Why does the government hand poor people large sums of money in the form of tax credits?
 

What is the stated purpose for this?

People under a certain income don't even pay taxes.

Votes. Thats how liberals get in office

He's most likely referring to "refundable tax credits". Take a few minutes and look at how they work.

perception of teamwork:

"people tend to not work against you if you are working with them."

aka paid voters

they should be put ito hard labor, locked up or shot.

too many people getting a free ride

..sarcasm


PS FUCK YOU JACK SPARROW..u arent fooling anyone ass dumpster.

if you give money to rich people they wont spend it and thus the gov doesn't get it back. If you give it to poor people the money gets spent, taxed and re-taxed until it makes its way back to some rich guy

well said!

Keep them from rioting.

It's redistribution of wealth, AKA socialism AKA corruption.

if their working their paying taxes

Sure, they may have taxes withheld if they are working, but what if they got everything they paid (or more?) back as a refund?

What % of tax payers would you imagine have a $0 tax liability at the end of the year? (Meaning in the end, they are paying nothing in federal income tax.)

I'm often curious how true this is. I just have a hard time believing that all of these "rich" people are sticking all of their money into a savings account and earning 1%. Even if they stick that money into bonds or CDs it still contributes to the economy.

ive said this before do you want to make sure they can have some what stable living or do you want to have them rob and killing? :2 cents: you want more broke and nothing to lose people on the streets or a some what stable system? cant have it both ways. :2 cents:

The purpose is simple.... If poor/lower income/middle class don't have money, then the rich don't have anyone buying from them, thus the entire economy comes to a standstill and rich people aren't getting rich anymore off the backs of poor people while pretending that taxes hurt them at all.

exactly! it would be like robocop nation wide robbery and looting everywhere.

Well...it is being reported that the rich are sitting on more than a trillion dollars cash...and that big business is making larger profits than ever before.

Recent studies have shown that being "broke" isn't as connected to theft and murder as people tend to think.

True, but where is the money? Sitting in a Scrooge McDuck style vault?

How else would shaved affiliates be able to afford to eat?


Serious now, even if the working poor are being given tax credits it's unlikely in most cases that their total credits are greater than the amount of aggregate taxes they effectively pay. For example do not forget Social security taxes. Yes, you might argue that it will be paid out to them eventually but really none of us know that for sure and that money is in the meantime being used for other things and has been for decades.

rich people don't put $$ in savings accounts, they invest that $$$... and that investment creates innovation, jobs, etc...

"poor people" on the other hand, don't really contribute anything to the economy, they just in a way leech off from those in higher classes...

But if 99% of people are living in dirt hovels and are spending 90% of their waking time working for the basics such as food and shelter this tends to put a damper on the given society's creativity and technical advancement. Then the society in question begins to stagnate. Eventually even the 1% will suffer as things such as cures for their diseases are never realized because the people who might have discovered them are now working on a farm or sweatshop instead of where their natural talents are.

where did you come up with 99%? perhaps 20% are "rich", 60% are middle class, and the remaining 20% are "poor"? and that "poor" is quite relative too, they are "poor" in a sense that they can't afford luxuries that middle class can afford, but in absolute terms they are still better off than perhaps 95% of the people in the world...

so rich people are doing the robberies? :1orglaugh what study?

It's just a number I came up with thus the "if" and not "This is how it is today in...." But it still has some truth to it. Creativity and technological advancement seems to increase with a strong middle class. A poor kid who has to work in some rich asshole's sweatshop 16 hours a day everyday probably isn't going to grow up to be the next Einstein even if he had that talent within him. Put the same kid in a middle class lifestyle with those added resources and the odds increase of the natural talent developing. Common sense I would say.

so they can spend it all and thus going to the rich

A progressive tax is a tax by which the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount increases. The purpose is to create a fair tax system, because poor people would not have enough money to survive if they were taxed. People need essential needs, such as: shelter, food and clothes.

No, rich people aren't committing those crimes. But those crimes aren't going up due to an increase of poor either. Over the past 15-20 years, we are actually at a very big low in regards to major crimes.

We're speaking in generalizations now but another person might more see it as the wealthy leaching off the labor of the poor who are under paid for their time. Conversely they might see it as the wealthy being grossly overpaid for their time and labor. That the wealthy set up and enforce a system which is meant to be biased against the poor (those who lack capital).

Of course these are mere generalizations. Sometimes wealthy people work very hard just as sometimes the poor do not work at all. But an intelligent person who is seeking to be reasonably objective should keep in mind that it is usually disproportionately those with power (often wealth) who are able to structure society as they see fit. Of course it is logical to think that they would structure society to benefit them the most at the expense of others.

Rich people don't eat?

Since none of that is even close to being true, I don't see what that has to do with anything. Your scenario could be applied to pretty much any situation even.

A lot of people work jobs that totally do not match their talents for all sorts of reasons. Location, benefits, family duties. Babies are aborted every day, one could be the next Isaac Newton. Similar argument. Not to mention, a lot of the greatest inventors and scientists did work shit jobs and hours like that and still came out on top.

I'm not arguing that people should remain poor, it's against the best interests of the country and it's simply wrong. But your argument is pretty thin.

cause people are getting benefits. cut that shit off and see if it doesnt set a hell fire. :2 cents:

they stopped eating years ago their all vampires. :1orglaugh

The above does not logically follow. Your last paragraph basically agreed with the point that I was making. It is in a given society's best interests to have a strong empowered middle class. This isn't true only in extreme cases but in general. Of course there can and will be exceptions to nearly anything.

:2 cents::thumbsup

if you hand a rich guy $100 he isn't going to buy anything he doesn't usually buy = no extra tax gained

if you hand a poor person $100 he will probably go buy a bottle of booze to forget he is broke and a pack of smokes, fill up his car with gas = $100 spent. within a day up to 25% of that $100 goes straight back to the government in taxes probably.

I guess I'm just old.

I was raised that if I earn money, it's nobodies business HOW I want to use it. If I want to "sit" on a trillion dolllars...whose fucking business is it of anybody else's? If I earn it, then it's mine.

Seems like those days are long gone now. And the whole idea of even bothering to make something for yourself is quickly fading. Why should a young person today even bother trying to become successful? All they have to do is wait for it to be given to them.

And no, I'm not saying that is what everyone does. I'm saying that this kind of thing does affect how people think in general. If I have to kick ass to make ends meet...guess what? I will.

But if it's all good no matter what I do or don't do...chances are that I won't.

Just human behavior.

Of course people like me are always gonna go for the gold. It's just that type of personality. But all those "poor" people who don't have that "A" type personality? Why should they even try anymore? The big payoff at the end (becoming rich) will just mean that they have to give away all their money. :( So what's the point?

simple answer is this
theres a poverty level the government has set, if you make below this level the idea is to give you an incentive to try to pull you out of poverty. Having less people living in poverty makes for a better society.:2 cents:

so there are 2 basic issues at play.

#1 Does giving money to poor people help them break out of poverty ?

#2 Do you think having less poor people would make society better ?

I bet you weren't really raised that way at all... The amount/how you earned you money has always been private - that I'm sure you were raised on. But without question 40+ years ago, communities ruled, giving money to church ruled everyone, sharing what you had/being party of the community ruled, having a lot less than today was normal, taxes where 2-3 times higher than today.... local business investing was normal, using the local business - was the only option!

Your parents and for sure your grandparents gave up more to the "people" than any of us ever have, ever.. without question. It's only in the last 30ish years or so that greed for money has changed everyone to say fuck everyone else - well lots of reasons but money is a huge backer.

How about we get rid of it altogether. Along with all the other wealth redistribution schemes like the EIC, rebates for electric cars etc.

If you make below poverty, the government gives you money as an incentive to work your way out of poverty and then have that bonus money taken away? Explain how that works.

Joe Blow is below poverty. Works 40 hours a week, minimum wage, three children. Government gives them $200 a month for food or electricity or whatever. Joe Blow picks up a side job working 10 hours a week which brings in around $100, maybe $75 after taxes totaling $300 a month. Now he is working another 40 hours a month to make 100 extra dollars. Assuming this is all "on the books." I'm not seeing any incentive?

These arguments are funny and never-ending.

In terms of dollars, there is probably as much abuse as the top as at the bottom.

Yeah, the poor are mooching, but the rich are hiding their money, exploiting unintentional loopholes and evading taxes.

Dollar to dollar, rich vs. poor, it's probably a wash in the end.

One thing for sure is nothing will get solved arguing it here on GFY. Instead, write to the people that represent you in Congress. I'm certain they care. :1orglaugh

Everybody sucks. Rich, poor and middle class.

politicians love to make people dependent on them :(

because at some point reality sets in and says if you have a trillion dollars , someone is being exploited.

the human population has a finite amount of productivity . if we divide the resources produced equally and one person has X amount more than his share , then someone has X amount less.

i didn't say it worked , i just explained the reasoning behind it :)

not sure i follow your example or the question.

i was referring to one time tax credits.

heres an example of how giving a one time cash incentive can help boost someone out of poverty in theory.

Single mom , works at mcdonalds , give her $1000 on her taxes, lets say she spends it to buy bulk food instead of by the week saving $250 over 3 months $1000 over the year , now she can buy a car saving her time getting to work , allowing her to put in an extra hour a day at work , whatever , blam now she is above the poverty line and less likely to sell smack on the corner so her kid can have the new xbox game. Now rich people don't have to drive by smack selling single mothers on their way to golf.

Thats funny considering your boy reagan made it for poorer people.

This is why we see so many families in their FIFTH GENERATION of welfare. :helpme:Oh crap

That is why the only fair income tax is no tax.

why does someone have to be exploited?

You work 2x as hard, you get 2x, no? you take on a risk, you should get more too, no? you have a brilliant idea, you don't deserve to be compensated for it? you invest time and money in some venture, you don't deserve a bigger cut in that case either?

I wouldn't call it exploitation, it's just getting out of life what you put into it...

for example, surgeons don't make few hundred thousand per year just because they were born with a cute face... they earn that because they worked hard half their life to be trained in that profession...

same logic follows for some "rich" business owner, he isn't exploiting anyone, he is just getting out life what he put into it...