Tax return is nearly $3000 LESS because I worked part-time last year!

[Muushka]

Yes, we've all seen this one before. but the part of the story that's left out is that is that they all worked for the 10th man who made the most money, yet was too cheap to buy his workers a beer.

Once again, hand extended for something for free.


The only thing I ever learn in threads like this is that there is a portion of our population who believes that the rest of the country owes them something, and by gosh, they will collect it and more if they can.

And a portion who have fallen on hard times and hang their heads, swallow their pride and receive welfare for a period of time until they are over the hump (I love helping people like this).

And there is another portion that believes that while they are not on the receiving end of welfare, they believe that themselves and everyone who earns enough money to pay income taxes should gladly take care of those without the means to take care of themselves.

And then there is another portion who believes that it is better to not enable people, but to help them to be able to help themselves. Meaning welfare or some other sort of assistance for a short period of time. Helping them to make wise choices. To not be of the mindset that this is their lot in life so they may as well get all that they can get.

 

[Anjelica]

The ability to do college level work, the ability to afford it? What do you mean by ability?

Not sure what ability they are describing as well. When I see folks with disabilities (both physical and mental) and they can go to college and graduate well its hard for me to understand why folks state they "don't have the ability".

 

[ccgirl]

Once again, hand extended for something for free.


The only thing I ever learn in threads like this is that there is a portion of our population who believes that the rest of the country owes them something, and by gosh, they will collect it and more if they can.

And a portion who have fallen on hard times and hang their heads, swallow their pride and receive welfare for a period of time until they are over the hump (I love helping people like this).

And there is another portion that believes that while they are not on the receiving end of welfare, they believe that themselves and everyone who earns enough money to pay income taxes should gladly take care of those without the means to take care of themselves.

And then there is another portion who believes that it is better to not enable people, but to help them to be able to help themselves. Meaning welfare or some other sort of assistance for a short period of time. Helping them to make wise choices. To not be of the mindset that this is their lot in life so they may as well get all that they can get.

Great post! I can't stand excuses. I can't go to college because I can't afford it...blah..blah..blah. It's time people take responsibility for their own actions. You know what...I couldn't "afford" college either so I rotated going to school for a semester and working for a semester to afford it. It took me 10 years to get a 4 year degree but I did it. Now, my children don't have to have the hard life that I did. If you want something bad enough and are willing to work for it, you will achieve it.

Financial assistance should be a stepping stone not a way of life.

 

[MrsPete]

And charities NOW can't serve all the people they'd like to. And YES, it IS the government's job to take your money and give it to others. People's taxes pay for public schools, regardless of whether they have kids attending those schools. Federal tax money goes to projects in other states, whether you will ever visit that state or not.

No, it's the government's job to take tax money and provide certain things -- things that are practical to "share" amongst everyone -- for the common good. Those things include roads, the military, libraries, schools, etc. This has happened for quite some time -- way back to the Romans, the Celts, and other early societies.

The idea of the government putting money into specific people's hands so that they can purchase groceries or pay their light bill is a relatively new concept. Relatively new meaning it came into existance around the time my mom was a kid.

No, the socialistic style is EVERYBODY works to the best of their ability. No one gets huge bonuses, no one lives in poverty, and everyone gets food, housing, education and health care. We're not even close.

And no country ever in the history of ever has been able to make that concept work. People work (or, in this particular discussion, don't work) because they are rewarded financially.

I have no problem with those that work hard getting richer..

You want to blame the debt on the wealthy guy thats paying $150K in taxes instead of $250K, I want to blame it on the non-producers that are leaching off society..

And anyone who even remotely thinks about the math will have to agree with you. The person paying IN is furthering the country's needs. The person TAKING OUT is not.

Yes, we've all seen this one before. but the part of the story that's left out is that is that they all worked for the 10th man who made the most money, yet was too cheap to buy his workers a beer.

You're implying that he owed his employees a beer. Why?

If they work for him, he definitely owes them a couple things: A fair wage, decent working conditions, etc. But he is under no obligation to take them out after hours for a beer. Essentially that's what "wealth redistribution systems" are asking taxpayers to do -- take the employees out for a beer.

 

[Anjelica]

Great post! I can't stand excuses. I can't go to college because I can't afford it...blah..blah..blah. It's time people take responsibility for their own actions. You know what...I couldn't "afford" college either so I rotated going to school for a semester and working for a semester to afford it. It took me 10 years to get a 4 year degree but I did it. Now, my children don't have to have the hard life that I did. If you want something bad enough and are willing to work for it, you will achieve it.

Financial assistance should be a stepping stone not a way of life.

Great post - I remember living off of nothing but spaghetti and cereal for weeks at a time when in college (living on my own having to pay rent, etc). I went to school fulltime (15-18 hours a semester) and a 40 hour a week job. It was a killer but I got through it.

 

[sam_gordon]

If they work for him, he definitely owes them a couple things: A fair wage, decent working conditions, etc. But he is under no obligation to take them out after hours for a beer. Essentially that's what "wealth redistribution systems" are asking taxpayers to do -- take the employees out for a beer.

Here's a key point... what's the definition of "fair wage"? I'm guessing if you ask working people up and down the wage scale, the majority would say they should get more money for what they do. To say nothing about the poor schlub who lost his job after 20 years, not because he was doing a bad job, but because the company owners decided to move the company out of the states because of cheaper labor.

I don't think anyone disagrees there are people who abuse the system. But aside from HHR saying "government shouldn't give people money", no one has said how to stop the abuse. I still believe (and will until anyone has facts to prove otherwise) the "abusers" are the minority. There's been examples all over this thread of people who used the benefits/credits/deductions they way they were designed and pulled themselves up.

So let's stop the abuse. Anyone have practical ideas on how you can do it?

 

[ccgirl]

Here's a key point... what's the definition of "fair wage"? I'm guessing if you ask working people up and down the wage scale, the majority would say they should get more money for what they do. To say nothing about the poor schlub who lost his job after 20 years, not because he was doing a bad job, but because the company owners decided to move the company out of the states because of cheaper labor.

I don't think anyone disagrees there are people who abuse the system. But aside from HHR saying "government shouldn't give people money", no one has said how to stop the abuse. I still believe (and will until anyone has facts to prove otherwise) the "abusers" are the minority. There's been examples all over this thread of people who used the benefits/credits/deductions they way they were designed and pulled themselves up.

So let's stop the abuse. Anyone have practical ideas on how you can do it?

As far as stopping the abuse; I think it may take extra money up front. I think we need to create more jobs similar to an auditor. If people are getting financial assistance, they need to be audited to make sure they are not lying, still need it, and are putting it to good use. I have a friend that is the manager of the housing project. She knows so many families where the mother and father don't get married so the mother can get welfare money and stay home with kids. When I go by the projects I see many people with brand new cars while mine is 6 years old. If they can afford brand new cars should they even be on public assistance? I'm not talking Hyundai Elantra's...I am talking BMW, Mercedes etc. If people want to accept financial assistance they need to be willing to accept audits just like the IRS. Welfare/Food Stamps should be similar to WIC in that it tells you exactly what to buy. You can't take your food stamps and buy $100 worth of candy. Those are just a couple of things I have thought of.

 

[ccgirl]

Great post - I remember living off of nothing but spaghetti and cereal for weeks at a time when in college (living on my own having to pay rent, etc). I went to school fulltime (15-18 hours a semester) and a 40 hour a week job. It was a killer but I got through it.

Thanks..the whole chip on the shoulder and entitlement just irks me to no end.

Ramen Noodles, that was my staple food. I think you could get 12 packs for $2. Was it the healthiest, no, but I survived. Throw in a grilled cheese or hot dog and that was a gourmet meal. Water is free, no need to buy other beverages.

 

[HHSTigerFan]

Yes, we've all seen this one before. but the part of the story that's left out is that is that they all worked for the 10th man who made the most money, yet was too cheap to buy his workers a beer.

So in 300 years, the reason for destruction of the greatest nation the world has ever seen will be listed as "jealousy"?

 

[luvsJack]

Thanks..the whole chip on the shoulder and entitlement just irks me to no end.

Ramen Noodles, that was my staple food. I think you could get 12 packs for $2. Was it the healthiest, no, but I survived. Throw in a grilled cheese or hot dog and that was a gourmet meal. Water is free, no need to buy other beverages.

Is that what you fed your kids? No judgement if you did, I am just curious if you had kids during the period of time you are talking about.



You know, when I qualified for EIC and when I received government assistance, I never felt "entitled" to anything. I worked every day (there seem to be a misconception on this board that those that receive assistance don't work and that isn't true) and I provided for my children and I used that assistance to keep food on the table and clothes on their backs. When I got the "big" tax refund, I paid for a year's worth of propane so that I could heat our home and cook and have hot water. Most people that are one assistance or that qualify for EIC do NOT think they are entitled to anything. They are just trying to survive.


I really think that the answer to all of this is somewhere in the middle of what everyone is saying. If we just stopped all things like EIC and assistance programs, we would clog up the charities and make for a lot of starving people on our hands. These programs just need to continue with a few alterations to help folks get off the government assistance merry-go-round.

We need more career/tech programs so that more people can learn a trade that will make more money. More tax dollars need to be put into programs like WIA that will pay for folks to go through programs like that and pay for books, testing and such. If an education is obtainable then more people will get that education and learn a marketable skill.

We need financial assitance programs that have a minimum work requirement (even if it is working AT the government office that gives that assistance).

And we need to remember that most people just want a little self respect and to be able to provide for their family.

 

[Colleen27]

So in 300 years, the reason for destruction of the greatest nation the world has ever seen will be listed as "jealousy"?

Jealousy on one end and greed on the other. A lot of that jealousy and resentment has its roots in what that 10th guy is doing; look at Disney for example. Cast members are picketing over low and stagnant wages, while Iger gets a 35% raise. The blame doesn't fall solely on one side or the other.

 

[ccgirl]

Is that what you fed your kids? No judgement if you did, I am just curious if you had kids during the period of time you are talking about.



You know, when I qualified for EIC and when I received government assistance, I never felt "entitled" to anything. I worked every day (there seem to be a misconception on this board that those that receive assistance don't work and that isn't true) and I provided for my children and I used that assistance to keep food on the table and clothes on their backs. When I got the "big" tax refund, I paid for a year's worth of propane so that I could heat our home and cook and have hot water. Most people that are one assistance or that qualify for EIC do NOT think they are entitled to anything. They are just trying to survive.

I really think that the answer to all of this is somewhere in the middle of what everyone is saying. If we just stopped all things like EIC and assistance programs, we would clog up the charities and make for a lot of starving people on our hands. These programs just need to continue with a few alterations to help folks get off the government assistance merry-go-round.

We need more career/tech programs so that more people can learn a trade that will make more money. More tax dollars need to be put into programs like WIA that will pay for folks to go through programs like that and pay for books, testing and such. If an education is obtainable then more people will get that education and learn a marketable skill.

We need financial assitance programs that have a minimum work requirement (even if it is working AT the government office that gives that assistance).

And we need to remember that most people just want a little self respect and to be able to provide for their family.

At that time, I did not have kids. I did not start having children until I was 32years old. I was so afraid of them growing up the way I did I just wanted to make sure that didn't happen. However, they do eat that (ramen noodles)now. Not out of necessity but because they choose to.

People like you are the people that should receive the assistance IMHO. You used it as a stepping stone, not a way of life. You used it for it's intended purpose. Kudos to you! You must feel great (or you should)!

 

[Colleen27]

Personally, I think it's unfair that homeowners get to write off all that interest paid to the bank from their income, where as renters don't get that write off. so, you've got 2 people who make the exact same income, same amount of kids, but the homeowner pays much less in taxes than the renter - even if they pay the same amount in housing expenses; but we don't call that "welfare". Why is that?

The one that gets me is the different treatment of different types of income. I do a relative's taxes who has about the same household income as we do, but he pays MUCH less in taxes despite fewer deductions because his income is all unearned (rent, interest, dividends) and earned income is subject to social security as well as income taxes. Add to that the fact that DH is self employed and pays both halves of the SS tax and our effective tax rate is more than double that of our relative.

 

[luvsJack]

At that time, I did not have kids. I did not start having children until I was 32years old. I was so afraid of them growing up the way I did I just wanted to make sure that didn't happen. However, they do eat that (ramen noodles)now. Not out of necessity but because they choose to.

People like you are the people that should receive the assistance IMHO. You used it as a stepping stone, not a way of life. You used it for it's intended purpose. Kudos to you! You must feel great (or you should)!

Thanks, but I just really feel like I did what I had to do. I am just glad I am past all that now!

My kids have always eaten ramen noodles too; out of liking them. That is until my younger son decided to move out and HAD to eat them for awhile because they didn't have money for food. He hates the things now.

For a lot of young girls that I see around here, having kids at a young age is why they don't go to school. Many of them don't mind doing without while they go to school, but they don't want their kids to do without. KWIM? When they do come by and check out our programs and such we try to steer them toward any aid they can get so that they can get through school and be better off.

 

[Muushka]

No, it's not welfare, it's a tax credit. In theory they are refunding on additional taxes that the taxpayer has paid beyond income taxes (i.e. sales tax, S.S. tax, excise tax and so on) The only reason why it's larger than what a taxpayer has paid in on the forms, is those additional taxes aren't listed on your W-2.
To call it welfare you'd have to call other tax credits welfare as well i.e. child care tax credits, first homeowner tax credits, solar energy tax credits and so on.

Personally, I think it's unfair that homeowners get to write off all that interest paid to the bank from their income, where as renters don't get that write off. so, you've got 2 people who make the exact same income, same amount of kids, but the homeowner pays much less in taxes than the renter - even if they pay the same amount in housing expenses; but we don't call that "welfare". Why is that?

I am a homeowner and do not get to write off one penny that I pay in interest OR real estate taxes.

And no children. Yet a good portion of my real estate taxes goes towards education.

And yet the renter does not have to pay any real estate taxes and yet has children in the school system.

Why is that?

I have since realized that my statement about renters and real estate taxes was way off base. I retract it without erasing the evidence.
I was wrong.

 

[Colleen27]

I am confused. Did OP say she was getting EIC? I didn't read that into the OP.

I didn't jump to that immediately either. We've known quite a few people who had the same experiences, not because of the EIC but because the second income changed their tax situation in other ways - the phase out of credits or deductions they qualified for on one income, the second income being taxed at a higher marginal rate, opening up exposure to the AMT, etc.

Also, not everyone who gets the EIC gets more back than they pay in. It phases out as income goes up. There have been a few years we qualified since DH started his business, but it wasn't even enough to zero out our liability much less bring in a hefty refund.

 

[Karlzmom]

No, I'll blame it on the politicians who decided to go to war without a way to pay for it.

...or the wars were paid for, just not the foreign aid, the welfare and the highway upkeep! We can find any configuration of expenses in the budget of "unfunded" projects.

Last I checked, the military is actually an enumerated obligation of the federal government. Can't say the same for the Dept of Ed, Dept of Energy, Labor, Health and Human Services, etc......

 

[sam_gordon]

I am a homeowner and do not get to write off one penny that I pay in interest OR real estate taxes.

Why not?

And no children. Yet a good portion of my real estate taxes goes towards education.

And yet the renter does not have to pay any real estate taxes and yet has children in the school system.

Why is that?

Because it has been determined that an educated public is a good thing for everyone.

 

[Colleen27]

But some have said it is for the "working poor". I'm curious if those of you who receive it consider yourself the "working poor"? I always pictured that as someone who worked earning minimum wage. Now people earning minimum wage (even if both spouses worked) would obviously qualify, but depending where you live, if one spouse is earning the salary listed above, that wouldn't be what I consider poor. Especially compared to the minimum wage worker.
Again, depending on cost of living in your area, etc.!

I agree, "working poor" is really dependent upon local costs of living. I don't consider my family working poor. I was working poor years ago, when I was a single mom working part time and going to school full time, and we're a long way from that lifestyle now. But we have qualified for the EIC off and on in the past and probably will again this year since business has been so terribly slow. We don't get anything close to the maximum credit and we usually get little/no return, though I do prefer overpaying to underpaying on our estimated taxes, but I'm not too proud to take any credit that helps to offset the ridiculous tax bill we pay for the privilege of being self-employed.

People from the Roman Empire said that too... we can't have 40% of the population paying ZERO income tax, its that simple..

It worked throughout most of our history. The idea that everyone should pay federal taxes is a fairly recent development on a big picture level.

I'm sorry, I might be missing something but why can't everyone get a college education? I know some people might not want one but that is different.

There's no value in it. Education is an excellent solution at the micro level - it can help an individual greatly. But it isn't an answer at the macro level because the value of a degree is directly dependent upon its' scarcity. Right now, 33% of the American workforce has a degree and 24% of jobs require one; as that trend continues the value of a degree (with the exception of certain fields effected by a significant skills mismatch) will decline.

 

[MrsPete]

Here's a key point... what's the definition of "fair wage"? I'm guessing if you ask working people up and down the wage scale, the majority would say they should get more money for what they do. To say nothing about the poor schlub who lost his job after 20 years, not because he was doing a bad job, but because the company owners decided to move the company out of the states because of cheaper labor.

I don't think anyone disagrees there are people who abuse the system. But aside from HHR saying "government shouldn't give people money", no one has said how to stop the abuse. I still believe (and will until anyone has facts to prove otherwise) the "abusers" are the minority. There's been examples all over this thread of people who used the benefits/credits/deductions they way they were designed and pulled themselves up.

So let's stop the abuse. Anyone have practical ideas on how you can do it?

No, that's not the question at all . . .

This came from the story about the 10 guys in the bar, one of whom is picking up the majority of the check. Someone else said he's the employer and SHOULD buy "his guys" a beer. The question IS NOT about whether he's paying a fair wage or not -- that's a whole different issue. The question, as it pertains to taxes is whether he owes the employees anything above and beyond the salary that was agreed upon when they started working for him.