reduce deficit/taxes

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Easy solution to reducing deficit and contrary to what the liberals say about taxing the productive more--you just have the 44 million deadbeats here that pay no taxes anti up just a paltry $100 a year and you got 4.4 billion more in revenue.Add that in medicare system yearly and see if it shores it up any.

Can you see in chart where liberal ideas is leading?

Table 1:
Growing Share of Zero-Tax Filers

Number of Zero-tax Filers
(in Millions) Zero-tax Filers as a Percentage of All Filers
1980 18.6 19.8%
1985 16.7 16.5%
1990 21.5 19.0%
1995 26.7 22.6%

2000 29.9 23.1%
2004 est. 44.0 33.0%
Source: IRS Statistics of Income and Tax Foundation estimate.

Good read
http://www.taxfoundation.org/ff/zerotaxfilers.html

 

[smurphy]

Are you talking about the people eligible for Earned Income Credit? If so, the problem there is that it takes the tax credits for them to earn a liveable wage. Without the credits, minimum wage earners are basically at depression levels.

How about we just eliminate loopholes and find a way to collect from from businesses that decide to outsource themselves?

 

[dr. freeze]

how about we eliminate all social aid to those people who have cable television, drink alcohol, and smoke cigarettes

i am tired of paying for such things

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I'm talking about ALL people that work, earn wages and pay no taxes. I don't think $100 a year is too much. It would amount to only 2 lottery tickets a week less?

 

[Chanman]

Good point Wayne. I might as well throw this in too...

http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=55356

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Scarey isn't it Cman. To add credence have you ever saw more commercials on home equity loans? Owning home was way bulk of americans had hidden way of saving with appreciation of value of their home which they looked forward to day they owned it free and clear. Home equity loan commercials dupe those that were unknowing saving into sqeezing out ever last drop of those savings into liquidity they can squander.
Cash will be king much as in the depression in short order. The bonanza for the savers with anticpated inflation and rising interest rates is accumulate, pay off home--retire to country where with low inflation and spend the money there.Could not believe when I was in Asia and the cost of living there. You could live like absolute king on $1,000 and month income
We could sustain the standard 80/20 rule that has held constant till recently,where 80% of people are product and support the 20% that aren't but as chart shows these #'s have jumped to 66/33 in just few years and if not headed off there is a point of no return.

 

[dr. freeze]

apparantly Kosar thinks we should use federal dollars to pay for people's cable television, cigarettes, and alcoholism


:142lmao: :142lmao: :142lmao: :142lmao:

 

[djv]

If you were truly worried about the deficit. Well we just had a election.

 

[smurphy]

I'm talking about ALL people that work, earn wages and pay no taxes. I don't think $100 a year is too much. It would amount to only 2 lottery tickets a week less?

We definitely should get rid of lotteries!

I would be completely in favor of dumping the tax credits for low wage earners IF the minimum wage was a liveable wage.

 

[MrChristo]

We definitely should get rid of lotteries!

I would be completely in favor of dumping the tax credits for low wage earners IF the minimum wage was a liveable wage.

Aren't the lotteries taxed themselves?? (I know they are here in Australia. Government run and take a %)

If so, aren't people buying lottery tickets effectively paying taxes anyway?

And on that point....Cigarettes and alchohol are two of the most highly taxed items that are sold.

So you stop them from buying smokes, booze and lottery tickets to get $100...even tho they are effectively paying much more than that in taxes? :shrug:

Nice plan

 

[homedog]

If you were truly worried about the deficit. Well we just had a election.

Yeah. I can't understand why Bush didn't get more votes.

 

[StevieD]

I might be wrong but it looks like the largest numbers occured while Bush was President. Certainly not a liberal. Add to that the fact that he cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans, therfore putting more of the burden on the middle class. Sounds like a plan to me!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Add to that the fact that he cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans, therfore putting more of the burden on the middle class"

Damn from reports and tables I've seen he cut taxes all "that paid taxes"

Liberals like to flaunt idea that many lower income people received no tax cut--no shit--and how do you cut taxes on the 33% that pay no taxes--

 

[djv]

I don't know who was in charge because no one will stand up and take credit for blowing a huge surplus. Then turning it into a huge deficit. I know Bush was in office when it all happened. But he takes no credit but gives a lot of it to his parties majority in the congress. I guess what Bush is saying to congress is. You don't like my spending don't vote for it.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"I don't know who was in charge because no one will stand up and take credit for blowing a huge surplus"

If you haven't seen the terrorist brag and take credit--you've been asleep--do you by any imagination think 911 and 2 wars remotely had anything to do with it--now I will side with you on medicare revamping -very bad move --expenditure we did not need but worst of all is escalating in future.

 

[bubbas1]

"I don't know who was in charge because no one will stand up and take credit for blowing a huge surplus."

This may be wrong but I always thought the surplus was on paper only. ie..If the stockmarket stayed up and economy kept booming than there would be a surplus after x number of years.
It dosent matter who is in office. The government way is to spend money they dont have.


"I would be completely in favor of dumping the tax credits for low wage earners IF the minimum wage was a liveable wage."

And just whose fault is it that these people cant make above min wage?? There should be a cap on the EIC of 3 yrs. If you cant get a livable wage in 3 yrs you havent been doing anything to try.
I dont see how raising the min wage would help anyone. What incentive would people making the min wage have to improve themselves if they were automatically bumped up? Just sit around long enough and the govt will make another program for you.

I believe the govt should be there to give a hand up not a hand out.

 

[smurphy]

"I would be completely in favor of dumping the tax credits for low wage earners IF the minimum wage was a liveable wage."

And just whose fault is it that these people cant make above min wage?? There should be a cap on the EIC of 3 yrs. If you cant get a livable wage in 3 yrs you havent been doing anything to try.
I dont see how raising the min wage would help anyone. What incentive would people making the min wage have to improve themselves if they were automatically bumped up? Just sit around long enough and the govt will make another program for you.

I believe the govt should be there to give a hand up not a hand out.

So let's raise the minimum wage to about $7.50/hr and eliminate the EIC alltogether. That way ALL LEGAL WORKERS will have a fighting chance AND the governament isn't giving them handouts. What do y'all think?

I think the government is too sold out to corporations who capitalize on the unrealisticly low minimum wage to do this. Better in their minds to let the the rich take advantage of cheap labor, and all of us make up the difference through taxes.

 

[Turfgrass]

Why stop at $7.50 ...how is that the magic number? Why not $10

But don't mind me...I'm sure what ever you come up with will be just fine.

 

[dr. freeze]

how about we give people the freedom to run their own business as they see fit?

why doe we need the government involved in everything?

 

[smurphy]

Why stop at $7.50 ...how is that the magic number? Why not $10

But don't mind me...I'm sure what ever you come up with will be just fine.

well, i saw a study that showed the adjusted wage after credits comes out to something around $7 hr, which is equal to a minimum wage that people can live on.

i'm just throwing ideas out there. i like the concept of the real wage being solid enough that it doesn't need tax credits that the rest of us end up paying for.

how about we give people the freedom to run their own business as they see fit?

why doe we need the government involved in everything?

I'm with you. California's a prime example of the government making it impossible for lots of businesses. Look how many of us have moved to Nevada for that reason.

Should we still have controls or incentives on some things? I'd love to see some forms of incentives to keep companies here instead of watching them leave for cheaper shores. How come these companies are basically able to get tax breaks for outsourcing?

Anybody like Lou Dobbs?