former husbands are deadbeat dads at best, and perhaps abusive mates whom they are seeking to avoid. Sometimes folks end up in poverty because of the death of a mate, or because mental or physical illness strikes down a family member. If this individual is the chief breadwinner, well, the economic life of the family will be even more bleak. Sometimes people end up falling on hard times because the job market for their skills ends up drying up. These poor souls can't find work. They live in the rust belts of America. It is certain that there will be more nice people drifting down into the ranks of the poor over the next few generations. It is cheaper for big businesses to off-load work off shore, you know.

It strikes me that all policies and attitudes that have to do with the treatment of the poor should be examined carefully. (I myself am often in favour of workfare programmes even though this pits me against many of my fellow left wing nuts.)

I do think that the wealthy should be taxed more than the working class poor or the middle class. Our basic needs are all the same: we all use the same amount of toilet paper, etc. While those who work harder or know how to operate the system to their advantage should defintely be rewarded for their intelligence and for their efforts, I do not see why the discrepancy needs to be as great as it is at this time.

[Wheetsin 714]

In my husand's home land, you pay about 28% sales tax on everything. And the economy doesn't support odd amounts of money (e.g. pennies) so on top of that sales tax, everything is rounded up to the next whole "dollar" amount.

In turn, the only cost of continued education is books. If you need a job the "employment office" doesn't just enter you into a system and look for matches, it pays to send you to your job interviews, including hotel stays of needed. You can see a doctor for a reasonable fee, without private insurance, or for a very small fee you can see a nurse practitioner. Taxes are done with a single signature on a single card that you review & then drop in the mail.

[mousecrazy 2]

I might be confused here...which country's tax system are we discussing?

[Wheetsin 714]

My original question was about US of A. But it's a bit naive to expect a message board thread to actually focus on the original topic for very long. So I draw a parallel to the tax situation where my husband comes from, which is probably as related as whether or not christians can be weathy.

[Wheetsin 714]

I agree with Cindy, but I'd also like to see this country have health care for everyone. How can a country as rich as ours NOT make insurance available to everyone. The poor are taken care of, the rich can pay their own, but what about the hardworking middle class people who struggle to make ends meet in order to have insurance.

You can't even deduct medical expenses unless you're in a lower tax bracket.

This hits home with me a bit.

My father wanted to go to college, but didn't qualify for grants or scholarships, didn't want the debt of a student loan, and couldn't really afford the fairly steep monthly tuition payments. His income was just high enough to kick him out of qualification for most of the assistance programs, but not high enough to comfortably allow for the additional payment. At the same time, a college degree was required for the next level of promotion where he works... so he was kind of forced into a static pool. While, at the same time, he had to watch his inmates getting free education, and watched my cousin (who is on welfare) get not only her tuition paid, but greatly reduced child care and reimbursement for her mileage to and from school. Of course, she was only going to school because between the reduced daycare and mileage payouts, she was actually making money. She dropped out as soon as she had enough money for a new stereo she had been wanting.

I know this is focusing more on education that healthcare, but it's the same principle as the "stuck" middle class, who can't really afford, but "on paper" can.

(BTW, after he retired from the military his GI Bill helped, he got the degree, and the promotions, and now could afford the tuition, but there's no way he could have then).

Like I said, I'm a flat tax proponent (now that I no longer work for a tax company!) Hehe. I'm fine with paying more money than someone else, I'm just not fine with paying a higher percentage. If my 10% is more than their 10%, great! But no 20% for me while it's 10% for someone else.

[Carlene 12]

I worked for tax prep companies and CPAs during tax season for years. Sometimes I hated to give clients the bottom line. They tended to take their anger at the IRS out on poor little me.

One year I did the taxes for a man whose income had increased about 5 times over what he made the year before. He was a heavy equipment salesman and man, had business been good!

When I gave him the bad news, he didn't bat an eye. I said, "Well, you certainly took that better than most people. I thought you'd be upset."

He said, "I'm just thankful I made the kind of money to owe that much in taxes."

Kind of like winning the Lottery. Yes, I know how much the taxes would be. Just give me the winning ticket and I'll gladly pay them!