Ledge Republicans?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by CarneVaca

If you call yourself a Republican or a Democrat, all you've done is agree to play, or rather spectate at, a game controlled by people intent on keeping you down.

Preach on Brother Carne - Preach On!!!!!!!!!!!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

I wasn't referring to the rich, I was referring to everyone collectively. If you were to conduct a poll and ask anyone off the street "Do you want to be taxed less?" the obvious answer is going to be yes. But then ask them what would happen if they fell on hard times and needed government assistance. Who and what would pay for it? Everyone wants to be taxed less but keep the same level of social programs we currently have. OR - they want to curtail social programs so they can have a little bit of extra steak in their pockets. They can't have it both ways. If given the choice between having a few extra bucks in their paychecks or helping a single mother out with putting food on her kids table, they are going to choose the former.

Now, what we should be doing is eliminating every type of waste we have in government spending to fund these ridiculous tax cuts. We need to stop offering tax breaks for SUVs, tax the corporations a helluva lot more, and stop giving oil contracts to companies that are going to steal money from us. There is so much that could be done to save money, but no one wants to put in the effort to save it. People want to bitch about the money being taken form their weekly paychecks, but they don't want to do anything about it. They want to vote for a man who is the collective whore of corporate America.

And no, it isn't necessarily fair that the rich pay half of their income, but it also isn't fair that the poor pay as much as they do. It's so absurd when someone gets ten dollars a goddamn hour BUSTING THEIR ASS and working full time, only to get $300 a week after taxes. Who the hell can live on that?

While I agree this is a good theory, in application, this is neither a D or R theorem. I mean W's tax cuts passed by an overwhelming majority, which means MANY D's voted for it. In the end, I am hard pressed to say W is more of a corporate whore than any other politicans. But, you will NEVER admit that

Also, taxing corps. more reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of almost all economic theory on how to stimulate the economy and keep the economy going. But, people think saying it means it is the right thing to do because it is easy to villfy the corps. I am NOT talking about corps. that use shell corps to avoid paying any taxes - although perfectly legal and with the blessing of the corp. whore politicians in Congress and the White House over the last 15 or so years, I think that is just wrong - but again it is legal and with D and R blessings. I am solely talking about corps. that "reside" in America and use the tax code to expand, etc. Expansion of corps. is the fundamental backbone of the US economy. Thus, the govt.'s use the tax code to promote this expansion by offering tax rebates, depreciation, etc. Increasing the taxes on these corp.'s would retard that growth and, thus, the economy.

Finally, you and you SUV obsession

Also, and I just cannot resist this, Clinton spending millions of taxpayer dolalrs to first try to stifle and then try to perpetuate his lie is a prime example of govt. waste (not to mention obstruction of justice) Imagine how those millions could have helped social programs

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Clinton

I won't touch that with a ten foot pole.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

I won't touch that with a ten foot pole.

[Violet]

Originally Posted by dissention

We need to stop offering tax breaks for SUVs

Showing my ignorance here....What tax breaks for SUVs? I drive one and, whether right or wrong , would like to know if I'm entitled to one...
At the same time, I'm curious to know what the basis is for it? I know I'm probably going to get the democratic point of view on this, but educate me...

Thanks,

Carol

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Violet

Showing my ignorance here....What tax breaks for SUVs? I drive one and, whether right or wrong , would like to know if I'm entitled to one...
At the same time, I'm curious to know what the basis is for it? I know I'm probably going to get the democratic point of view on this, but educate me...

Thanks,

Carol

In general, the idea is that people having a small business or farm that need a SUV to haul things around in should get a tax break to promote starting up a business, etc. On its face, this is a laudable goal because it will promote commerce and help boost the economy from many angles. The problem is anyone essentially can say with a little effort that they are a small business and thus qualify for the tax break, which was not the original intent of the tax code.

Here are some articles:

http://4wheeldrive.about.com/cs/driv...a041603a_3.htm

http://www.selfemployedweb.com/suv-tax-break3.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...ax-break_x.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scite...ax0301001.html

www.irs.gov

[Violet]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

In general, the idea is that people having a small business or farm that need a SUV to haul things around in should get a tax break to promote starting up a business, etc. On its face, this is a laudable goal because it will promote commerce and help boost the economy from many angles. The problem is anyone essentially can say with a little effort that they are a small business and thus qualify for the tax break, which was not the original intent of the tax code.

Here are some articles:

http://4wheeldrive.about.com/cs/driv...a041603a_3.htm

http://www.selfemployedweb.com/suv-tax-break3.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...ax-break_x.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scite...ax0301001.html

www.irs.gov

Thank you! Technically, I am self-employed, so this may apply to me, but considering my equipment would fit in the trunk of any car, I wouldn't use this deduction. I can totally see how it could be abused. I think one of the articles said something about possible tax breaks for more environmentally friendly vehicles. That's something I'd support. Incidentally, I'd love to get a new car that's not such a gas hog, but can't afford that right now.

Thanks again for enlightening me!
Carol

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Violet

Thank you! Technically, I am self-employed, so this may apply to me, but considering my equipment would fit in the trunk of any car, I wouldn't use this deduction. I can totally see how it could be abused. I think one of the articles said something about possible tax breaks for more environmentally friendly vehicles. That's something I'd support. Incidentally, I'd love to get a new car that's not such a gas hog, but can't afford that right now.

Thanks again for enlightening me!
Carol

You are welcome!!!!

And - Ford, Lexus, and other auto makers are beginning the first parts of mass production of hybrid SUV's. www.ford.com indicates the new Escape miniSUV hybrid will get around 40 MPG and Lexus indicates the new RX330 hybrid SUV will get in the mid 20's MPG. So, that is promising and, to me, a clear indication that this is where the auto industry is going. Although this will not end our dependence on oil, when in plae 100%, it will lessen out consumption by about 2/3 in this sector, which is a good thing IMO even though we will still be burning fossil fuels.

Food for Thought.

[Violet]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

You are welcome!!!!

And - Ford, Lexus, and other auto makers are beginning the first parts of mass production of hybrid SUV's. www.ford.com indicates the new Escape miniSUV hybrid will get around 40 MPG and Lexus indicates the new RX330 hybrid SUV will get in the mid 20's MPG. So, that is promising and, to me, a clear indication that this is where the auto industry is going. Although this will not end our dependence on oil, when in plae 100%, it will lessen out consumption by about 2/3 in this sector, which is a good thing IMO even though we will still be burning fossil fuels.

Food for Thought.

Wow! That's very cool. I didn't know ford was doing that. I've always been a ford girl! 40 mpg sounds much better than the 14 I get now!

Thanks again!
Carol

[sparky]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

FOUL and you know it

I was talling about the $100 hammer at the Pentagon. This is a PRIME example of attacking the rich as all being evil misers who want to see the poor dead rather than pay for them Stereotypes are just as bad when you are talking about rich people, but that often gets lost in the shuffle. Moreover, NO ONE should have to pay 1/2 of what they make to the govt. period - end of story IMO. That is just absurd. But, people think people maling $200,000 a year are rich beyond reason, automatically evil, and should have to pay pay pay. IT is unfair and you know it, but will NEVER admit it

I think that the government is insanely wasteful, and spends money on a number of ridiculous things. Nonetheless, I wouldn't mind paying more taxes. The tax system really ought to be overhauled - but I doubt it will ever happen. The more you make, sometimes the less you pay. When you own a business, homes, have business expenses, etc., the write-offs just add up like crazy. I am shocked at how much I can deduct. But, my accountant isn't cheating - just following the tax code.
BTW - 200k a year isn't really all that much money. UNLESS, you live far beneath your means. The thing about most people is, the more they make, the more they spend. The average person making 200 can all of a sudden have two new cars, plus insurance, an expensive house, and all the attending expenses, send the kids to private schools, have a nanny, gardener, maid, pool man, buy designer clothing, eat out more, take nice vacations. You make more, you just keep upgrading. Soon enough, they NEED that 200 ! And would like more.
I don't live beyond my means, usually, and am happy about every buck I make. Don't think I am the norm, though. I knew that, in so many ways

[dissention]

Originally Posted by sparky

The more you make, sometimes the less you pay.

Yup, let's not forget that Cheney paid less in taxes than Shrub this year, even with those multi-million severance checks he cashes from Halliburton.

[strandinthewind]

There is an old axiom that tax rates do not ever reflect actual tax collection

In other words, no one, inlcuding the poor, ever pay their actual inital stated rate, if they make enough money to have one. Everyone gets a decuction, be it standard or itemized. Actually, the standard deduction allows people with no valid deductions to have some they would never be able to have, etc. So, in that sense it is a "gift" from the govt.

I get that the tax code is complex because it is an effective tool to promote growth in certain sectors. In other word, money put into some retirement plans is taken out of the taxable amount, etc., and that is a good thing because it adds incentive for people to put money away for their retirement, which in theory means they will be less of a burden on the govt. in their old age and still be able to contribute to the economy in their old age. Same thing goes for the deduction of mortgage interest in that investment in real property is a good and strong stimulus for the economy.

But, in general, if you make enough money (somehere around $200,000 a year by most estimates), you can have all the deductions in the world and not be able to use them after a certain point due to the alternative minimum tax (AMT). The AMT system eliminates many of the deductions and personal exemptions taxpayers are entitled to under the regular tax system, and instead automatically applies a Federal Income Tax rate of 26-28% - which does not include the additional taxes like state taxes, OASDI, Medicare, etc. So, no matter how much money you make personally, almost all people making somewhere around $200,000 or more a year that have alot of deductions are going to pay somewhere around 40% of the taxable income to some govt. entity. This is a conundrum because it obviates the incentives in the tax code that are there to stimulate certain sectors of the economy. In other words a hig income and tax minded person could chose not to do something or to prolong a decision based on the tax advantage of it. But, in the end and IMO, the AMT should be kept and the bar to activate it raised because while a blessing and relatively rare, $200,000 is not alot of money relative to today's cost of living.

Here is the IRS' line on AMT.

( http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...107843,00.html )

Alternative Minimum Tax

Tax Tip 2004-51, March 15, 2004

Before mailing your federal income tax return, check to make sure you aren’t subject to the alternative minimum tax. In recent years, more and more people have found themselves subject to the AMT.

The tax law gives preferential treatment to some kinds of income and allows special deductions and credits for some kinds of expenses. Taxpayers who benefit from these provisions of the law may have to pay an additional tax called the alternative minimum tax. It is a separate tax computation that, in effect, eliminates many deductions and credits and creates a tax liability for an individual who would otherwise pay little or no tax.

For 2003, the exemption amounts for figuring the AMT have increased. The amount depends on your filing status. You may have to pay AMT if your taxable income for regular tax purposes, combined with certain adjustment and tax preference items, is more than the exemption amounts below:

$58,000 if you are married filing a joint return or a qualified widow(er),
$40,250 if you are single or head of household, or
$29,000 if you are married filing a separate return.

The adjustments and tax preference items include such things as: standard or certain itemized deductions, taxable state and local tax refunds, accelerated depreciation of certain property, intangible drilling costs, certain tax exempt interest and the difference between AMT and regular tax gain or loss on the sale of property, treatment of incentive stock options and depletion allowances.

If you meet the criteria noted above and have several of the listed tax preference items, you should determine whether you might be liable for AMT. For details, see the instructions for line 42 of Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, as well as Form 6251, Alternative Minimum Tax—Individuals, and its instructions.

The forms and their instructions are available on this Web site or can be ordered by calling toll free 1-800-TAX-FORM (1-800-829-3676).

Here are some other general articles on it:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107246,00.html

http://money.cnn.com/pf/101/lessons/18/page8.html

http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed...0040121amt.htm

Food for Thought!!!!!!!