Got my $600 tax relief check today. Return address was US Treasury regional office in Austin, TX and bottom of check was annotated "TAX RELIEF FOR AMERICA'S WORKER'S". These Republican boys and girls are at leas as sharp as the KKD wizz kids. Thank-you.
Now, if Congress would get off their ass and send me the other $600 I've already overpaid beyond my fair share this year so far, maybe we could get an economic recovery going. I'd be interested to hear from any of you bleeding hearts out there who disagree with the tax relief initiatives AND who sent your check back to the Feds. Let's see if you can overwhelm the message board responding!
vrtyalum, thanks for the information. I didn't mean to intrude on your personal information but I was curious about how stock market losses alone could reduce taxable income to 0. I appreciate you taking the time to explain.
I hope it turns positive for you by the end of the year.
The Constitution has everything to do with this. It grants the powers to the federal government. Anything not granted to the federal government specifically in the Constitution is not legal action for the government. This includes welfare, medicare, etc.
I know that modern America likes to think that the only control that you have is that you vote for representatives. That simply isn't the truth. We are not a democracy. I realize this is amazing news to some who aren't up on their politics or history.
America is designed so that we elect leaders who are then free to work within the framework of the Constitution or to change the Constitution. If every citizen of America but me votes for a certain representative and that representative establishes welfare, it still is not legal if those powers are not granted to him/her by the Constitution.
Since you asked, I'm 30. You won't ever be paying my social security benefits. No one will. I will pay in more than I'll ever take out and that's even assuming that it will be around when I retire.
It's nothing against you personally. I'm happy for how great you have turned out. That doesn't justify a welfare state, however.
You have it right, but the key is whether your income comes mainly from ... oops, Schedule D. (gotta fix that)
In my particular case, Schedule A deductions took care of most of the rest, so $0 tax showed up in a hurry.
Good evening gator,
//His welfare money was money given to him unearned, without the consent of those from whoit was taken, and without said powers having been granted by the Constitution.//
LOL. What does constitution have to do with all this. Actually.......it had an IMPLIED consent of "those who it was taken from". When you vote for laws, representatives, and even when you pay taxes, you know what you are paying for.
Unfortunatelly life is not fair, you don't decide exactly who you are paying for, but no system is perfect.
How old are you? I am 25, I take it you are bit older then me. Think of me when you retire, because I will be the one paying for your Sosial Security benefits. Think of me then.
Is the $3000 max Schedule D deduction really lowering your taxes to $0 or was there something else? I realize it's none of my business but it just seems like you would have to make very little money in order for your max stock loss deduction to wipe out your taxable income.
Or is it different for long term losses? I don't know the answer to that since I don't hold much long term except in my IRA. I would like to know, though.
Is there a specific point that you have here? Reagan clearly worked to reduce the tax rates that tax payers were paying. Are you addressing that fact or is there something else that you are adding?
small_invstor, I remember talking to you about your father-in-law and a few other things. You mentioned back then that you thought we had similar views on a lot of things. Do you remember?
I answered his post before moving on and now I see you've given a similar answer. It's nice to see that there are a few people left in America who understand the truth about government. Are you a Libertarian?
How's your father-in-law doing now? Has he stopped pointing out KKD's stock price to you? <g>
There is a very big difference between you being on a Navy scholarship and him being given welfare.
You were expected to give back something concrete in return for your Navy money, right? What you were expected to give involved the defense of America, a legitimate function of government outlined in our Constitution.
His welfare money was money given to him unearned, without the consent of those from who it was taken, and without said powers having been granted by the Constitution.
I help out many whom I think have been placed in a bad situation because of events out of their control. This is VERY different from my money being taken from me against my will by some government employee who decides how much will be taken and to whom the money will be given.
The fact that he turned out so well does not justify the means of seizing money from private citizens.
Are you aware of who created the budget during those Reagan years?
Are you aware of the percentage increase in entitlement spending during those years?
Did you know that we here in the United States have a Constitution that specifically states what the government is allowed to do and that nearly every government program favored by the Democrats and other class warfare types is NOT authorized by that Constitution?
By the way, there is little difference between Democrats and Republicans these days. Oh, there is in terms of the voters, but not in terms of the politicians once in office. Democrats want socialism immediately. Republicans are okay with bringing it in slowly. That's why I'm a Libertarian.