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.
When I heard about some potential legislation to place more tax burden on single people without kids recently, I flipped my lid. The US tax system is so unfairly balanced right now, and it is pushing me out of the middle class into poverty.
Almost 1/4 of my gross incomes goes directly to state and federal taxes. And I only make 43K. My net take home ends up being 30K. The system punishes my demographic because we are single with no kids. My GF made close to 100K last year, and she was taxed nearly 25K. Again, 1/4 of the income.
Maybe the government looks at it that we are getting to keep three fourths of our hard earned money without dealing with the expenses of kids. Screw that. A married couple has the benefit of a dual income. They are the ones I see with the nice houses, the garages full of stuff. I am in my 40s, and can't afford a house. I've never owned a lawnmower because I've never had my own yard.
Yes, kids are expensive, but I believe a dual income more than makes up for that especially with all the tax breaks. But the government wants to take more away from me to help familes? Why should I be punished because I was a responsible adult and didn't engage in risky behavior or poor parenting? I have a friend on FB who has a new kid every year. He now has 7 kids. He was bragging about his big tax refund and how his family would get to enjoy a nice cruise. Does he really deserve a break and not me?
I'm all for everyone paying their fair share. So if I have to fork over 25% then everyone should have to do the same.
It's what happens when over half of babies are now born to welfare households. Families paying taxes are shrinking in number. Liberals want to bring in millions of indigents from third world nations and reward them for having babues they can't afford.
now you are adding payroll into the equation too????
7% (6+1) is mandated for payroll
40-50k is in the 12% bracket for federal (with you paying about 9%)
and only 2 states have a bracket over 10%...most states are between 3-6%
the FACT is you are paying LESS than 25%
the math isnt all that difficult
7+9+4 is what.......20
heck my property taxes are 20% of my income....that's why I itemize and write them off my federal
No, you are incorrect.
Let's do some basic math.
6.2% (FICA) + 1.45% (Medicare) + 5.1% (New York State) + 12.9% (Fed) = 25.65%
Property taxes for me are included in my rent. I live alone and am 24 years old. No surprises. Like I said, I was over 25% for the year.
Well, they would like mandatory community service for most everyone, starting in school. Just to get people involved in the communiIn factempted would be the elderly and disabled, and welfare recipients with children.
I'm sure the conservatives would also give mom a break. Everyone else can get to trash pick-up duty for the common good. Especially those low-income single people who pay a quarter of their meager wages so welfare mom can have a smart phone and middle class family of six can take a Euro vacation.
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them. In fact, single mothers are exactly the people who need to learn a work ethic, their kids have no other parent to teach them about going to work, getting a job, being responsible.
1. the ''bush tax cuts'' were mostly for the middleclass and the poor...infact the rich got only a small cut in the income tax
the bush tax cuts/credits helped mainly the poor and middleclass
the credits:
expanded child CARE credit
expanded child credit
energy star credit
tution credit
health care credit
retirement fund (401k/tsp/roth) credit
the 01/03 (aka "bush' ) tax cuts/credits were for EVERYONE..with the poor and middleclass getting the biggest part of the cuts/credits.....\prior to the 'bush' tax cuts there was not a 10% bracket..it was 15%....the rich was cut from 39% to 35%
2. but the biggest part of the cuts/credits was not the tax rates ....... but the CREDITS ( child care credit, child credit, energy efficiency credit, retirement 401k credit, education tuition credit, and the health costs credit) which the "rich" those households over 180k could NOT take
the only cut the "rich' got solely was thier rate dropped from 39 to 35...a 4 point drop
EVERYONE got the capitol gains cut
the POOR got a 5 point drop from 15% down to 10%
and EVERYONE under 180k got the credits...(energy credit, tuition credit, child credit, child care credit, retirement(401k) credit, and health care cost credit)....the 'rich' were not allowed thoise credits as they prorated down on incomes over 180k
the 01/03 cuts and credits benefited the poor and the middleclass much more
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them. In fact, single mothers are exactly the people who need to learn a work ethic, their kids have no other parent to teach them about going to work, getting a job, being responsible.
Everything about you conservatives is about "reward" or "work ethic" or "teach." Life is not a sermon. Get over it and move on.
Why would you keep rewarding irresponsible breeding? That is much of the problem with over 50 % of births going to indigent women who cannot afford them.
Government uses the tax code to manipulate people into doing what they want. Maybe rewarding irresponsible breeding is exactly what the democrats want. More people living in poverty, more democratic voters.
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.