2005 Tax deduction

If you can see Prius Chat.com, you are rich. At least in the top 1% in the world.

I don't think anyone realizes how many 1 billion is.

India has 1 billion extremely poor people out of their 1.x billion total.

Ditto with China....

All those Southeast Asia countries have 10's of millions in deserpate poverty. 50 million here, 50 there.

The arabs have 5 people with all the money, millions with nothing.

Africa has poor, very poor, and desperate to the minute poor. Hundreds of millions there.

Eastern Europe (Czech, russia, etc..) have modest middle class by their standards, poor to our standards.

We have 300 million people.... Sparse by world standards. We have some elite wealthy, but really overall, we have a wealthy base (yes, you at 35k are wealthy).

Anyone over 50k is extremely wealthy by the world standard. You may have more credit card debt than your neighbor, the bank account is empty, and you struggle to pay rising natural gas bill, but for the most part that is all your fault. You live above your means. Which is fine, most of America is that way. I'd suggest that you stop, but I think buying more on a new credit card is probably more fun, then complain about the price of gas at the pump as the problem in your financial picture.

I'd say don't complain about it, but that too is the national pasttime (bigger than baseball).

Of course, I don't mean You as in.. YOU... I mean You as in.. John Doe American family that has a warm house, 2 cars in the garage, and a big screen TV, all of which he can not afford.

Not to worry. If the wind and rain blows my pile of junk I bought on my credit card away, it happens to be my constitutional right to have the government give me a big check and pay for all new junk. God bless katrina..

Stop complaining about being poor and go give $20 to someone who has nothing this Christmas. You'll feel better about that than all the other junk you put on your credit card for Christmas.

 

Gates would still have a huge net worth, because he still has all those assets. They're just non-liquid assets at that point. He'd still be rich.

"Rich" is not just income, but also your net worth. Look at Steve Jobs. His official income from Apple is $1. Just a single buck. Now is he rich? You better freaking believe it.

Now note I said net worth. At one point Donald Trump had assets of somewhere around $200-300 million, but he owed much more than that. Technically he was beyond broke. When it's that much money though, and you're Donald Trump, there are many ways to work it out. He just sold a hotel and paid off his debts...

 

But forget what fshagans says about becoming a Republican. Although I respect him as a fiscally-conservative-sounding person, I advise becoming an FSD, a Fiscally Conservative Democrat, in the Bill Clinton mold.

Ever since Mr. Reagan said "deficits don't matter", the Republicans have replaced "tax and spend" with "borrow and spend even more", and fshagans knows this. All of our indulgences, including Iraq and big Hummer subsidies, are courtesy of Japan and China, who own our debt. God help us if they stop buying our paper (bonds).

A fiscally responsible Democrat will advocate RAISING taxes, to exactly the level of the incredibly prosperous Clinton 90's. Whoever replaces Bush will probably have to do the same, even a Republican. Our economy is on very thin ice---think Instant Gratification consumerism---with private debt as scary as public debt. Now that housing is cooling off, if THAT bubble deflates, run for the hills.

 

Finally, something I can agree upon with Richard M.

I'm a liberal who says: NO tax breaks, NO HOV lane privileges, NO free downtown parking, NO perks, period. But remove the Hummer's subsidy, too.

How about we start a thread wherein we enumerate every purchase we can think of worthy of some subsidy, on the grounds that it contributes to the "general good". Can we start with my quieter lawn mower?

 

Dump the income tax

put a 25% tax on everything you buy for the feds.

15% for the states/schools (eliminate state income/property tax also)

No tax on 90% of the food items. Beer, smokes, etc still have the tax.

No tax on other things poor people need. Shampoo, soap, diapers...

We'd all have so much money left over we wouldn't know what to do with ourselves.

no special exemptions for anyone rich or poor beyond the basic setup. Even bill gates gets 0% on his milk and bread.

 

Throughout history, and in many places around the world today, it was easy to spot the poor people. They were skinny.

We live in a marvelous country. Our "poor" people are fat. With all the calls for taxing the "rich" so we can have more "compassion" and redistribute more of the money to the "poor", you'd think our goal is to have them die of weight related diseases.

You are poor if you do not have enough to eat. If you don't have enough to eat you are skinny. You are not poor if you are fat, and complain that you can only afford basic cable.

 

Viewpoint through the eyes of a worker bee:

What you propose is a wonderful concept, but that still takes away the manipulative control of the government to "influence" us.... thats why they won't do it!

Right now Uncle Sam can influence and give you incentive to become an entrepreneur, or landlord, or any to start any company that puts people to work.
They presently can influence whether you will want to buy certain types of goods, or carry your lifestyle on in a certain way. "ie: married verses just living together!"

It would be very interesting having all that removed. But Flat tax would kill companies that have never learned how to make it while not paying taxes "because they don't!"

Once upon a time in the beginning of our government, we had certain weaknesses or "deficits" in our society... so in order to turn the trend to encourage folks to fill in the gap, they gave incentives, many of which are tax related.

Just use your imagination and you will see that it doesn't take too many decades of doing such behavior that soon the ones getting the breaks are the ones that have responded to the call and challenges the government has proposed. "ie: become landlords, company owners, etc."

Also, you now see how the evolution occurs which causes the middleman to be the ones that pay all the taxes?
The lower class gets the tax credits and welfare.... the upper class is exempt or has breaks and deductions... that leaves the worker bee to do all the work!

This system of ours has "evolved" over time... like all things of government that evolve, after a time there are elements of jobs and institutions that are no longer needed that should be trimmed, removed, or given a change of job description... but they seldom actually to it so as to preserve thier job security. They get lazy and fat and move at the speed of a slug and are basically worthless. Fat pensions, benifits, & salaries with little output.. thats government for you!
In time the government gets so big, they tend to choke the people they serve in order to support thier habit.

It takes a president or leader with some serious cahonas to remove excess government without getting lynched. Its a thankless job. They all promise it, but rarely do any have the fortitude to pull it off!
The way to stay popular with the people and power is to give, give, give to the people what you don't have.. because no body wants their piece of the pie cut to help save someone else from starving.
Greed is not just in government... its in the people too!

On an economic level these things have to be instituted slowly, otherwise it would turn the whole economic world on its ear overnight.... just like instantly going to a car that would get 300MPG would do.

Just the little prius is freaking out government for all the money they aren't' getting in gas taxes.

Its a wonderful idea, but I really think Uncle Sam would freak out without that control to make them feel like they have a job.

I would sure love to trash the whole system and start over, I just don't think the government doesn't have the cahonas to try it or seriously consider it... people in power seldom vote to remove thier own control.

We the people would have to vote it in, but even then the officials we have voted in wouldn't go for it....

Left to law abiding governmental systems.... these things never happen short of a crisis! No one wants to rock the boat.... especially when they've finally made it to the top!
The only ones with nothing to lose to make real change are the political nobodys.

So you say you want a revolution...well you know, we all want to change the world!... "The Beatles"

 

I'll agree that being a FCD is a good thing, in fact its the next best thing to being a truly FCR (Fiscally Conservative Republican), which no one in the current administration is, unfortunately.

You do know that we are taking in more money than before the tax rate cuts, right? More total receipts. Its just that we are spending WAAAY too much, because the current Republicans are big government guys just like most of the Dems are. We should be cutting programs to fund the war on terror, not increasing them to grease the skids so the congress-critters will vote for the war on terror!

That's probably where the difference between a FCD and a FCR would play out, on the social and security issues. I think most Dems are "fortress America" types today, who want to "take care of people at home" rather than play offense overseas. Fair enough; I disagree, but its a good argument.

 

No, as the California Legislature has shown, a windfall in revenues to government only increases the size of government. It grows to consume all the money received.

Unlike the waitress who brings you change for your $20, and then you decide if you want to tip, the government will keep your money and decide how to spend it.

 

If you play "defense" long enough, pretty soon you earn the reputation on the play ground as a "fraidy cat" and a pussy.... It's no wonder the terrorist thought they could scare us into doing what they wanted!.....enough said....

 

1. We are. The Bush administration has cut Food Stamps, Medicaid (in conjunction with states) and other health care programs for the poor---so far. I suspect they're just getting warmed up.

2. No, most of us are committed internationalists who would rather play defense, not offense---except in cases of "ethnic cleansing"/genocide, such as in Darfur.

We do, however, want to shore up our democratic institutions (e.g., new voting machines that are tamper-proof and give paper "receipts") and civil liberties (ditch parts of the Patriot Act than intrude unnecessarily on privacy, forswear torture in all cases), and to address our most shameless shortfalls (e.g., 48 million Americans with no health insurance). Then our desire to "lead" will be overshadowed by the desire of others to follow us. Fortress America doersn't work. Being the world's 500-lb. bully doesn't, either.

Of course, REAL security comes first: effective enforcement at the Mexican border (which everyone knows could have been done decades ago) and systematic inspections of imports at the ports, for starters.

 

Ditto!, but
You forgot to say fat and "lazy"!... thats usually why they don't have more.
The the "poor" look around at those who have so much more and get bitter because its their supposed God Given Right to have what everyone else has!.
They don't see the years of schooling and persistence and diligence that got them there... those are foreign words to them.
And if they think its a God given right, they better go back to the book and read where it says... "If a man doesn't work, neither should he eat!", and "if a man doesn't provide for his own familiy, he is worse than an infidel"

Put that in your religious pipe and smoke it!

 

The vast majority of the very poor in this country work full time. Welfare cheaters exist, but are a tiny minority of the poor. Problem is, working for minimum wage will not get you a roof over your head plus food to eat. And forget about any kind of health care.

Destitution poverty (having absolutely nothing at all) is rare in this country. As I've said elsewhere, the poor in America are rich by world standards. But being fat does not mean you're not poor. It just means you are not destitute. Sadly, a healthy diet is more expensive than an unhealthy (and fattening) one.

There's also a strong correlation between poverty and lack of education, and uneducated people are more susceptible to the propaganda of Wall Street which entices people to eat the least healthy and most fattening foods.

With an abominable education system and a minimum wage that nobody on this board could get by on without living for free with relatives, a lot of people have no way out.

People should have to work if they want to get by. But people who use the labor of others should have to pay them a living wage. Anything less is simple robbery.

 

I realize this thread is a bit off course, but it still pertains to the application of benifits from the government.

True, about 20+ years ago, it was a shame to steal from others through welfare.... now its acceptable as bragging rights.

Welfare is only for the elderly, and for those who cannot help themselves.... no one else!

Anyone who is smart enough to trick the system, they are rewarded by the government with even more money.
If you try to break out and actually work for your keep, the government pulls everthing because you make too much.... so people learn how to earn under the table "or" just make enough not to break the limit.... would'nt want to lose something for free you know!

Its better to have as many kids as you can to get more money, then that lifestyle teaches several generations at once how to do the same?

If I have offended anyone that is trapped in that scenario.... I'm sorry, and I encourage you to go rent and watch the Truman Show! Get out now!

 

Sorry, fshagan, I was going to let this pass, but I can't.

These generalizations are grossly incorrect, and feed into unfair stereotypes held by others.

For starters, as Daniel has pointed out, "poor" diets are often fattening (e.g., lots of refried beans, usually made with lard). Even worse, many African-Americans still eat vestiges of the "slavery diet", which in too many cases lingered as part of the emerging post-Civil War black "subculture". Fat pork of all cuts and other fat meats are features of this diet. It's undoubtedly a component of African-Americans' greater susceptibility to high cholesterol counts and earlier heart attacks than whites'.

Finally---something that's not usually talked about in "polite company"---is the matter of "body types". Just as other ethnicities (e.g., Tongans, Samoans, Japanese) have commonalities in their physical features and body types (with a small minority of exceptions), people whose ancestors were kidnapped, to be sold as slaves, from different African tribes show characteristics of their tribal ancestry to this day. Some were given to heaviness, some to slenderness. (For that matter, have you noticed that, compared to "average-sized whites", there seem to be a lot of more obese---AND skinny---African-Americans, with not as great a proportion in the middle?)

Some "in-your-face" black comedians are now using these facts in their acts. I heard one, with the guy joking that most African-American women couldn't find jeans that would accomodate their butts. Even THIS wasn't talked about not so long ago---too uncomfortable for all concerned.

But: true.

 

appears we are dicussing a matter of "terms".. of what "poor" means

I know it sucks when you can't pay your cable bill, and you cell phone is about to be cut off, but as I recall the pictures in africa and elsewhere that show the poor.... I don't recall any "big butt" women in those pictures.

It has been said.. " the poor you have with you always"... thats a relative term based on the prosperity of your surroundings.

We truly live in the land of Milk and Honey..... Even the poor on the streets without homes have more than the middleclass in central america... let alone africa... Haven't been there yet!... But in Central america, they live from day to day off the land and they don't suck off of others handouts.
They build simple houses without roofs made of mud.
If they own an OX, they are not rich, but well off... it makes their gardening easier and work less in the hot sun. Most don't have that luxury.

I think the point is we all feel good about helping those that can't help themselves and outraged and providing for the lazy that takes food off of our table and struggle with bills that provide for our own family.

 

Windstrings: I repeat, that the people cheating on welfare are such a small number that they don't have any significant impact on the economics of welfare. Most of the poor work full time. The cheaters, of course, get all the news coverage and all the anecdotes focus on them. That way we can feel smug and ignore the people (the vast majority of our poor) who work full time for wages so low that the employers belong in prison for robbery.

Yes, our poor are rich by world standards. But that's no excuse for paying full-time workers less than the cost of an apartment.

And you are entirely mistaken about the middle class in Central America. There is virtually no middle class in Latin America, but such as it is it lives reasonably comfortably.

 

The only reason I used the term "middleclass" is so it wouldn't be confused with my definition of the poor in africa and other parts of the world.... they are not poor.... they are very rich in the fact that they love life, and value thier families and time together. But when it comes to technology and money, they have far less than our poor. And I am not talking based on reports I have read. I have personally been on ministry trips 8 times from Mexico, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Honduras to Costa Rica. I did not spend my time in the big cities, but in the far off rural towns lost in the wilderness and mountains where there were no notable roads or services.

We went to give and minister, but were almost always overwhelmed and were instead given to. They were estatic to give thier last chicken for our meal. Welfare is something they would never accept, they have too much pride in thier hard work and way of life. It would give every American a life change of paradigm to go just once.
There is a big part of me that would love to toss all of our wonderful technology and go live the simple life with them, but I am far too spoiled to pay that price.

As far as your numbers.. you may be looking at paperwork, or stats from the government, but from where I come from both in the southern states as well as where I presently live... there are a large # of people who siphon off the system.

I also am in the medical profession and I see private files that others are not privy to.
I see many many numbers of people who have good health, yet utilize the welfare system. Knowing the social status of peoples personal lives is not a pretty picture in many cases. I'm sure anybody else out there in the medical system can confirm this.
There are many dark secrets people carry about their personal financial affairs they would never reveal to peers and friends.

In our current system, the privacy and respect of personal information has only enabled people to do what would normally be shameful to get away with it.

I think it was good in the older days when it was a shame to be on welfare "if you didn't really need it".
Your close friends and family really know your physical abilities and status as to whether you could really work..... but it can all be secret now!

 

I would challenge this. Most poor fat people eat a lot of fast food, and it is much more expensive than fresh fruit and veggies from a grocer. A healthy diet can be the most cost-effective one, but it doesn't have the "instant gratification" that we all crave in today's society.

 

I think I'll have to agree with you ... most of the best foods are the cheapest... of course nice juicy shrimp, clam, lobster, and fish I'm partial to also. But large amounts of that is not healthy either.....