Just finished our tax returns

Rancho Cucamonga

Active Member
Why? I really never understood the child tax credit system. Hell I don't understand the tax codes at all for that matter. My taxes go to the accountant, a check goes to her, then another to the IRS.
I have a female friend unmarried with 3 kids and she works a 18k a year gross job and she's getting a refund of 8,000. I am single have no kids make about 60k a year taxable and had to pay in 2k. I made almost 4 times she did and paid a tax rate 10% more then her yet the difference between returns was a staggering 10k in her favor.

We need a flat tax and have to end or reduce child and other credits. We can't reward(aid) people who decide to have children they really can't afford. To add to this at a different level, we also can't have companies like Facebook who made billions get a 500 million to 1 billion refund just because they know how to scam the system by paying employees with stock options and not cash compensations. All language differences yet financially it's all cold hard cash.

Out tax system is fucked at both ends. The middle is who mostly gets screwed.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
I have a female friend unmarried with 3 kids and she works a 18k a year gross job and she's getting a refund of 8,000. I am single have no kids make about 60k a year taxable and had to pay in 2k. I made almost 4 times she did and paid a tax rate 10% more then her yet the difference between returns was a staggering 10k in her favor.

We need a flat tax and have to end or reduce child and other credits. We can't reward(aid) people who decide to have children they really can't afford. To add to this at a different level, we also can't have companies like Facebook who made billions get a 500 million to 1 billion refund just because they know how to scam the system by paying employees with stock options and not cash compensations. All language differences yet financially it's all cold hard cash.

Out tax system is fucked at both ends. The middle is who mostly gets screwed.
Oh yeah, cos the top 50% paying 97.3% of all income taxes is them shitting on you.

Btw, you're not in the "middle", you'd be upper-lower class.
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Some, but not all. Many get caught by the AMT and pay at the maximum rate, with no deductions, credits, exemptions, or exclusions at all, if their income is all earned income. Capital gains, "old money", gets the big breaks. The tax increase didn't cover capital gains at all, if I'm not mistaken.
What tax increase?
Why is it that the "temporary" Bush tax cuts are treated as a tax increase?
Does that mean when the stores Presidents day sale is over prices on goods have increased? What were they before the 2 day sale?
 

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
I have a female friend unmarried with 3 kids and she works a 18k a year gross job and she's getting a refund of 8,000. I am single have no kids make about 60k a year taxable and had to pay in 2k. I made almost 4 times she did and paid a tax rate 10% more then her yet the difference between returns was a staggering 10k in her favor.

We need a flat tax and have to end or reduce child and other credits. We can't reward(aid) people who decide to have children they really can't afford. To add to this at a different level, we also can't have companies like Facebook who made billions get a 500 million to 1 billion refund just because they know how to scam the system by paying employees with stock options and not cash compensations. All language differences yet financially it's all cold hard cash.

Out tax system is fucked at both ends. The middle is who mostly gets screwed.

Name one Flat tax scamnario that treats Capital gains and Investments as income.

There is a reason Rich fuckers back a Flat Tax and it has nothing to do with fairness.
 

deprave

New Member
If I invented a sarcasm font, I'd probably never need to work again. I think I'll thank myself for all those previous years I subsidized myself.



If you're living paycheck to paycheck on 50k you're living way beyond your means. Also 25% of $50000 is $12500. Shouldn't you be -$12500 to your name? Maybe you should find another accountant.
No am not, and after paying my taxes I have negative ~3k to my name
 

spandy

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't brag about getting more back than what was paid in. Why would a person be proud of the fact that they can't take care of themselves financially and rely on the forced donations from others to survive?
All well, most these people getting returns beyond what they paid in don't know how to handle money, and will soon filter in through business doors and give back all that money, cuz you know they gonna spend it like they stripped for it. I conveniently raise my prices every year in time for tax returns, thy never notice cuz they only come through doors like mine this time of year, buying things they can't afford with money they soon won't have because few are smart enough to tuck it away or invest it in something to obtain a better life so they dont continue to rely on more welfare.
 

nitro harley

Well-Known Member
Thousands of new IRS agents to pay for...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48990224/IRS_Agents_Won039t_Be_Enforcers_of_Obamacare_Mandate


This part is interesting..

Under the law, Americans who lack health insurance will have to pay an annual fee to the IRS of $95, or 1 percent of taxable household income, starting in 2014.
By 2016, that will rise to $695 per person, with a cap that equals the greater of $2,085 per family or 2.5 percent of household income.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Unlike you I pay taxes. So shut your taco hole
Are you accepting responsibility for prohibition and for bombing babies? It seems that you sure are proud of funding it.

As an aside, lately your insults have been references to holes and female orifices....do you have "vagina envy" ?
 

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
Unlike you I pay taxes. So shut your taco hole
Everybody pays taxes. Gas, food, bus tickets, shit you buy at the store. The Govt. giving poor people more than they paid in federal taxes doesn't negate the fact that they still pay tax. Last time I checked, you don't get a tax break for buying a happy meal, but hilariously enough McDonald's gets a tax break.
 

fb360

Active Member
Name one Flat tax scamnario that treats Capital gains and Investments as income.

There is a reason Rich fuckers back a Flat Tax and it has nothing to do with fairness.
Fairness? Your definition of fairness is wildly incorrect and stupid to say the least.
You're advocating for the exact opposite of fairness; That successful individuals should have to pay more to help others than unsuccessful people.

In doing so, we are rewarding failure and freeloading. "Mr. President, it is your job to make sure I have money for food. It is your job to make sure I have a place to live and clothes to wear"
 

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
Fairness? Your definition of fairness is wildly incorrect and stupid to say the least.
You're advocating for the exact opposite of fairness; That successful individuals should have to pay more to help others than unsuccessful people.

In doing so, we are rewarding failure and freeloading. "Mr. President, it is your job to make sure I have money for food. It is your job to make sure I have a place to live and clothes to wear"
If everyone in this country paid a flat tax rate. The poor would be extremely poor or the rich would be slightly less rich. Anyone who understands basic economics knows that.

25% flat rate regardless of income

$25,000 a year after 25% tax is $18,750, hardly enough to get by in today's world.

$50,000 a year after 25% tax is $37,500

$100,000 a year after 25% tax is $75,000

See where I'm going with this?

You could say, "well, they need to get better jobs" Ok then, IF that was feasible and everyone working at McDonald's quit and got jobs making 2x more. Who would make your kids happy meal?

Why is it so difficult to understand that this world is built in a way that we thrive on the poor? They make your clothes, teach your kids, serve your food. The least you could do is give them some government cheese. :p
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Are you accepting responsibility for prohibition and for bombing babies? It seems that you sure are proud of funding it.

As an aside, lately your insults have been references to holes and female orifices....do you have "vagina envy" ?

That is correct, Chesus has contributed to the bombing of babies, the destruction of towns, the disruption of political situation in other countries.


but he has also contributed some of his wealth to stem the tide of AIDS in other countries, he has helped feed children in every country including his own. He has sent money that was used to improve the health of females, he has helped ease the burden on the aged, assisted the blind and the impared. He has done a small part in ensuring that the air we breath is more pure, the water we all drink more clear and the social situation in this country just a bit more equitable and fair. I am sure you wouldn't dissaprove of these uses of funds even if you consider that his money was stolen, at least some of it has contributed to the welfare of his fellow citizens.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Fairness? Your definition of fairness is wildly incorrect and stupid to say the least.
You're advocating for the exact opposite of fairness; That successful individuals should have to pay more to help others than unsuccessful people.

In doing so, we are rewarding failure and freeloading. "Mr. President, it is your job to make sure I have money for food. It is your job to make sure I have a place to live and clothes to wear"

You make a presumption here. That presumption is that the rich in this country were not helped to get the money they have. You presume that government programs only exit to assist those who cannot help themselves when in reality Federal, state and local tax and incentive laws greatly support the wealthy and the well off. This being the case, why is it so hard to imagine that perhaps those who actually need the assistance should be given at least a portion of what is granted to the rich?

Our national community contributing to those who are in a less than desirable situation is not encouraging failure any more than bankruptcy laws encourage failure. Subsidizing treatment for the sick does not "encourage" the sick to remain sick or to become sick.


The government offers tax breaks to investors, on the one hand we believe that encourages actions that improve our economy but according to your logic it is an incentive for some not to work, as money earned through labor is taxed more than money earned through investment. In short your logic is flawed.
 

fb360

Active Member
If everyone in this country paid a flat tax rate. The poor would be extremely poor or the rich would be slightly less rich. Anyone who understands basic economics knows that.
Seeing as how 2 young individuals with nothing more than their ideas and knowledge were able to make effectively 500million/year (instagram) proves you wrong. The same could be said for Steve Jobs, Apple, Facebook, etc etc. Taxes don't make people poor or rich, (or at least they shouldn't; great example of government policies hurting rather than helping the individual they are governing). One should never jump from one tax bracket to another due to the taxes they pay. Wealth or lack there of is based upon work, ideas, dreams and realizations. You want to slack off during grade school, college, and your job, you should reap the correlating lack of rewards.

Furthermore, although I agree with you to an extent, I merely said that the word "fair" cannot be used to describe our tax system. Our tax system is anything BUT fair, and "the poor" want the responsibility to fall on the back of "the rich". You even said so yourself, "Why is it so difficult to understand that this world is built in a way that we thrive on the poor? They make your clothes, teach your kids, serve your food. The least you could do is give them some government cheese."

In nature if an individual is freeloading or not pulling their weight, do you know what happens? They are cut off, rejected from the group, or even killed. It's funny how even animals with their primitive survival thought process comprehend that in order to have prosperity and wealth, all must do their part.Socialism and overpopulation is exactly why we are in the predicament we are now. And in fact, the best thing we could do is to understand that fact and work to fix it.

Lastly, you seem to have a thing against wealthy individuals being taxed equally. Do you know who hires the poor? The wealthy. Do you know who pump the most money back into the economy, as long as it isn't all taken as taxes? The wealthy. Consequently, it would make sense to suggest that if the rich had more money to spend on business, that they would be able to hire more workers, or pay their current ones better. Taking money from the rich and spreading it to everyone equally, just makes everyone equally poor. Failure should never be rewarded.

Want to move up in life? Work for it. Whether it is getting up early and hustling for sales, or teaching yourself calculus so that you can tutor part time. Don't blame anyone else for your lack of success

The government offers tax breaks to investors, on the one hand we believe that encourages actions that improve our economy but according to your logic it is an incentive for some not to work, as money earned through labor is taxed more than money earned through investment. In short your logic is flawed.
What the hell are you talking about? You are illiterate bro. All I said was that having increasing tax % for > income IS NOT FAIR. Simple as that. Riddle me how taking handouts from others who had to earn them, is fair, sherlock
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
fb360? what am I talking about? I am illiterate? I said, I thought fairly clearly that the rich get direct tax advantages from the government. If what you are claiming is true then those tax advantages should discourage the rich from working as those advantages favor those who do not work.

You are presuming that the rich do not get any handouts, that only the poor do. If that is truly your presumption then how am I the one who is illiterate?
 

mr2shim

Well-Known Member
Consequently, it would make sense to suggest that if the rich had more money to spend on business, that they would be able to hire more workers, or pay their current ones better. Taking money from the rich and spreading it to everyone equally, just makes everyone equally poor. Failure should never be rewarded.
Who is suggesting we take money from the rich and give it to the poor? I don't think I've ever heard someone actually suggest that. That is a Republican talking point and should never be used in a conversation. "If the rich have more money to spend on business that they would be able to hire more workers" is a flawed ideology and has never worked in reality. It sounds good coming out of a politicians mouth, it hasn't and won't ever be the case in reality.

In short, people should have enough money to do more than just "get by" even if they work at McDonald's; willingly or if that's the only job they can get. They shouldn't have to rely on the Government to survive. I think we both can agree on that.

IF people could survive off their 40 hour a week check alone, why would the Government need to put so much into assistance programs? Seems to me the problem lies with the private sector and the fact that wages are not keeping up with inflation.
 
Top