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.
So what is your point exactly? After someone hits a certain income level, they are no longer entitled to the money they earned?
They were giving that money to Uncle Sam in the form of FICA tax for all but the last 2 years.
It was temporary..extra cash in your pocket.
It was even written up as a "tax holiday" and not an IRS tax change.
The gimme crowd had fun money for one year longer than they were supposed to.
And if someone making $90K per year can't afford their food bill then they should march themselves down to the food stamp office and try to sign up. I'm sure the workers down there would be more than helpful in showing someone making $90K a year how to budget so they can afford food so they won't starve in the streets because they now have $34 less per week in their paycheck.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds ?
Someone making $300 per week will see $6 less in their paycheck per week. That doesn't even cover the cost of a McDonald's combo meal.
So when the tax vacation went into effect you took on MORE BILLS?
Didn't everyone get the message that the cut was temporary, and not an invitation to take on higher monthly bills?
umm not sure where you live but here in jersey nothing goes down.. my taxes went up food went up, i have no credit card bills no cell phone bills,no car payments, i wiill probably have to cut food bills down somewhere.it is what it is. Hey Nascar and hollywood get a nice tax break though.. woo Hoo.
So what is your point exactly? After someone hits a certain income level, they are no longer entitled to the money they earned?
In this case, no, they are not entitled to it, because it will be returned to them in the form of a social safety net that will provide them with a meager income in case they did not save enough for retirement.
It's a well run program with only a 1% overhead.
It's been like this for Decades. If you don't like Western industrialized safety nets for elderly people so they don't wind up begging on the streets....move to Sudan where they don't withhold payroll taxes you poor thing.
umm not sure where you live but here in jersey nothing goes down.. my taxes went up food went up, i have no credit card bills no cell phone bills,no car payments, i wiill probably have to cut food bills down somewhere.it is what it is. Hey Nascar and hollywood get a nice tax break though.. woo Hoo.
oh ps,.. i make no where near $90,000 grand a year cut that in half, thats what i make and still manage to own a home in nj..
umm not sure where you live but here in jersey nothing goes down.. my taxes went up food went up, i have no credit card bills no cell phone bills,no car payments, i wiill probably have to cut food bills down somewhere.it is what it is. Hey Nascar and hollywood get a nice tax break though.. woo Hoo.
They were giving that money to Uncle Sam in the form of FICA tax for all but the last 2 years.
It was temporary..extra cash in your pocket.
It was even written up as a "tax holiday" and not an IRS tax change.
The gimme crowd had fun money for one year longer than they were supposed to.
And if someone making $90K per year can't afford their food bill then they should march themselves down to the food stamp office and try to sign up. I'm sure the workers down there would be more than helpful in showing someone making $90K a year how to budget so they can afford food so they won't starve in the streets because they now have $34 less per week in their paycheck.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds ?
Someone making $300 per week will see $6 less in their paycheck per week. That doesn't even cover the cost of a McDonald's combo meal.
So the big "time for the rich to pay..." results in the average joe paying more and getting hurt more than the rich. Nice job liberals.
I dont care if the payroll thing was supposed to be temporary or not, the bottom line is, getting rid of it now hurts many in this country. The better thing to do would have been to make it permanent.
No cuts in spending, but cuts in our hard earned pay checks. I hate those hypocritical crooks! It is damn sad when our hard earned money, especially when times are tough and many of us would benefit greatly from keeping more of our money, is taken from us any chance they get to do so. And its made worse when we have much of it wasted. ********* big government morons. You people are insane and dont value your own freedoms or your own hard earned money.
nah never paid attention really. gues it was my fault. guess i should hope to go on unemployment live free and maybe go on food stamps. but $87.00 how is that justified for a person making less than $40,000 grand a year. thats 173 month. more than my medical for 4 people..
They were giving that money to Uncle Sam in the form of FICA tax for all but the last 2 years.
It was temporary..extra cash in your pocket.
It was even written up as a "tax holiday" and not an IRS tax change.
The gimme crowd had fun money for one year longer than they were supposed to.
And if someone making $90K per year can't afford their food bill then they should march themselves down to the food stamp office and try to sign up. I'm sure the workers down there would be more than helpful in showing someone making $90K a year how to budget so they can afford food so they won't starve in the streets because they now have $34 less per week in their paycheck.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds ?
Someone making $300 per week will see $6 less in their paycheck per week. That doesn't even cover the cost of a McDonald's combo meal.
Whether or not a person can or cannot afford something is irrelevant to how much they should or shouldn't be taxed. A fair tax applies an equal percentage to all people. A person should be able to trust the fact that they can actually retain the money they personally earn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher
In this case, no, they are not entitled to it, because it will be returned to them in the form of a social safety net that will provide them with a meager income in case they did not save enough for retirement.
It's a well run program with only a 1% overhead.
It's been like this for Decades. If you don't like Western industrialized safety nets for elderly people so they don't wind up begging on the streets....move to Sudan where they don't withhold payroll taxes you poor thing.
I am sorry, but how on earth is it a 'well run program', when the ROI is less than 1/4 of what you would get investing the same money in an index fund following the S&P? Retaining spending in the program rather than allowing individuals to spend that same tax money in investment portfolios prevents them from having higher returns, and you call this mess a 'well run program'? Good god the ignorance.
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.
