Middle class tax breaks?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sounds like a good idea. We want a larger middle class, right?

Yes, eliminating good paying jobs is a great way to expand the middle class. LOL!

Honestly, how is giving a tax break to hard working middle class people = a destroyer of jobs?

It isn't like the rich 1% makes many jobs in this country.

Putting a 0.1% transaction tax on financial services will kill jobs.

Where did that number come from? The proposal I saw was something like 0.00004 %

Where did that number come from? The proposal I saw was something like 0.00004 %

The Washington Post first reported that the plan would give a credit of $1,000 to individuals and $2,000 to couples making under the wage cap. It would also increase the tax credit for child care and make a few other changes.
Democrats reportedly would fund this with a .1 percent fee on stock trades; limits on tax breaks for the top 1 percent; and new rules for deductions for high-value executive performance bonuses.

 

[Jarhead]

By the way.....making 200K or less is the bottom 95% of American households. There are about 118,000,000 households in the US...so 95% is 112,000,000....

Now...multiply that by 2,000

224,000,000,000

So those negligible fees amounts to 224 billion dollars.

Wall Street probably funnels an order of magnitude more than that out of our financial system. The transaction fee I saw was something like 0.00004 cents per dollar transacted. How much do you think the average American would end up paying in fees? As for Wall Street, it's a scam of almost inconceivable size. The high frequency transactions only generate a fraction of a cent per dollar but they happen so often that it becomes huge. The transaction tax doesn't have to be big to generate a lot of money.

Joe....we are talking about a quarter trillion dollars....225 billion dollars. It does not matter how small the fee is per transaction....anyone with a pension, IRA or stock portfolio will be contributing to that 225 billion dollars.....and contrary to what many think, a guy with a moderate portfolio has his securities traded as often as a guy with a larger portfolio....sure, the rich take on more of the burden......but we are talking about a quarter trillion dollars. I guarantee you that households of 100K to 200K will, at best, break even....the rich will likely pay 4K or more with no credit, and the poor will get 2K with no burden. Just do the math.

If you have some actual data we can use, I'll crunch the numbers. Otherwise, I'm going with my theory that there's too much liquidity already and that bubbles have become a convenient way on Wall Street for making a ton of artificial money and that they both need to be discouraged.

I gave you actual data...
$2000 per household
Income of 200K or less get the credit...that is 95% of the households.
There are approximately 118 million households in the US.
95% of that is about 112 million households.
So 112 million households will get 2000 a year tax credit...
That comes to about 225 Billion dollars.

How will that be made up by only 5% of the households?

Tell me how many transactions and their average dollar value are made with high frequency trading and I'll tell you if it would work out. My gut says it would.

I don't know the answer....but seeing as it will apparently result in a quarter of a trillion dollars annually, it will have to be a number that will be felt by anyone with a stock portfolio, pension and/or IRA. Again, we are talking about generating 250 billion dollars.....how could people NOT feel it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Last time the middle class got a tax break, it came from President Obama and the Rs fought against it. Anything good for the common man is against Repub "family values".

Instead, they want tax breaks for the most needy among us - the 1%.

I don't see anyone asking for tax breaks

Not increasing taxes is NOT a tax break

If you believe the government is entitled to your money then allowing you to keep some is considered a tax break.
Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

The Washington Post first reported that the plan would give a credit of $1,000 to individuals and $2,000 to couples making under the wage cap. It would also increase the tax credit for child care and make a few other changes.
Tax credits. If you don't make enough to pay income tax, you'd still get a check back.

 

[Jarhead]

"Our economy is still struggling to create jobs -- and the last thing we need is a new trillion-dollar tax hike added to the current broken tax code," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., unveiled the tax plan on Monday at the Center for American Progress.

His plan would give a tax credit of roughly $2,000 per year to middle-class families, reportedly defined as couples making under $200,000. According to The Washington Post, the windfall would add up to roughly $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

However, to pay for the plan, Van Hollen wants to charge a fee on financial transactions, and curtail tax breaks for other top earners, effectively transferring wealth from Wall Street and beyond to everyone else. '
Dems pitch controversial plan to tax Wall Street to pay for new middle-class credit Fox News

Steel's comments are bewilderingly deceptive.

First, this does no harm to the economy. In fact, it helps it - those with the money to spend trading stocks will continue to trade regardless, and the under-$200,000 earners are very likely to spend that $2,000.

Second, Steel just saying "one trillion dollars" with his pinky to his mouth and no context is pretty alarmist. This is $1 trillion, but over ten years. Plus, the only reason the number is that high is because that's how much money diverting the tiniest fraction of Wall Street trading will bring in.

Third, it's not a tax hike. It's a tax cut. One paid for in one of the least disruptive ways possible.

Lastly, any representative of Boehner complaining about the broken tax code is a joke. If Boehner wants tax reform, it's in his power to make it happen, and has been for a while now. Honestly, this idea does more to address tax code issues than Boehner has, since it promises to stop some tax breaks.

Pay attention. A family with 100K to 200K income will be paying those increased fees as their retirement funds are traded....not the brokers...it is a tax. It is automatically and legally passed on to the owner of the stocks....so those making 100K to 200K will NOT have more money to spend....they will have the exact same disposable income.Yes, the poor will have more income, but what do you think many will do with it? Save it for they know their jobs are dispensable......
It will do nothing for the economy.

In other words, those making less than $200,000 but who still have a considerable portfolio stand to break even, while others (who are also in the middle class) with lesser financial standings would benefit, just not as much. Basically, I think your definition of "middle class" differs from mine. I know people I would consider middle class who only have savings or CD accounts but make a respectable yearly income (if nowhere near $200,000).

So as far as I can tell, some people you're describing would break even, and many more people like I'm describing would benefit. So what's the issue?

Actually, I don't have an issue with the idea. I have an issue of how it is being marketed to the American People. It is a game for votes. Truth is, it is not designed to help the middle class. Sure, a percentage of the middle class may benefit from it....but on the most part, the middle class will break even from it....the lower class who needs it will benefit from it...So call it what it is....an initiative deigned to help the lower class have more spending power which will help to stimulate the economy.
Right now, democratic politicians are questioning "why does the GOP not want middle class Americans to have another 2.000 to spend?". That is a political game...insulting the intelligence of the American People. I don't like it. We pay their salaries.
And then there will be the END backlash......just as we saw with the housing bubble issue...
think about it...
When Middle Class Americans get their statements showing how much more they are spending to have their portfolios managed, the blame will be put squarely on their financial planners...and the politicians will be out there saying "don't blame the initiative, blame your planners for their greediness."
We saw how the banks were forced to increase lending with the CRA and then blamed by the politicians when the whole thing caved in. Sure, the banks were to burden some of the blame...but those same politicians who created it, took no blame at all.
Sorry...I don't like shell games played by our politicians.
Call it what it is.

 

[Jarhead]

Last time the middle class got a tax break, it came from President Obama and the Rs fought against it. Anything good for the common man is against Repub "family values".

Instead, they want tax breaks for the most needy among us - the 1%.

I don't see anyone asking for tax breaks

Not increasing taxes is NOT a tax break

If you believe the government is entitled to your money then allowing you to keep some is considered a tax break.
Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

Its a tax credit....not a tax break.
When you file, that $2000 is inserted (theoretically) as tax you paid and is being credited back to you...sort of like the automatic exemption you get for your dependents. So, if without it, you had a zero tax liability, when it is inserted, you actually will show that you OVERPAID by 2000...and you will get a 2000 refund.
It is not a tax reduction. It is a tax credit.

 

[JoeNormal]

Let me see if I understand the right wing thought process here. 1) There's a lot of money in being a thieving bastard. 2) We don't want to lose high paying jobs in this country. Therefore, we'd better bend over backwards to retain the thieving bastards.

There's a lot of money in being a lobbyist too. Shall we bend over backwards to keep them as well?

See, the basic issue here is you dont understand the function of the financial industry in this country. To you, they're all "thieving bastards" who sit around and think of ways to screw people. That is 180degrees from the truth. And while there are some thieves and unethical people please show me the business that is free of such folks.
If you actually understand what people on Wall St do you wouldnt have that attitude. Of course if you understood that you'd probably be a Republican.

Granted, I don't have an extremely high opinion of Wall Street types but this discussion started with high frequency trading which is the raison d'être for the transaction tax. Would you care to try and defend that?

Defend high frequency trading? Why does it need defending? Is there something illegal about it?

It's illegal in most countries and should be illegal here. That it isn't is one of the reasons I think Wall Street guys are scum.

So there is no reason to defend it. Lots of things are illegal in other countries.Like denouncing Islam. SO what?

Yeah, or preemptive strikes. They're illegal in some countries too. No sense in seeing what's wrong in this country and trying to make it right.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

See, the basic issue here is you dont understand the function of the financial industry in this country. To you, they're all "thieving bastards" who sit around and think of ways to screw people. That is 180degrees from the truth. And while there are some thieves and unethical people please show me the business that is free of such folks.
If you actually understand what people on Wall St do you wouldnt have that attitude. Of course if you understood that you'd probably be a Republican.

Granted, I don't have an extremely high opinion of Wall Street types but this discussion started with high frequency trading which is the raison d'être for the transaction tax. Would you care to try and defend that?

Defend high frequency trading? Why does it need defending? Is there something illegal about it?

It's illegal in most countries and should be illegal here. That it isn't is one of the reasons I think Wall Street guys are scum.

So there is no reason to defend it. Lots of things are illegal in other countries.Like denouncing Islam. SO what?

Yeah, or preemptive strikes. They're illegal in some countries too. No sense in seeing what's wrong in this country and trying to make it right.

If you don't want to do HFT, don't do it.
There is nothing illegal, or wrong when others do it.
It's not even that profitable anymore.

 

[zeke]

If you don't want to do HFT, don't do it.
There is nothing illegal, or wrong when others do it.
It's not even that profitable anymore.

Hey todd, is there any ultra rich persons dick that you don't want to suck?

 

[The Rabbi]

See, the basic issue here is you dont understand the function of the financial industry in this country. To you, they're all "thieving bastards" who sit around and think of ways to screw people. That is 180degrees from the truth. And while there are some thieves and unethical people please show me the business that is free of such folks.
If you actually understand what people on Wall St do you wouldnt have that attitude. Of course if you understood that you'd probably be a Republican.

Granted, I don't have an extremely high opinion of Wall Street types but this discussion started with high frequency trading which is the raison d'être for the transaction tax. Would you care to try and defend that?

Defend high frequency trading? Why does it need defending? Is there something illegal about it?

It's illegal in most countries and should be illegal here. That it isn't is one of the reasons I think Wall Street guys are scum.

So there is no reason to defend it. Lots of things are illegal in other countries.Like denouncing Islam. SO what?

Yeah, or preemptive strikes. They're illegal in some countries too. No sense in seeing what's wrong in this country and trying to make it right.

Go amend the constitution or something.

 

[suplex3000]

Granted, I don't have an extremely high opinion of Wall Street types but this discussion started with high frequency trading which is the raison d'être for the transaction tax. Would you care to try and defend that?

Defend high frequency trading? Why does it need defending? Is there something illegal about it?

It's illegal in most countries and should be illegal here. That it isn't is one of the reasons I think Wall Street guys are scum.

So there is no reason to defend it. Lots of things are illegal in other countries.Like denouncing Islam. SO what?

Yeah, or preemptive strikes. They're illegal in some countries too. No sense in seeing what's wrong in this country and trying to make it right.

Go amend the constitution or something.

You know I believe that the Constitution has to be amended because the constitution is out of keeping with real life of the US.
It's not perfect.IMO

 

[OnePercenter]

Dodd Frank imposed curbs on what banks could charge. How did that work out for middle class people?
These idiots dont get it. The middle class has most of the wealtjh in this country simply because there are lots of them. Anything that raises taxes invariably will raise taxes or expenses on them. It is a given. Remember when Obamacare was going to fund subsidies by taxes on medical devices and cadillac plans? In the end it simply raised costs for everyone.

Your post is ignorant. In 2014 I made more money than 600 families in this country. I have an acquired wealth of more than 98% of US population will make in their lifetime. The rich like me control the majority of money in this country. Thank you very much for being a dolt and voting Republican.

 

[OnePercenter]

There ya go. Let's drive all the players in the financial industry, which employes millions of people, overseas.
Dont you complain about companies sending jobs overseas? Now you want to do the same. Hypocrite.

Bull Shit. Every company in the US can afford to pay living wages for their employees, sell their product or service and make a reasonable profit. The problem is the definition of a reasonable profit. I've personally heard numbers as high as 60%.

 

[OnePercenter]

Ok. I pay 35% Income tax, a Family member With 50% more Income than me only pay 20% Income tax due to deductions. It all makes one hell of a mess that requires a huge bureaucracy to administer and here you get to the root of the problem. We will never see a flat tax or elimination of income tax in favor of just a consumption tax because the special interest of the huge unions that depend on chaos in order to have jobs are dependent on the tax code to be as complex as possible just as Lawyers vote democrat because they depend on the Law to be as complex as possible.

If your effective tax rate is 35% you need tax help.

 

[OnePercenter]

Nothing this country does is ever for the middle class. The system is set up AGAINST the middle class. The rich walk away with everything and there may very well be a plan to ensure that the middle class is kept at bay as it threatens the elitist 1 percent. Class warfare is only going to grow in the next months... and rightfully so. To argue against any of this indicates anti worker anti middle class anti American.

Which is why I post a plan to help the middle class, keep the Republican made deductions for the rich, reduce all taxes and employee costs for business to 30%, and move businesses deductions to favor employment. Win -Win.

The problem on this board are the dinosaurs that can't think past their non-working prostates.

 

[OnePercenter]

Prove it.

You know that's Rabbi. 'Prove it' is impossible for him.

 

[OnePercenter]

Sorry, I can't tell you

If you are single and making over $100k/yr, file as a contract employee. You need a CPA to do it, but you'll save big bucks in taxes.

 

[OnePercenter]

Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

I made $30M in 2014 and paid no federal tax. I love my Republican tax breaks!!!!!

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

I made $30M in 2014 and paid no federal tax. I love my Republican tax breaks!!!!!

Sure you did. You go that from the masters in business from Columbia, right? LOL! Poseur!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

I made $30M in 2014 and paid no federal tax. I love my Republican tax breaks!!!!!

We know, your trust paid all your taxes.

 

[chikenwing]

Of course 47% of workers pay no income tax, so a tax break is meaningless to them.

I made $30M in 2014 and paid no federal tax. I love my Republican tax breaks!!!!!

Ya and am an astronaut,brain surgeon,rocket scientist.