Staying single to collect welfare benefits

[wvjules]

That is insane. My employer sponsored plan* is more than what I found on my own. Maybe that is the way to go for those who have outrageous plans through their employer.

*We pay the full premium however we get an MWR benefit amount of $450 to offset the costs of our insurance. Since I didn't take the (health) insurance offered I get the $450 in my check which I in turn use to pay for private insurance. I do use my employer for dental and vision.

I'm still in shock at how much some of you are paying.

 

[Art 1]

I truly don't think (I hope!) that that's what Art 1 meant; I'm guessing it was referring to those who choose not to work and instead live off the government, then collect thousands at tax time because of the credits available to them. I believe I mentioned that I'm related to someone like this, by marriage.

You got it. Lots of tax payers are un-aware of how this works and the amount of money that some people are getting back.

 

[Darsa]

Thanks Lilygator, I certainly don't need more proof that you're judging me and think I'm a liar, but you certainly seem to keep piling it on. Not sure exactly why I would be lying about something like this, or what I would stand to gain from it. I suppose I could post a picture of the premium listing that I was given, but I choose not to, so you'll just have to take my word for it... or not.

Again, thanks for the vote of... well, whatever. I'm glad you're secure in your ability to insure your family and make sure they have adequate health/dental/vision benefits; I only wish I was as awesome as you.

 

[Colleen27]

Oh, I have my opinions on coperate welfare as well. I will NEVER buy anothe GM vehicle.

I know the trendy, anti-govt/anti-union thing is to zero in on GM's bailout (which was largely due to their ventures beyond the car business and has little to nothing to do with their quality or marketability), but have you ever really looked into the companies you do business with? Corporate welfare is a way of life in America. Pepsico has a negative effective tax rate. Toyota plays one state off another for the best incentives as far as where to locate their US facilities. And who do you bank with or turn to for a mortgage if you want to avoid bailout-supported businesses?

Some interesting facts about corporate welfare/taxation from before the meltdowns and bailouts of the last couple years:

Eighty-two of the 275 companies (Fortune 500 companies for which enough public information is available to compile statistics), almost a third of the total, paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2001 to 2003. In the years they paid no income tax, these companies earned $102 billion in pretax U.S. profits. But instead of paying $35.6 billion in income taxes as the statutory 35 percent corporate tax rate seems to require, these companies generated so many excess tax breaks that they received outright tax rebate checks from the U.S. Treasury, totaling $12.6 billion. These companies' "negative tax rates" meant that they made more after taxes than before taxes in those no-tax years.

In 2003 alone, 46 companies paid zero or less in federal income taxes. These 46 companies told their shareholders they earned U.S. pretax profits in 2003 of $42.6 billion, yet they received tax rebates totaling $5.4 billion. Almost as many companies, 42, paid no tax in 2002, reporting $43.5 billion in pretax profits, yet receiving $4.9 billion in tax rebates. From 2001 to 2003, the number of no-tax companies jumped from 33 to 46, an increase of 40 percent.

In 2001, the Treasury paid corporations $40 billion in tax refunds, a third more than the 1998-2000 average. Then in 2002 and 2003, after the law was changed to expand tax subsidies and make it easier for corporations to carry back excess tax breaks to earlier years, corporate tax refunds skyrocketed to an average of $63 billion a year - more than double the 1998-2000 average.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_welfare/real_tax_rates_plummet.php

 

[Colleen27]

I thought they were meaning the employees cost - for their portion. The company usually takes the brunt of the cost...I still can't believe an employee's portion would be thousands a month.

Fewer and fewer companies are taking the brunt of the cost as those costs rise, particularly when it comes to blue collar and low wage jobs.

 

[padams]

DH is the business owner. We have always paid all of our employees' health care (we even reimburse co-pays). Our rates went up 18% last year. We have told the employees that in October when we learn what the annual increase is (and we anticipate the increase will be huge), the employees will begin covering some of their costs. If insurance becomes astronomical over the next few years, then we may drop health insurance and let the employees be on their own. Call me Mrs. Galt.

 

[kellyg403]

He'll get to show me 10 job applications a week, with signature verification they were submitted. He might not find one, but he's darn sure going to be applying everywhere.

Um...just so you know I have taken several of these 'applications' and signed the form saying they applied. Its a joke. They walk in, hand you an application and tell you point blank " I just need this signed so I can keep my benefits but I am not actually interested in working here". What do you say then??? They did what you required, they handed in an application, I sign the form because they, well, handed in the application.

The reality of the situation for me is that the system needs a total overhaul. Period. I could lay the blame anywhere I want to but the bottom line is that I, as a taxpayer, need to step up and be vigilante in making my vioce heard. I am sorry, and will probably get flamed, but its not the cash that bothers me its the EBT/Snap cards. It bothers me a lot. Day after day I hear they don't get enough to live on, yet I see a buggy loaded down with frozen dinners and junk food. Yeah, there are some I feel really badly for, you can see that they are embarrassed to be using the benefits, that times have brought them to this place. They shop at midnight hoping no one will notice and their cart has exactly what goes in my budget stretching cart. But, IMHO, there aren't many like that. I overheard recently a cashier asking for the cusomters store card for the sales and the customer replying she did not need a store card, she wasn't worried about the sales. Of course not.

For those who need it, I am all for it to get a person to a better place. We have all been there when a simple extra 50 bucks would have taken stress to a whole different level. For those who look at it as I, a hardworking person who would prefer to work at McDonald's if I had to, owe them food every month. Sorry, you don't deserve it.

I know there is some idea that it is a vicisous cycle some can't get out of. Sure...I think that would be valid. But, lets stop the cycle and get them the help they need in the next generation to STOP the cycle. There are sr citizens living on ss getting 75 a month in Food Stamps that I would much rather see get 200 and lower some capable young woman whose children are in school during the day so she has incentive to find work. Or go to school.

Kelly