I don't see getting pregnant when you don't have the means of supporting yourself and your child as "falling on hard times." It's completely controllable. It's about choices. Unfortunately, it's one of those choices that you can't undo, so if you make a bad choice you have to live with it.

I'm glad she's putting the money to good use, most people don't. They go out and buy a luxury item.

BTW, I hope you told her to take another look her withholding -- getting a refund is bad financial practice, giving the government an interest-free loan. Of course, with the change in income, you'll have to do some projections.

I still disagree with the earned-income credit, that's money out of other taxpayers pockets that SHE DID NOT EARN. If someone wants to give her money, good for them, but the government has no right to take my hard-earned money away from me and my family and give it to someone else. Where's that money gonna be when I need it to pay for my kids' college education? Middle class = no free ride.

If the current welfare programs were converted back to LOANS, as they were originally devised, you can bet so many folks wouldn't "need" the money any more. Bet her parents would have still supported your friend. The problem is that it has become a way of life. Oops, you weren't responsible, here's some money...

I do realize there are other circumstances like job loss (layoffs and closings), medical emergencies, and numerous other things that are quite out of people's control and those are the people I agree with helping. When it isn't a lifestyle choice.

I admit to being pretty unsympathetic. Several of my friends and family have been on welfare at one time or another, and its mostly because of bad decisions. Being kicked off welfare was the one thing that seemed to make them take responsibility for their lives.

Taxing the wealthy more simply because they can afford it is ridiculous. So, because they made good decisions, worked hard, saved and invested, they should have to carry the burden so that other people can be irresponsible? Maybe read The Ant and the Grasshopper story and give it some thought.

No, it should not be redistributed because we would be living in a completely different system than the US system. Aliadam is right, countries that have tried this have failed miserably.

As far as the tax system, while it is not perfect and there are loopholes, it is fair. Anybody that has taken a basic ECON class in college has learned about progressive taxes and regressive taxes. Flat rate taxes, such as a sales tax, hurts the lower income people and helps the richer people since everybody is taxed at the same rate.

For example, if everybody is taxed at 10% and you earn $1 million, you will pay $100,000 and have $900,000 left over. If you earn $50,000, you will pay $5,000 and have $45,000 left over. If the person is taxed on a progressive scale (like we have now), then the higher income person would be taxed at a higher rate, say 33%, while the lower income person would be taxed at a lower rate, say 20%. It just depends.

I do think tax laws need to be looked at to make it more equitable as far as rates, but to have a flat tax is NOT the answer. It will only help the higher income folks.

I do think there needs to be more focus on altruism in the US. We need to help our fellow man more than we do no matter what our income levels. n my soapbox:

Great posts vcudik! ITA!

[quote=ember15]Wow this has been quite a debate. I think that having the wealthy taxed more is ok. If you are making enough to have all your needs met then why not have higher taxes. QUOTE]

I don't agree with this argument. Why do you want to punish people for working hard and being successful? So you are saying that as long as I have a roof over my head, clothes to wear, and food to eat then I should be happy to just hand over the rest to the government to dole out to whomever they deem need it the most? I wasn't aware we were living in a socialist country...

I do see your point here...it makes a good argument for the fair tax.

Yes, there are people who use the systems as they were intended and I applaud her for it. It would be interesting to see, however, statistics that show the percentage of people like your friend vs. moochers. I wonder what the larger percentage would be...

I Don't ever agree with tax credits based on low income though. I have to admit it is a real slap in the face to know that not only are there people out there who pay NO income tax at all, but actually get some of my hard earned money on top of that. Even in a situation such as your friends, I don't agree with earned income credits.

It is ironic that you mention this. My husband and I do quite a bit of donating money, goods, time, and services to various charities throughout the year. My opinion on keeping my husbands hard earned money is not a reflection of my altruistic nature.

My problem is, in essence, having a gun pointed at my head by my own government and being forced to "donate" to causes I don't believe in via taxes going to broken social programs.

I can assure you that if the choice was left in my hands, I would donate far MORE money than is being taken out in taxes, as long as it was going to a cause I believed in.

I am willing to bet that there are many people out there who feel the exact same way that I do. I truly think that people in general would be more generous if they weren't constantly worrying about our government picking their pockets everytime they turned around.

This is exactly how I feel. My husband and I do what we can, and you know, if we had more of OUR income, that WE EARN by working hard, then we would do more.

The founding fathers never envisioned that the government would become a security blanket to the masses. It was there in order to provide a structured framework and centralize certain elements of government that function best at a central level. Nothing more.

Now, in regards to a different taxation system. People seem to be confusing "flat tax" with "fair tax". A flat tax is just that - everyone pays the same rate. The Fair Tax is completely different. It is a consumption tax. Your tax rate is based on the what you consume, in terms of purchases - buy a big screen TV, you pay more tax than a smaller TV (or, heaven forbid, no TV). The choice gets put in you, the cosumer's hands, whether or not to spend the money and thus contributing to the government's bank account.

__________________
check out my blog: http://anniebananie.wordpress.com

Oh, Spoodler, I am NOT saying to donate to welfare situations, but I do think, as a whole, the US needs to be more altruistic like they were in the Great Depression for those less fortunate. BUT, the difference, to me is, that a lot of those recipients were trying to help themselves instead of waiting for a handout. They just were not able to.

I hope that makes better sense. I was not supporting a government run welfare state.

Yes, I agree with you on that. I believe that, as a whole, our society is still basically good. I think if people were able to keep more of their income and help those they choose to then some of these social problems would set themselves right.

You could help a family member or neighbor in need and the moochers simply wouldn't get any help from anybody...or at least not long term help. Eventually these people would be forced to get a job, better themselves, become more responsible, etc. and have to take care of themselves.

We have a neighbor in a bad situation right now. I won't go into detail, but these are the most wonderful people you will ever have the priviledge (sp?) of meeting. These are the kind of people who make you really take a look at how you treat others because they give and give and give and ask for nothing in return. I would love to take a big wad of cash...the thousands of dollars we pay year after year to support people we don't know and the government lets squander our tax dollars, and hand it over to our neighbors. It would be such a blessing to them, but you know what? I can't do that, because our government treats us like we are idiot children who can't make these kinds of decisions for ourselves.

It is really mind boggling when you think about it.n my soapbox:

Stepping down off my soapbox now...

Where do I start? By this argument, there should be no helping anybody. If you made the bad choice to drive and you got in an accident, you don't deserve help. You put yourself there. Stuff happens. People make mistakes. That is what welfare, etc. is for- a helping hand to get yourself back to where you need to be. Don't be mad at the people on welfare and their choices. Be mad at your lawmakers that run a system full of errors.

And to say that most people don't put the money to good use and go buy a luxury item is a broad assumption at best. I understand that you are basing this on the few people you know who, apparently, abused the system. However, the few do not account for the many.

As for the earned income credit, it's not that high. It is for single parents who struggle and work hard and barely get by. I received this credit a few years ago. I didn't look at it as getting back other people's money. I looked at it as getting back some of what I spent most of my life paying in to. I got something around $3000. No, I didn't go buy a luxury item, like apparently my kind of people do. I used it to immediately pay off the mass ammount of debt I was building up as a single mother of an infant, with crappy medical coverage and one income. Had I been on welfare, I wouldn't have had those debts.

__________________
Christine's Corner



Mom to Matt, 3 years and Catie, 7 months!

I am going to try to type and make it sound like it sounds in my head. I hope it comes across right.
I don't think money should be redristibuted, it would be nice, if we(Our family) benefitted from it, but just how things have gone in the past I think it would hurt our family more than it would help us.
My husband has been working 2 jobs for the last 2 1/2 years just to make ends meet. We don't drive big expensive cars, we live in an average home for our area, we don't travel, we don't have expensive stuff. We have been through 2 job loses in the last 3 years. The first time we got a severance pay so we didn't qualify for any assistance. Then he got a new job and the wage was lower so we went without insurance because we couldn't afford it, but we still made too much for assistance.
The second job lose happened while he was working 2 jobs, he lost his primary job. But we couldn't get assistnace because he made too much at his second job.
I guess we could call ourselves middle class and it sucks. We don't make enough money to have extra things and we barely get by, but we make too much (according to the Government) to get help with anything. We are pretty proud to be able to support ourselves, but the few time that we have needed help we have not been able to get it!

The welfare system needs to be reformed. There are too many people abusing the system. It should be to help you get back on your feet. Not FREE food for life.

I think they need to look at take home pay. Like after you medical benefits come out. We are running into this problem right now. We just cut out the 2nd job, not by choice, and now we have to get new insurance through dh's primary job. It is so expensive, but we have to have it, and we don't qualify for assistance before or after insurance comes out.

I have a hard time with the government saying that we make too much, when we barely have enough. Even when we did have the 2 jobs we were just getting by. Then some people just get everything handed to them! I know people that get assistance, don't have to buy food or insurance and they have big fancy cars and eat steak dinners every night. I can't afford that and we WORK hard for what we have! There is something wrong there!

Some of you other ladies are so knowledgable on political topics. I feel a bit dumb and out of the loop. I am a smart person, but I think being a stay at home mom has sheltered me a bit over the last 3 years.

__________________
Austin
Mom to 3 beautiful girls