Show Families the Money. New tax reform.

[Viking]

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2015/01/14/use-cash-allowances-to-fight-child-poverty

One more welfare program?
Your thoughts?

[DC Al Fine]

I'm a bit surprised that the GOP doesn't like the EITC given that the Conservative Party of Canada loves to introduce stuff like this.

I like the idea of semi-universal programs with an income cap and clawbacks. Totally universal programs tend to be too politically popular to cut if need be (even for the rich). If the aim is to reduce absolute poverty, I like the idea of a universal allowance that gets clawed back at relatively low levels. (e.g. Clawbacks begin at $30k and are eliminated entirely at $50k).

Lastly, where are you getting your "3.5 million kids on <$2 a day" stat? There were only about 74 million kids in the USA in 2011 and $2 a day is less than $1000/yr family income. That doesn't make sense. With $2/day and American prices, you'd have a large number of children starving to death.

[Indy Texas]

I'm a bit surprised that the GOP doesn't like the EITC given that the Conservative Party of Canada loves to introduce stuff like this.

The GOP used to like that sort of thing until it was taken over by misanthropic sociopaths who think anyone who hasn't "made it"/"built that" doesn't deserve to live.

[King]

I'm a bit surprised that the GOP doesn't like the EITC given that the Conservative Party of Canada loves to introduce stuff like this.

The GOP used to like that sort of thing until it was taken over by misanthropic sociopaths who think anyone who hasn't "made it"/"built that" doesn't deserve to live.

Yes, EITC was a Republican staple. Ford, Reagan, and Bush I all professed love for it. It makes sense as a smaller less bureaucratic way to help the working poor. But the modern GOP isn't really about smaller less bureaucratic ways. They'd gladly spend a $3 trillion budget to help the rich get richer than $1 trillion dollar budget that redistributes directly down.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm a bit surprised that the GOP doesn't like the EITC given that the Conservative Party of Canada loves to introduce stuff like this.

The GOP used to like that sort of thing until it was taken over by misanthropic sociopaths who think anyone who hasn't "made it"/"built that" doesn't deserve to live.

That's all well and good, but I'd much rather hear your opinion on Viking's or my tax reform suggestions.

[AggregateDemand]

There is no dislike of the EITC in the Republican Party. It was Paul Ryan who spear-headed expansion, though his increases were smaller than those requested by the White House because Ryan assumed lower-flatter tax rates.

The supposed dislike of the EITC is something conjured by liberal journalists who know that hardline conservative voters don't like the EITC.....which is basically just a refund of all payroll taxes, excise taxes, and imputed federal tax (corporate and payroll) on the goods poor people buy.

[Alcon]

Hey, welcome to the forum.  Just so you know, this is a private web site so we need to follow copyright law.  Please reduce your quoted articles down to a paragraph or less, and link.

Article is from: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2015/01/14/use-cash-allowances-to-fight-child-poverty

Thanks!

[Mr. Reactionary]

Hey, welcome to the forum.  Just so you know, this is a private web site so we need to follow copyright law.  Please reduce your quoted articles down to a paragraph or less, and link.

Article is from: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2015/01/14/use-cash-allowances-to-fight-child-poverty

Thanks!

Viking may be unable to. I think there is a comment threshold before linking is allowed. That was the case for me at least.

[krazen1211]

The EIC and CTC are of course filled with rampant fraud and are prime tools for tax scofflaws.  It is interesting that some want to aid such folk. Although to be fair, perhaps some want to divest themselves from the current federal government at least until there is regime change.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The EIC and CTC are of course filled with rampant fraud and are prime tools for tax scofflaws.  It is interesting that some want to aid such folk. Although to be fair, perhaps some want to divest themselves from the current federal government at least until there is regime change.

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons that the poor.

[krazen1211]

The EIC and CTC are of course filled with rampant fraud and are prime tools for tax scofflaws.  It is interesting that some want to aid such folk. Although to be fair, perhaps some want to divest themselves from the current federal government at least until there is regime change.

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons that the poor.

Not 'some'. If Congress is any indication it is a solid majority of the public that wants to spend such sums of money. Perhaps they want to kill the bad people before the bad people can kill the good people.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The EIC and CTC are of course filled with rampant fraud and are prime tools for tax scofflaws.  It is interesting that some want to aid such folk. Although to be fair, perhaps some want to divest themselves from the current federal government at least until there is regime change.

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons than the poor.

Not 'some'. If Congress is any indication it is a solid majority of the public that wants to spend such sums of money.

Some people are incapable of detecting sarcasm on the internet without loads of smileys being used.

Perhaps they want to kill the bad people before the bad people can kill the good people.

Since when did you join Snowstalker in advocating killing bad people?  It is a shame that we do have so few Christians here in America.  People who put their faith in violence instead of charity and the word of God.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And let's not forget this choice quote from Isaiah when Ahaz refused to trust in God to deliver Judah from the hands of its enemies.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[AggregateDemand]

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons that the poor.

The much bigger legacy of the US military is that it built the middle class we enjoy today, for all intents and purposes. That's why we spend so much.

[Indy Texas]

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons that the poor.

The much bigger legacy of the US military is that it built the middle class we enjoy today, for all intents and purposes. That's why we spend so much.

Please explain.

[King]

And military spending has long been associated with waste, fraud, and abuse.  It's amazing that some people want to still spend money there.  I'm reminded of Isaiah 2, but it's amazing how few religious conservatives pay attention to that part of the Bible.  Anyone who thinks America is the New Zion ought to worry who God will choose to be the New Assyrians sent to punish the New Zion for being more concerned about weapons that the poor.

The much bigger legacy of the US military is that it built the middle class we enjoy today, for all intents and purposes. That's why we spend so much.

Please explain.

I assume he's talking about the effects of the GI Bill after WWII, which have nothing to do with 99% of the spending we do today.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If the GOP is smart, they'll support tax credits for all parents as an alternative to Obama's plan for a tax credit for childcare.  Mike Lee has been trying to do that, though his plan has its flaws and may not be directed toward the people who need it most. Any of this is going to require systemic tax reform if its going to be paid for and provide any sort of substantial help.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm a bit surprised that the GOP doesn't like the EITC given that the Conservative Party of Canada loves to introduce stuff like this.

The GOP used to like that sort of thing until it was taken over by misanthropic sociopaths who think anyone who hasn't "made it"/"built that" doesn't deserve to live.

The Conservative Party is your standard somewhat right of center party. The Republican party is your standard right-wing nutcases party.

[AggregateDemand]

Please explain.

What do you think was doing all of the wealth redistribution prior to Welfare, SNAP, and Medicare?

All we've done during our liberal sprint down the road to perdition is point the money at people who don't do anything for America. If you invest in retirees and non-working poor, you're going to make millions upon millions more.

Military isn't exactly efficient economic stimulus, but it has a vastly superior track record to our modern transfer payment system. Every politician sees the problem, but fixing it is a suicide mission.

[Indy Texas]

If the GOP is smart, they'll support tax credits for all parents as an alternative to Obama's plan for a tax credit for childcare.  Mike Lee has been trying to do that, though his plan has its flaws and may not be directed toward the people who need it most. Any of this is going to require systemic tax reform if its going to be paid for and provide any sort of substantial help.

That would be more politically feasible, but it doesn't make sense apart from that.

Having children is not an economically productive activity. You don't need to subsidize it for people who have enough money not to require transfer payments to raise the 1-3 children your median American family will have of their own accord.

The biggest obstacles to poor families being able to work are transportation and childcare. Conservatives will argue that it makes more sense for an uneducated, poor woman to just stay at home with her children rather than go work at a low-wage job and leave them with the low-wage workers who make up your standard day care. The problem is that:

(1) If a woman stays at home from the birth of her first child until the time her last child enters school, that's likely almost a decade of being out of the workforce. That is a loss of earnings and work experience that will hamper them for the rest of their lives.

(2) Lack of affordable childcare has consequences for women beyond that. In the office building where I work, I always see the first exodus of the day at around 3:30pm. It is the lower-level female employees who are leaving so that they can pick their children up from school. They are essentially consigned to a "mom track" and will never rise any higher in their jobs than the role of glorified secretary. That has real consequences for them after their children are older and they realize they can't afford to pay for their college and fund their own retirement because they are 50 years old and still doing an entry-level job at an entry-level salary.

This will be more consequential as the differential between male and female earnings for the working class continues to narrow and in many cases lead to women having a higher earning potential.