or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama Caves In
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama Caves In - Page 8

post #281 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

The EITC was created in 1975 Hands. It is nothing more than an income redistribution program, furthermore, it is fraught with abuse. Many illegal aliens are alleged to benefit from it, but since the IRS does such a poor job of identifying fraudulent SS numbers the actual dollar amount of fraud is difficult to determine:



Furthermore, if it's such a great program then why did the Anointed One Himself propose eliminating it just eleven months ago?




I sometimes wonder if you read the very sources you cite.

No john you're wrong again, this time in thinking that because a very small part of a program is being cancelled the rest must be too. Obama didn't get billions of extra funding for it for nothing.

I'll try and find the exact amounts of funding and post the links here when I have them. Be forewarned the numbers will be extremely high.

Ok, here's a link saying Obama, through ARRA, put an additional $4.7 billion into EITC.
When I have EITC full budget I'll post it too.

Ok, here it is. Cost for it in 2004 was $36 billion (that's the most recent I have yet to find). Link- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_Income_Tax_Credit
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #282 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

No john you're wrong again, this time in thinking that because a very small part of a program is being cancelled the rest must be too.

I do not dispute that Obama increased the 35 year old EITC eligibility limits. The point is that it's not a tax cut as you have alleged. The EITC takes money from those who have it and gives it to those who want it. It's no different than if I stick a gun in your ribs and say "hand it over".

Quote:
Obama didn't get billions of extra funding for it for nothing.

Actually, he did. That's been the point of numerous replies to your assertion. The funding was indeed "for nothing", unless of course you realize its purpose is to buy votes from "the poor".

Quote:
Ok, here's a link saying Obama, through ARRA, put an additional $4.7 billion into EITC.
When I have EITC full budget I'll post it too.

Where did that money come from Hands?

I'll save you the time:

Quote:
It is difficult to measure the cost of the EITC to the Federal Government. At the most basic level, federal revenues are decreased by the lower, and often negative, tax burden on the working poor for which the EITC is responsible. In this basic sense, the cost of the EITC to the Federal Government was more than $36 billion in 2004.

It is also estimated that between 22% and 30% of taxpayers claiming the EITC on their tax returns do not actually qualify for it. This led to an additional cost to the government (in 2010) of between $8 and $10 billion.

The EITC is fraudulent, wasteful, and as morally justified as a streetcorner mugging.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #283 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

I do not dispute that Obama increased the 35 year old EITC eligibility limits. The point is that it's not a tax cut as you have alleged. The EITC takes money from those who have it and gives it to those who want it. It's no different than if I stick a gun in your ribs and say "hand it over".



Actually, he did. That's been the point of numerous replies to your assertion. The funding was indeed "for nothing", unless of course you realize its purpose is to buy votes from "the poor".



Where did that money come from Hands?

I'll save you the time:



The EITC is fraudulent, wasteful, and as morally justified as a streetcorner mugging.

Well clearly Obama wasn't planning on it as you had said. By ending the Advanced EITC those people (all 125,000 or so of them) will simply get their EITC at the end of the year just like everybody else.

I'm not at all surprised that you wouldn't favour these tax cuts for the poor. The families who have the least money would of course get a major tax increase in a right wing government that you'd favour and the super rich would of course get the tax relief instead. I can of course see you saying that those high income earners will create even more jobs for the poor etc, etc...it gets a bit repetitive but for me it's pretty clear who really needs the money.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #284 of 295
The problem is not that the nebulous "poor" aren't paying enough taxes. Clearly there is a gaping discrepancy of taxes paid by "the rich" and "the poor". Those distinctions are exploited for the sole purpose of promoting class warfare and the subsequent creation of voting blocs that favour one political class over another. I'm sure you're well enough aware the top 1% of income earners pay nearly 40% of all tax revenue, while the bottom 50% pay less than 3%, while millions of others pay nothing, ad nauseum. What does it matter? The problem is that taxes are levied on personal income in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I'm not at all surprised that you wouldn't favour these tax cuts for the poor. The families who have the least money would of course get a major tax increase in a right wing government that you'd favour and the super rich would of course get the tax relief instead.

You are prone to gratuitous assertions Hands. I do not want "the poor" to pay more. I do not want "the rich" to pay more. I do not aspire to confiscate anyone's earnings. It's wrong. That moral standard means I cannot endorse another's ability to do so either, whether it's one man or a mob doing the confiscating. I have nothing to gain by having government confiscate legally acquired income or accumulated wealth, and - again, contrary to your assertion that I seek a "right wing government" to accomplish that - I cannot condone theft. Furthermore, as I've repeatedly stated the EITC is not a tax cut for anyone. It is an income redistribution plan. Not that it matters - call it wealth confiscation or redistribution, any government that does that is evil.

No one should be compelled to pay income taxes. I want everyone to succeed, to a degree limited only by their imagination and amount of effort they devote to achieving that success. The best way to accomplish that is to tear down the obstacles to success, of which we have built plenty in the US. Imposing limits on success ensures everyone has less ability to achieve it.

Wealth redistribution via the tax code will never transform "the poor" into "the rich" no matter what amount each pays or fails to pay. The progressive income tax is a fundamentally flawed concept that cannot be fixed, no matter how many tens of thousands of pages of tax code are enacted, printed, tweaked or rescinded. Income exemptions, credits, deductions, exclusions, deferrals... they're all symptoms of an inherently bad design. Wealth redistribution via the income tax can achieve one and only one certain result - wealth destruction. This ought to be morally repugnant to any thinking being.

How much should each income class pay? Is half your income enough? How about two-thirds? All of it? You said it's "pretty clear who needs the money" but is it really? Who decides who gets what, how much, and from whom? No matter how rich you are there's always someone richer. Should he pay you? No matter how poor you are, there's always someone poorer. Should you pay him? The only logical conclusion to the argument that stays true to the principle of income distribution by force leads to the concept that income itself is at fault, therefore no one should be entitled to retain any. Taken to its eventual resolution, that logical fallacy quickly becomes evident.

Would it not be better for everyone if the Federal government stopped wasting so much tax revenue on ill-conceived programs that seek to treat everyone "fairly"? What's fair about punishing a person's success, and rewarding failure? Yet this is exactly the result of a progressive income tax.

Quote:
...it gets a bit repetitive but for me it's pretty clear who really needs the money.

It gets repetitive for me too Hands I surmise you and I have a fundamental disagreement about the utter absurdity and moral vacancy of the income tax, but at least we've have a civil discussion about it. I would appreciate your quitting the gratuitous assertions though, and concentrating on the "factually informed" requirement for the PO forum instead
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #285 of 295
john galt, I want to have your children.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #286 of 295
Yahoo News

Quote:
President Barack Obama, in a setback to hopes for the quick closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison, reluctantly signed a bill on Friday barring suspects held there from being brought to the United States for trial.

Making plain he would fight to repeal language in the law obstructing civilian U.S. trials for Guantanamo terrorism suspects, Obama said he was left with no choice but to sign the defense authorization act for fiscal 2011.

"Despite my strong objection to these provisions, which my administration has consistently opposed, I have signed this act because of the importance of authorizing appropriations for, among other things, our military activities in 2011," Obama said in a statement.

Another broken promise because a Democratic Congress wouldn't vote to follow what their president claims to desire.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #287 of 295
Republicans filibuster without needing to actually stand up and filibuster. That's the problem.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #288 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Republicans filibuster without needing to actually stand up and filibuster. That's the problem.

So let me see if I understand all of the interpretive rules here:

1. When the Republicans are in power they are responsible for all of the policies and actions that take place and are enacted.

2. When the Republicans are in power they are responsible for actions that have not been taken because, well, they were in power and had the ability to act.

3. When the Democrats are in power the Republicans are responsible for all of the policies and actions that take place and are enacted (that Democrats don't like) because the Republicans forced them to enact something.

4. When the Democrats are in power the Republicans are in power they are responsible for actions that have not been taken because, the Republicans prevented them from enacting something.

Have got that all right?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #289 of 295
Nope, you're just being snarky.

You can't claim that Democrats have the power to pass things if the rules are currently set up where they actually don't have the power to pass things because their majority isn't large enough.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #290 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Nope, you're just being snarky.

Well yes, of course I'm being snarky. Unfortunately, many people on the left are not being snarky when they use this basic reasoning. Albeit not quite so clearly and usually obfuscated by some "reasoning" such as:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You can't claim that Democrats have the power to pass things if the rules are currently set up where they actually don't have the power to pass things because their majority isn't large enough.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #291 of 295
Now I remember why you are worthless to talk to. Duly noted.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #292 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Now I remember why you are worthless to talk to. Duly noted.

Well, I do have a bad habit of playing down to the competition.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #293 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Nope, you're just being snarky.

You can't claim that Democrats have the power to pass things if the rules are currently set up where they actually don't have the power to pass things because their majority isn't large enough.

Is everything that goes wrong because of Republicans? Are the democrats responsible for anything?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #294 of 295
Yes, everything. Rolleyes. Just when I was hoping you'd be the sole reasonable conservative left here.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #295 of 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Yes, everything. Rolleyes. Just when I was hoping you'd be the sole reasonable conservative left here.

Dude, you are having a bad night. I am reading through all your posts tonight and you are sounding very frustrated. The question is simple, not intended to be snarky. I believe that you are not that partisan that you simply think that republican=bad and democrat=good. But your post seemed to draw that correlation. It was my attempt to draw that out and let you shoot it down. If you don't want to that is fine I guess.

However the question is still hanging a bit now. What level of responsibility sits with the democrats for not accomplishing what you want to see done? I assume there has to be some.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama Caves In