Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps you should have chosen not to have kids since you think it's my responsibility to raise them.
You breed them, you feed them.
Not my job.
By your reasoning, we should just take the nation's bills, and charge everyone user fees for only the stuff they use. No progressive income tax. Not even a flat tax. That would work out fine for me. I would do very well with that deal. That is not going to happen though.
it's the same where I"m from, but it's called 'Child Benefit'
basically, anyone who has a child receives around $30wk (cash) regardless of their income (although this has now been changed to household income of around $120k/year)
it's absolutely ridiculous, and many of these rich welfare claimants are the first to bash the poor 'welfare queens, benefit scroungers'
Not only do I pay for my own kids, but at my level of taxation, I pay for many others as well. If you got that I think you should pay for my kids from my post, you did not read it very well. My point was that I should be able to pay them an actual salary in the form of food and shelter, and let them pay taxes on that salary. Then I can deduct their salary as a business expense as I would deduct any of my employee's salaries. I would end up saving a lot more than $1000 per kid. Its all theoretical as with most tax credits, I am not actually eligible to claim them at my income level. But while I am at it, why should my wife be taxed at my rate just because she is married to me? There are many things in the tax code that are unfair and/or don't make sense.
couldn't your wife file as a single and separate her income from yours? Simply put, your Family is NOT a business. It's a "family" and is ONE household. If they are going to offer the $1,000 giveaway, I think that it's very unfair that they phase for higher income people. After all, you're the ones that pay the bulk of the taxes in this stinking country.
Offensive? No offensive is 1) Calling someone else a derogatory name. 2) Complaining that people want to keep their own money, 3) Complaining that OTHER people aren't supposedly paying more than they currently are.
Anyway, please expand upon your second paragraph because it doesn't make sense to me. Who is going to spend it on dinner, groceries, or clothes? If it's those that are using the tax credit then isn't purchasing goods and services creating employment needs??? Is this not a good thing??
If the federal government gives someone a $1000 tax credit (for anything), that means they extract that now missing $1000 from someone else. The government needs that $1000. Let's ignore deficit spending for the moment.
By giving a family $1000 to spend on their children, the government is denying others from that money. These other people would spend that money too. The economic difference is zero. My simplistic conclusion is that you think it is better for the economy for parents to buy diapers and Kraft mac and cheese than others on tires for their car.
couldn't your wife file as a single and separate her income from yours? Simply put, your Family is NOT a business. It's a "family" and is ONE household. If they are going to offer the $1,000 giveaway, I think that it's very unfair that they phase for higher income people. After all, you're the ones that pay the bulk of the taxes in this stinking country.
We can file as married filing separately, but I remember my accountant telling me a long time ago that the way the tax code is written, it would not help. If there is an accountant on this board, maybe he/she can explain it better.
The bottom line is that if you are single, you have one income tax on one income that is supporting one person.
If I am supporting a family of 5, it is one income supporting 5 people.
Now, if I chose to work less and force the other 4 members of my family to get jobs to support the family, we could make the same amount of money, but because we would all be taxed at a lower income levels, our total tax burden would be a lot less than having the one person earn all the income for the family. So I am penalized for picking up the slack for my kids and working those extra hours to support them instead of making them support themselves.
Not only do I pay for my own kids, but at my level of taxation, I pay for many others as well. If you got that I think you should pay for my kids from my post, you did not read it very well. My point was that I should be able to pay them an actual salary in the form of food and shelter, and let them pay taxes on that salary. Then I can deduct their salary as a business expense as I would deduct any of my employee's salaries. I would end up saving a lot more than $1000 per kid. Its all theoretical as with most tax credits, I am not actually eligible to claim them at my income level. But while I am at it, why should my wife be taxed at my rate just because she is married to me? There are many things in the tax code that are unfair and/or don't make sense.
Is raising children a business? Do you think by any stretch of the imagination that anyone thinks minor children need to be taxed unless they are EARNING wages?
If I had my way, your wife would file her own tax return. There would be no such thing as a joint return. The federal government's interest in marriage would almost go away. Gay marriage would be much less of an issue.
Is raising children a business? Do you think by any stretch of the imagination that anyone thinks minor children need to be taxed unless they are EARNING wages?
If I had my way, your wife would file her own tax return. There would be no such thing as a joint return. The federal government's interest in marriage would almost go away. Gay marriage would be much less of an issue.
But in his case, they are a dual earner couple. They only get the HUGE benefit when one spouse does not work (like Ann Romney). Their tax table is roughly half of what we single slaves and dual working couple slaves pay. The tax table should really go after all of those people. It is an antiquated family model where the woman stayed at home. The Romneys taxes would probably double!, might bring him up to 15% or so of AGI.
Is raising children a business? Do you think by any stretch of the imagination that anyone thinks minor children need to be taxed unless they are EARNING wages?
If I had my way, your wife would file her own tax return. There would be no such thing as a joint return. The federal government's interest in marriage would almost go away. Gay marriage would be much less of an issue.
No you are missing the point on the kids. Because I am a responsible person, I pay for my own kids. I have a much bigger house than I would have without kids. I work a lot harder to support them than if I just had to support myself. Because I work more hours (70+ per week) I make more money, but not for myself. Because I make more money, I am taxed at a higher percentage because I have kids to support. So in that sense I am penalized by the government for having kids. It's not like everyone gets a bonus from the feds for having kids, though some people do. Unless you have a flat tax, there is never going to be a fair way to tax people. You will always be redistributing someone's wealth to someone else. Whether it is corporate welfare, welfare welfare, child tax credits, mortgage deductions, etc.
No you are missing the point on the kids. Because I am a responsible person, I pay for my own kids. I have a much bigger house than I would have without kids. I work a lot harder to support them than if I just had to support myself. Because I work more hours (70+ per week) I make more money, but not for myself. Because I make more money, I am taxed at a higher percentage because I have kids to support. So in that sense I am penalized by the government for having kids. It's not like everyone gets a bonus from the feds for having kids, though some people do. Unless you have a flat tax, there is never going to be a fair way to tax people. You will always be redistributing someone's wealth to someone else. Whether it is corporate welfare, welfare welfare, child tax credits, mortgage deductions, etc.
How are you paying MORE for having more kids? Working more than 40 hours is your CHOICE, not a mandatory requirement. You could work 40 hours, but then your children might not have as much, but your fed tax rate would be less.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
