$14.5 B Tax Refunds Issued By "error"

The only way the left side of this forum knows how to defend their opinions. Also, W/B KN.

Why is it substantially significant on how the content is presented to you, Naz? Why couldn't you take what was within the content from the initial counterpoint and run with it then except dragging it out for a page and a half of utter semantics? What the hell was intended with the long drawn out quoting and nitpicking?

Lets keep the personal insults to a zero level please.

The idea as it was originally written and amended in 1986 is sound. The idea as it was amended in 2009 is what is flawed.

So, my objection is against the refundable aspect of it, because it did nothing to address the actual problem the original bill addressed (help alleviate poverty), and it encouraged poverty by keeping the income limits low (to get max credits, a single person with zero kids would have to make between $6,450 to $8,450, and a married filing jointly with 3+ kids would have to make between $13,650 to $23,300 (Source)). How is that helping the economy again, by requiring people's income to be so low in order to get the maximum credit possible?

Which is better for the economy, a person who makes $50k per year and receives zero EITC, or a person who makes $23,300 per year and receives $6,143 from the government for that?

What I'm seeing is that this credit makes welfare a better option. When the benefits received from welfare is greater than the income limit + credit received, who's really going to work for a living if they depend on this credit?

That's humanity. Doesn't matter if you are rich, poor, white, black, American, European, Asian, polka dot, striped, whatever, humans are generally *** to each other and to themselves. Not everyone, just the vast majority.

That's a whole different topic.

What I meant is that not all of these Mom/Pop businesses for tax prep are fraudsters. As long as you are dealing with a registered agent or higher (CPA mainly, although some lawyers do tax returns also), then you really have nothing to worry about.

Just got to ask for the certification if you are unsure about the competency of the preparer. All CPAs have their licences displayed for public viewing, and it's not even a requirement. We do it because we like to show the effort it took to be a CPA, like how doctors took the effort to be doctors.

I agree with your reasoning, but you really think someone qualifying regularly for EITCs are capable of finding a $50k/year job?

Yes, I honestly believe so.

There are people out there who only works temporary to receive the maximum benefits (SSI Disability, Medicare, state welfare, Social Security, etc.) from welfare. This income range conveniently falls right in the maximum benefits range.

While I was working in college, there were people who even claimed that they do that all the time, only working 3-4 months per year so they can receive the maximum benefits from the state and federal welfare departments. I have no reason to disbelieve them, as why would they lie about it?

In a city, maybe.

For a lot of rural/semi-rural America though, jobs that spot you >$40k/yr are pretty rare, and the ones that do so without requiring a college degree require more work than most of the people claiming EITCs are willing to put in.

I would have to disagree with you on part of that.

In a small city or large town, there is usually something that helps sustain that city/town. Generally speaking, a manufacturing plant.

Those jobs can pay well (not all of them, but most of them) due to the fact of the remote location the plant is situated.

If you are looking at a town with less than 1k people in it, then there is no real hope of the citizens there. But those people live in a supporting community, where they take care of each other more often than not. Anything larger (generally) has some sort of industry there that also helps support the community and helps the town grow. Otherwise, why would anyone be in that town in the first place?

What you are indirectly implying is that people in small towns are generally on welfare because there is no jobs there to support them, which I state that the inverse is true as that there are no jobs to support the town, but that doesn't make the residents poor. They are there for reasons other than jobs.

I got it last year and I'll get it this year too.

The max for a single parent with one child is 38,511, and yes one could easily jump from that to a 50k annual salary position.


I hope to be at the upper limit of that bracket by the end of next year though, and at the 45-50k within 5, but I'm sure I'll have to relocate for that, unless a position opens up at the local hospital, and at the rate people are getting annoyed with that merge, it's likely :D

Even if I do hit slightly over, the money I pay on my student loans will drop me under the taxable amount. Gogo AGI.

edit: max credit, yeah: no I won't get that, well maybe this year, since I was jobless for 2~ months and part time for 3~, gotta love having 4 jobs in one year...

Eh. What I'm saying is people are lazy and no amount of legal wrangling is going to fix that. We've created a culture of dependants and short of cutting them off entirely (which you wouldn't even get the staunchest of tea partiers to do), and letting them twist in the wind for a generation or two, you're not going to change that.

People are going to game the system, rich or poor. As you yourself said above; people are *** to each other.

Edit: As for your comment about towns and populations and supporting industry...maybe my own view is skewed. Rural Pennsylvania doesn't really conform to what you're saying, but perhaps we're an outlier. What you're saying used to be the case a few decades ago, but it's all going away now.

Frankly I think we need to stop giving tax breaks and benefits for having children, let alone welfare and housing benefits.

And welfare reform as pertains to children would be great, but you just can't tell people not to have babies, apparently. Something about violating fundamental human rights or some such...I don't know, I stopped listening when I was told compulsory sterilizations were draconian.

*gets on board the Evil Express™ with Nik*

Well it starts with that wages have stagnated over the past several decades to the point to where some can get more from the system than they would get from a job in their field/skillset.

Which ranges from a wide variety of issues, from our education system, business practices, women entering the workforce en masse and the accompanying multi income households, the trickle-down myth, etc.

There's no bandaid fix, and the patient is still hemorrhaging, the questions are if we can cauterize the wounds and then if it's too late. But for the most part we're still arguing about the problems, instead of doing something about them which would in turn affect the symptoms (such as welfare fraud, tax fraud) some are trying to treat the symptoms while ignoring the bigger problem, or just pretending it doesn't exist.

'Murica

You know, I was once of the opinion that the people with more children should be taxed more, then I realize that a system like that would collapse almost instantly, and moved on.


But I'm right there with you in ending corporate welfare.

I'm not saying to tax them more than people without kids. I'm saying just take away their tax breaks.

Gonna just have to disagree.

also, damn I had a typo in that...

Obviously you are, you have offspring and it's not in your direct benefit to pay more taxes.

I, however, don't think it's within our country's best interest to give people more benefits because they got their willy wet (or their cave spelunked) without a prophylactic.

But my baby mamma needs to have fifteen kids though...

I disagreed even before I spawned offspring.

Now I'm not saying that I like the current environment of low income mass breeding, as it just creates more poverty, but that falls into the category of many things being *** up.

Why do you think having children should entitle someone to pay less to the government when they are, by nature of now being two people and not one, a greater burden on the country? Especially when that child is utterly incapable of giving back in any significant way to the country for the first ~14-16 years?

Do you want to be Japan?

Seriously though, the EITC/ACTC is not going anywhere, same for welfare. Corporate America benefits the most from these programs and they will not cut into their profits to actually pay their employees.

Japan is the most culturally diverse country in the world though...

Do you want to elaborate as to why, or do you prefer to continue making glib remarks?


That's the reality of it, but when was the last time we debated anything realistic around here?

We can't even agree one what color green is here...(answer various shades of varying shades of green)

So would any money saved by a childless worker -- or anyone, really, who isn't paying more in taxes, with or without children -- it might go into consumer electronics, automobiles, or other services that aren't child-related, but your statement is a bit superfluous, unless you're suggesting that not having children means you stuff all of your money into a mattress and don't spend or invest it in the economy in any way, shape, or form.

It's like the old debate over the color of the Adaman Hauberk.

Long story short: society has a responsibility towards the next generation, and it makes sense #'s wise in the long run.

Even in our screwed up system it just creates a bunch of poor working class citizens, and that's what is desired, apparently.

Personally though, I'd like to eliminate taxes on anyone making under 35k, single income, probably could persuade myself into thinking more, but at least definitely for anyone making under the living wage.

But i will concede to a point of it potentially creating or continuing people aspiring less, and I really don't have an answer for that, I'll have to ponder on it some more.

Hey Ram good morning to you too.
*pours Ram a cup o Joe*

Basically Japan has a reproduction issue of native Japanese right now. Their citizens are seeing little upside to have children, so Don't.

As for real, well...

I replace your reality and substitute it with my own. Or how ever that quote goes.

Edite: Good usage of Glib, lol.

That's pretty much where I'm at right now.

Like this world needs a miniature version of me.

YES.

Not sure where you live, but in MA I know MANY people who have grown up on 'gaming the system'. Work under the table here, work actual part time work here, sell some weed over here, reset that EBT card, and bam! They're making enough money off the books, and in welfare to actually compete with the rest of us who get up and sludge to work everyday.

Why do they get the free pass? Oh I forgot I'm white so I don't get to complain about it.