It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by foodstamp
With my low income, I am having to pay $42 bucks more a year with the new tax policy. I'm also getting MORE money back for my earned income tax credit. So in fact, I'm about $800 better off then I was last year.
Dig it?
Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by ownbestenemy
Uhh, yeah I get it... I did my taxes today... I got my totals from both the previous years policy and the current one that was decided on just recentley... it's 42 total.. I don't know what YOUR refering too. But my increase was forty two dollars period.
It sounds like your reading a conservative article. Try reading a more liberal article about the tax rates. And somewhere in between the two. You'll find the truth...
Originally posted by ownbestenemy
Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by ownbestenemy
Uhh, yeah I get it... I did my taxes today... I got my totals from both the previous years policy and the current one that was decided on just recentley... it's 42 total.. I don't know what YOUR refering too. But my increase was forty two dollars period.
It sounds like your reading a conservative article. Try reading a more liberal article about the tax rates. And somewhere in between the two. You'll find the truth...
It reverted back to the 6.2% rate, from 4.2%. It is impossible to be only $42 over the whole year unless you are making next to nothing; as in below minimum wage.
Also, if you just did your taxes, it is for the 2012 rate....not the new 6.2% rate.
Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by foodstamp
You mean like the first 100+ years of our existence? Yep it would but we would have to rid us of the 16th Amendment to do that. To even get close to that we would have to get rid of the 17th Amendment to bring power back to the states in the Senate. Not going to happen.
Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by ownbestenemy
Are you aware of any states that had anything that resembled a welfare system in the early 1900's?
Originally posted by ownbestenemy
Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by ownbestenemy
Are you aware of any states that had anything that resembled a welfare system in the early 1900's?
Probably not much. At those times the belief was that private charity is enough and honestly it can be. It used to be the belief that government's role wasn't for the welfare of the People in the sense it is today. Welfare of the People should be to provide an environment that fosters growth and prosperity.
Originally posted by foodstamp
Right I agree with that. However, if the people foster a community of growth and prosperity, they can assemble a welfare system at the state level for it's citizens. I can't think of anything that would block that from happening should the people desire.
That's one thing I don't often agree with many people on. Some people think that because the federal government was not given the power to make a welfare system, that somehow tht means that the sovereign state cannot and/or should not assemble one for itself.