Taxpayers would get checks from $600 $1200

#4
#4
The catch is they're "giving" you money that was yours in the first place. So letting citizens keep more money is stimulating for the economy? They should carry that thinking out further.
 
#5
#5
allvol123 said:
The catch is they're "giving" you money that was yours in the first place.
Click to expand...

I would view this also as a redistribution of wealth since there is a max cutoff ($75k single/$150k couple) but I've yet to see a min cutoff. People could be getting money back when they pay nothing while many will get nothing.
 
#7
#7
utvolpj said:
I would view this also as a redistribution of wealth since there is a max cutoff ($75k single/$150k couple) but I've yet to see a min cutoff. People could be getting money back when they pay nothing while many will get nothing.
Click to expand...


The report I read said you would have to have earned at least $3000 in 2007 as the min cutoff.
 
#8
#8
allvol123 said:
The report I read said you would have to have earned at least $3000 in 2007 as the min cutoff.
Click to expand...

Wow, I made more than that donating plasma in college. I think you actually have to try to make below $3k. Then to receive a check for 20% of your yearly income for doing nothing?
 
#9
#9
utvolpj said:
Wow, I made more than that donating plasma in college. I think you actually have to try to make below $3k. Then to receive a check for 20% of your yearly income for doing nothing?
Click to expand...

Yeah..but a lot of people who are making that little can do so without reporting it .... I bet people like that will be scrambling to report up to their 3,000 this year.
 
#10
#10
The idea is silly in so many ways. The idea that a couple making $140,000 would need financial assistance from the goverment is ludicrous.
 
#14
#14
The U.S. govt has been running up some of the largest deficits in the country's history, and the politicians are talking about tax cuts. Unbelievable. I guess it's always the next generation who has to do the belt tightening. A day of reckoning is coming quick.
 
#15
#15
oklavol said:
The U.S. govt has been running up some of the largest deficits in the country's history, and the politicians are talking about tax cuts. Unbelievable. I guess it's always the next generation who has to do the belt tightening. A day of reckoning is coming quick.
Click to expand...

Tax cuts can do more to lower the deficit than giving tax rebates.

I would be in favor of some targeted tax cuts (e.g. cap gains, etc.) since they are proven to promote real economic growth and thus tax revenue.

Just giving tax rebates is wrong on many levels.
 
#16
#16
the democrats i'm sure will assure i don't get a dime because I have the gall to make decent money and pay a much higher % of taxes than the rest of americans.
 
#17
#17
allvol123 said:
The idea is silly in so many ways. The idea that a couple making $140,000 would need financial assistance from the goverment is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

it's not a financial assistance package. and $75K a year for an individual is hardly f-u money.
 
#19
#19
this plan is supposed to help economic growth by having people spend money. please explain to me why those paying the majority of the taxes shouldn't get a dime back just because they happen to be more successful than average. and also explain why there is a child credit too? politics is all this is.
 
#21
#21
I am not saying they shouldn't get it back. I am all for people keeping as much of their money as possible. My point was, a couple making $140,000 receiving $600, should almost be meaningless to that couple.
 
#22
#22
droski said:
so if I buy a car from you and give you money i'm financially assisting you?
Click to expand...

If you paid for a car from me last year, and then send me a check for no reason a year later. Yes, you are assisting me finanacially for some unknown reason.
 
#23
#23
allvol123 said:
The idea is silly in so many ways. The idea that a couple making $140,000 would need financial assistance from the goverment is ludicrous.
Click to expand...


Droski is right about this. Its not about the money itself helping you, as it is getting you to go out and spend. They want you to go buy a new sofa, or maybe buy a new car. Thats all. Its really not a bad idea. Maybe not the end all, cure all, but a start.
 
#24
#24
they'd be receiving $1,200. which is enough for a small flatscreen, a laptop, etc. hardly meaningless. $140k sounds like a lot of money, until your mortgage is 6K a month because the average house price is 750K and you figure that you only get like $80k after taxes. If you have kids, trust me you ain't living high on the hog.
 
#25
#25
allvol123 said:
I am not saying they shouldn't get it back. I am all for people keeping as much of their money as possible. My point was, a couple making $140,000 receiving $600, should almost be meaningless to that couple.
Click to expand...

odds are it will be spent like the gov't intends unlike those that will just use it to pay for rent/gas
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top