PDA

View Full Version : Economic Stimulus Act



WAHMof2
03-16-2008, 11:29
I was just curious about how this tax "rebate" was structured, and I found this on the IRS site. It appears that the higher your income, the more you get (up to $80,000 AGI). How is this supposed to "stimulate" our economy? Families pushing 6 figure incomes are surely already spending plenty of money, so why would an extra $1200 or so make any difference? It seems to me that the lower income brackets should get the larger amounts so they have something to spend other than buying groceries and gas. We certainly aren't wealthy, but I'd happily see less fortunate (deserving) folks get a little more than us. Just doesn't make any sense to me.
Not trying to take this out of context, but this excerpt is from their site:

4) Married couple with two children, no wages, no social security benefits, no veterans’ payments, AGI is $25,000, federal income tax liability before child tax credit is $70.
Rebate is $600
Qualifying child credit is $600
TOTAL is $1,200

5) Married couple with two children, AGI is $35,000, federal income tax liability before child tax credit is $1,070.
Rebate is $1,070
Qualifying child credit is $600
TOTAL is $1,670

6) Married couple with two children, AGI is $80,000, federal income tax liability before child tax credit exceeds $1,200.
Rebate is $1,200
Qualifying child credit is $600
TOTAL is $1,800

7) Married couple with two children, AGI is $160,000, federal income tax liability before child tax credit exceeds $1,200.
Rebate is $1,200
Qualifying child credit is $600
Phaseout reduction is ($500)
TOTAL is $1,300

Garrobo
03-16-2008, 15:24
I don't know about all the conjectue concerning the 'stimulus package' but I got a letter from the IRS yesterday telling me that I would be getting a check for $1200 in May. That's good enough for me. I only had to pay $762 in witholding this year on my retirement income as opposed to paying $3500 for the same income in the years when our pal Bubba was in charge. That makes my federal tax zero and $438 to the good. Thank you George W. So you know who I am NOT going to vote for in the next election and that is anyone who goes public with the intention of rescinding the "BUSH TAX CUT". Since that has taken effect my taxes have gone down an average of $2600 a year. Pays for a lot of dive trips to the Keys.

Cheddarchick
03-16-2008, 15:28
oh but it is not fair.....we should send more money to the people who don't pay any taxes to begin with....Sorry just sent a tax bill in......

mm2002
03-16-2008, 16:14
There's definitely different ways to look at it. I know that I may pay more taxes than someone in a lower income bracket, but it's sometimes not proportional to the income level of the person paying. I know many people in lower income brackets than myself, and I know many in higher ones. Many times, the person in the lower bracket ends up owing more (proportionally) than the person in the higher bracket. My feelings are that the bill should lower the cap from 80K to something a little more realistic like maybe in the 40K range. If I'm making 80K a year, I can easily afford the taxes, and that $1200 wouldn't have much (if any) effect on how much money I spend. To an honest hard working family grossing 25K, that $1200 could be a lot of money.

BuzzF117
03-16-2008, 16:42
I mail a check in April get a check back in May and send em another one in June (we pay estimated taxes) not stimulus here they should save the dough and take the rebate from what I owe for 07. Govt=lawyers making laws. I have had it with all of them. Economy is to large to micro manage and all these "little tweaks" just make the pending doom that much larger they need to get out of the way and let the business cycle complete and then we can pick up the pieces when its over.

plot
03-16-2008, 17:50
the higher your income, the more you paid. shouldn't you get a proportional amount back?

If I paid 15k in taxes last year and the next guy paid 5k, why should he get 600 back and me only get 200 back?

As a single childless guy, I can agree that families with less money could use it alot more than I could (lets face it, I'm gonna probably blow it on scuba), but I'm also a huge proponent of the flat tax and an opponent to most social services like the idea of government funded healthcare... so no sympathy here.

I don't think "fairness" should be based on who could use it more.

IrishSquid
03-16-2008, 18:36
oh but it is not fair.....we should send more money to the people who don't pay any taxes to begin with....Sorry just sent a tax bill in......

My sentiments also. No pay, no play.


the higher your income, the more you paid. shouldn't you get a proportional amount back?

If I paid 15k in taxes last year and the next guy paid 5k, why should he get 600 back and me only get 200 back?

As a single childless guy, I can agree that families with less money could use it alot more than I could (lets face it, I'm gonna probably blow it on scuba), but I'm also a huge proponent of the flat tax and an opponent to most social services like the idea of government funded healthcare... so no sympathy here.

I don't think "fairness" should be based on who could use it more.

Right on. I'm sick of other people deciding how much I need, and what % of MY EARNED money should be given to someone else. Fairness is just a short hop away from fairy-tale. I may sound cold hearted, but redistrubition of wealth is just a legal form of theft by the gov't to me.

CaptainRon
03-16-2008, 19:04
Remember, it is a rebate. That means you must are getting back some of what you paid. If you paid more, you should get more back. Of course that was the intention before congress started trying to extend it to even those who did not pay taxes.

And I find it unbelievable that there are actually legislators who want to let the Bush tax cuts expire when we are facing a possible recession. Raising tax rates is the last thing you want to do when facing an economic downturn.

BouzoukiJoe A.K.A. wrecker130 AKA Chuck Norris AKA joeforbroke (banned)
03-16-2008, 19:12
I have a high income and I feel that I 'deserve' it just as much as someone with a low income. I worked hard to get where I am and don't think I should be punished for it by the so-called progressive tax code.

Nevertheless I think the whole idea of this stimulus package is voodoo econmics. No country in the history of man has ever spent its way to prosperity. What we need instead investment and addition to the capital base so that new businesses can be formed to provide good jobs for 'deserving' Americans.

georoc01
03-17-2008, 08:37
I paid over $50k in federal taxes last year and am getting nothing. And that doesn't include my state and SSI taxes as well. And I don't get to write off my sales taxes as those that live in states without a state payroll tax do either.

So please don't complain if you are getting something.

Garrobo
03-17-2008, 09:24
georoc01: Well, vote for Hussein or Billary and you might get to pay $100G's next year.

BuzzF117
03-17-2008, 09:52
Yep only in America do we punish the successful via higher proportional taxes

Clanggedin
03-17-2008, 10:25
I don't care who gets what as long as I get something back too. My stimulus check is paying for a new tv.

WAHMof2
03-17-2008, 12:24
the higher your income, the more you paid. shouldn't you get a proportional amount back?

If I paid 15k in taxes last year and the next guy paid 5k, why should he get 600 back and me only get 200 back?

As a single childless guy, I can agree that families with less money could use it alot more than I could (lets face it, I'm gonna probably blow it on scuba), but I'm also a huge proponent of the flat tax and an opponent to most social services like the idea of government funded healthcare... so no sympathy here.

I don't think "fairness" should be based on who could use it more.


The way I understand it, the object of this "stimulus" act is to put money in the hands of people who don't ordinarily have much extra to spend. If you're making enough dough to owe 15K in taxes, you're probably already spending plenty on other things. Is that extra $600 going to make a huge impact on your spending, or the economy? Now, put that $600 in the hands of someone in a lower income bracket who may never have any extra cash to "blow", and then an effect could be realized. I still don't think it's going to help our economy, but I'm trying to reason it out considering the objectives of the bill itself.

Now, do I think that that all of the non tax paying people sucking off food stamps and welfare, who are perfectly capable of working but too damned lazy, should get any money? Nope. They need to be smacked up side the head and told to get a job.

fireflock
03-17-2008, 12:57
The objective of the stimulus act is to trick you into thinking that getting your own money back is a 'gift' so that
you will vote for the people who 'gave' it to you (after they take it from you first).

The incumbent politicians are scared that you will vote for their opponents, who will point out the incumbents role in getting us into this mess.

Sad thing is....it will probably work.

Garrobo
03-17-2008, 17:27
Works for me.

RoyN
03-18-2008, 13:04
Hmmm, I don't know if i qualify for it. :(

WAHMof2
03-18-2008, 13:12
Hmmm, I don't know if i qualify for it. :(


Oh don't worry, I'm sure you'll still qualify to pay. :smiley36:
(sorry)

Byte Me
03-18-2008, 13:39
I use Turbo Tax and they informed me about the rebate as well. It literally came out and said:

You qualify for the tax rebate of up to $1200. This is not a refund but a rebate that you will not be taxed on next year (It is "free money").

I almost crapped at the "free money" comment. These elected "never had a real job" asshats decide to give me back some of my money instead of pissing it away on increasing their pay or benefits, for free loans at the house bank, bantering back and forth about how best to protect me from myself by frivolously spewing my hard earned money that they so willingly take and then they have the nerve to try and tell me it's "free money"?

Douchebags. Every one of them. I'm glad I'm getting this back and will put it to use in the same manner I do the rest of my discretionary income. Having fun!!

johnyringo
03-18-2008, 23:50
I use Turbo Tax and they informed me about the rebate as well. It literally came out and said:

You qualify for the tax rebate of up to $1200. This is not a refund but a rebate that you will not be taxed on next year (It is "free money").

I almost crapped at the "free money" comment. These elected "never had a real job" asshats decide to give me back some of my money instead of pissing it away on increasing their pay or benefits, for free loans at the house bank, bantering back and forth about how best to protect me from myself by frivolously spewing my hard earned money that they so willingly take and then they have the nerve to try and tell me it's "free money"?

Douchebags. Every one of them. I'm glad I'm getting this back and will put it to use in the same manner I do the rest of my discretionary income. Having fun!!

...I can't top that statement, well said!!

hooligan
03-19-2008, 01:02
I say abolish the IRS and go to a federal sales tax... no refunds, no owing, you buy more you pay more taxes. Plus, the gov. would collect taxes from EVERYONE living in the US. Hell, even collect it from people traveling to the US to buy goods since our doller is worth jack right now.

Beaucoupfishies
03-19-2008, 09:08
I say abolish the IRS and go to a federal sales tax... no refunds, no owing, you buy more you pay more taxes. Plus, the gov. would collect taxes from EVERYONE living in the US. Hell, even collect it from people traveling to the US to buy goods since our doller is worth jack right now.

Yep, and stop property taxing everyone to pay for schools. Only the parents who have children in school should have to pay the taxes. I realize that schools do help the community, but I'd rather see my property tax money go to better police stations or parks since I don't have anyone going to school.

Think
03-19-2008, 09:27
georoc01: Well, vote for Hussein or Billary and you might get to pay $100G's next year.

Amen brother. Sure, our economy is in the toilet, the world hates us, we have lost our civil liberties, etc. etc. etc. But damn it I'm getting a new TV!!

mm2002
03-19-2008, 13:26
Yep, and stop property taxing everyone to pay for schools. Only the parents who have children in school should have to pay the taxes. I realize that schools do help the community, but I'd rather see my property tax money go to better police stations or parks since I don't have anyone going to school.

I kind of agree with that, except that living in a school district generally raises the value of your property. Is it proportional with the extra taxes you pay? I've never done the math, but around here property located in a public school district equates to approx 8% to 10% increase in property value. I'd think that probably offsets the extra tax, but I don't know. Got me curious now.

Beaucoupfishies
03-19-2008, 14:03
I kind of agree with that, except that living in a school district generally raises the value of your property. Is it proportional with the extra taxes you pay? I've never done the math, but around here property located in a public school district equates to approx 8% to 10% increase in property value. I'd think that probably offsets the extra tax, but I don't know. Got me curious now.

Definitely a good point, though higher property values do increase your taxes too.

Here in Tampa, they recently passed a bill to drop property tax by 25% starting 2011 and increase the sales tax 1% to pay for schools. Housing here is higher than the national average, but wages are lower, so it's a welcome relief either way.

Garrobo
03-19-2008, 14:24
I've never had any children in school but I don't have a problem with paying taxes to support the school, be it property tax or whatever. I feel that since I got a (so-called) education through the system I am obligated to pay for it and for others by paying taxes.

mm2002
03-19-2008, 16:43
Definitely a good point, though higher property values do increase your taxes too.

Exactly, but if you weren't in the school district your property value wouldn't be as high to begin with, right? :smiley5: Oh thanks, now my head hurts!

plot
03-19-2008, 17:02
I don't have kids nore do I want them, but I don't mind the school taxes because... well... I spent 13 years in public school (counting kindergarden), so I guess I kind of have to make up for that.

mm2002
03-19-2008, 17:04
I don't have kids nore do I want them

I said that when I was 24 too. :smiley2:

plot
03-19-2008, 17:06
I don't have kids nore do I want them

I said that when I was 24 too. :smiley2:


should've been more carefull, huh pops? :smiley2:


that's what pretty much everyone with kids tells me. i'd rather be the cool uncle than the dad though

ChrisA
03-19-2008, 17:12
Here in Tampa, they recently passed a bill to drop property tax by 25% starting 2011 and increase the sales tax 1% to pay for schools. Housing here is higher than the national average, but wages are lower, so it's a welcome relief either way.

Isn't that what we call a tax break for the rich? Say I live in a ten million dollar house and I'll see a huge tax break. Yes I spend money too but most of it goes to art auctions in europe and dive trips in the tahtii and mexico.

The poor folk who live in a trailer and spend ever dime of their paycheck just got a 1% tax hike.

ChrisA
03-19-2008, 17:23
I say abolish the IRS and go to a federal sales tax... no refunds, no owing, you buy more you pay more taxes. Plus, the gov. would collect taxes from EVERYONE living in the US. Hell, even collect it from people traveling to the US to buy goods since our doller is worth jack right now.

The problem is that the more money you make the less percentage of it you spend on taxable items. Sales tax is anti-progressive taking a higher percent from the poor than the welthy.

You can change that ONLY if the sales tax would appliy to EVERYTHING including housing and investments, stocks and bonds and medical care. AND purchases made outside the US. But then you would seriously decuorage investment and then where does capital for productively improment come from?

Why not a "head tax" everyone pays the same amount, say $10K every year. And I mean EVERYONE including babies. So if you have a kid you pay for him untill he is 18 then he pays his own $10K tax.

And while we are at it why not PREVENT crime rather then recat to it. I say "lock them up BEFORE they commit the crime" and prevent it from happening.

mm2002
03-19-2008, 17:55
And while we are at it why not PREVENT crime rather then recat to it. I say "lock them up BEFORE they commit the crime" and prevent it from happening.


Now wait a minute, if that were the case I'd have been in prison a long time ago for things I thought about doing but never did. :smiley36:

DRNightdiver
03-19-2008, 20:04
The county reassessed all houses in our neighborhood last year when the home market was still going strong. As a result my property taxes increased by $900.

Do you suppose the county assessor will come back and reassess my house now that its lost 20% of it's value? Wishful thinking.

georoc01
03-19-2008, 20:22
Here in Tampa, they recently passed a bill to drop property tax by 25% starting 2011 and increase the sales tax 1% to pay for schools. Housing here is higher than the national average, but wages are lower, so it's a welcome relief either way.

Isn't that what we call a tax break for the rich? Say I live in a ten million dollar house and I'll see a huge tax break. Yes I spend money too but most of it goes to art auctions in europe and dive trips in the tahtii and mexico.

The poor folk who live in a trailer and spend ever dime of their paycheck just got a 1% tax hike.


The problem is when you have areas where the value of your house increases faster than you ability to pay the taxes on the new value on it. So if the value of that trailer has tripled over the last 3 years (which has happened in some parts of the country), they do better with the break as well.

Who gets screwed are those that rent and don't own property. I doubt they will see much of a break in rental prices (which are set more by supply and demand than the cost of owning the poperty).