GOP: Rich Kids Are Worth More Than Poor Kids

[hazlnut]

GOP to America: Rich Kids Are Worth More Than Poor Kids

The bill, introduced by Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Ks.), changes the way the federal child tax credit works by raising the eligibility cap for married couples. At the same time, the legislation would allow a 2009 child tax credit increase for low-income families to expire at the end of 2017. Here's how that would play out in the coming years. A married couple with two children that bring in $160,000 a year would get a new annual tax cut of $2,200, according to an analysis by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). A single mother with two kids who makes $14,500 a year would lose $1,725 annually.

"The big winners would be the more-affluent families who would become newly eligible for the [child tax credit]," tax experts at the CBPP noted Tuesday. "The losers would be millions of low-income families who are doing exactly what policymakers often say they want these people to do—working, even at low-wage jobs."

Here's a look at how poor, middle-class, and wealthier Americans would be affected by the bill, via the CBPP:

Now we sit back and watch the dirt poor USMB tea brains defend this...

 

[Katzndogz]

First, we have to know what it really says before it was filtered through Mother Jones.

 

[The Rabbi]

GOP to America: Rich Kids Are Worth More Than Poor Kids

The bill, introduced by Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Ks.), changes the way the federal child tax credit works by raising the eligibility cap for married couples. At the same time, the legislation would allow a 2009 child tax credit increase for low-income families to expire at the end of 2017. Here's how that would play out in the coming years. A married couple with two children that bring in $160,000 a year would get a new annual tax cut of $2,200, according to an analysis by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). A single mother with two kids who makes $14,500 a year would lose $1,725 annually.

"The big winners would be the more-affluent families who would become newly eligible for the [child tax credit]," tax experts at the CBPP noted Tuesday. "The losers would be millions of low-income families who are doing exactly what policymakers often say they want these people to do—working, even at low-wage jobs."

Here's a look at how poor, middle-class, and wealthier Americans would be affected by the bill, via the CBPP:

Now we sit back and watch the dirt poor USMB tea brains defend this...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

 

[g5000]

GOP to America: Rich Kids Are Worth More Than Poor Kids

The tax credit which benefits low income people does not expire for another 18 months. Why should it be addressed now? It is stupid to even bring it up. These things get extended at the time they are set to expire, not a fricking year and a half ahead of time.

It was set to expire at the end of 2012, and was extended then.

This is a bullshit topic trying to create some sort of "unfairness" which simply does not exist.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/American-Opportunity-Tax-Credit

This page has been updated to reflect the fact that the American Opportunity Tax Credit, which was to expire at the end of 2012, was extended through December 2017 by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.

 

[g5000]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

GOP to America: Rich Kids Are Worth More Than Poor Kids

The bill, introduced by Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Ks.), changes the way the federal child tax credit works by raising the eligibility cap for married couples. At the same time, the legislation would allow a 2009 child tax credit increase for low-income families to expire at the end of 2017. Here's how that would play out in the coming years. A married couple with two children that bring in $160,000 a year would get a new annual tax cut of $2,200, according to an analysis by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). A single mother with two kids who makes $14,500 a year would lose $1,725 annually.

"The big winners would be the more-affluent families who would become newly eligible for the [child tax credit]," tax experts at the CBPP noted Tuesday. "The losers would be millions of low-income families who are doing exactly what policymakers often say they want these people to do—working, even at low-wage jobs."

Here's a look at how poor, middle-class, and wealthier Americans would be affected by the bill, via the CBPP:

Now we sit back and watch the dirt poor USMB tea brains defend this...

 

[R.D.]

What it really says https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4935/text

Child Tax Credit Improvement Act of 2014 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code, with respect to the child tax credit, to: (1) increase from $110,00 to $150,000 ($75,000 for individual taxpayers and married taxpayers filing separately) the threshold amount applicable to married couples fiing joint tax returns above which such tax credit is reduced, and (2) allow an inflation adjustment to the threshold amounts and the $1,000 credit amount beginning after 2014.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

...and you're POSITIVE this is the GOP saying this and not your Progressives?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

 

[The Rabbi]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

Hazlnutsjob has no credibility. Every thread he starts is based on a lie, half truth, or misinformation. It bears repeating over and over until this entire board ceases to respond to his idiocy.

 

[boedicca]

The OP should try reading the complete article:

A spokesman for Jenkins explains that the reason the bill ends up extending the child tax credit to wealthier Americans is that it gets rid of the marriage penalty, which treats a married couple's total income differently than the sum of two separate incomes. The way the child tax credit is currently structured, a single person making up to $75,000 is eligible for a full credit. But for a married couple filing jointly, full credit eligibility cuts off at $110,000 instead of at $150,000, the couple's combined total income. Jenkins' bill moves the full credit cut-off to $150,000. (As income increases above these thresholds, the child tax credit phases out slowly. Under Jenkins' bill, for instance, a couple with two kids could still get the credit if they make up to $205,000.)

Jenkins' office adds that the reason that the legislation does not extend the low-income child tax credit increase is that this provision doesn't expire until the end of 2017, and future legislation can address it....


The low income tax credit doesn't expire until 2017, so this law does nothing to hurt The Poor. What it does do is get rid of the marriage penalty associated with the credits.

In major metro areas, a couple making $75K each (for a total of $150K), are hardly rich, and can barely afford to buy a home.

Why do you Hate The Children of such working couples?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Here's the REAL source of the Liberal outrage:
House Votes To Boost Well-Off Kids, Cut Out Poor Kids

The bill also includes a provision that would bar anyone from receiving the tax break if they do not provide a Social Security number. Many immigrants, including the undocumented (illegal aliens), pay their taxes using a tax identification number instead, and all of them would be barred under the bill.

Why would Illegal Aliens be barred when they use a Tax I.D. number? Well lets look at the Tax I.D. Number form shall we?
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf

Part II Certification. Under penalties of perjury, I certify that:

3. I am a U.S. citizen or other U.S. person (defined below)

Definition of a U.S. person. For federal tax purposes, you are considered a U.S.
person if you are:

• An individual who is a U.S. citizen or U.S. resident alien,
• A partnership, corporation, company, or association created or organized in the
United States or under the laws of the United States,
• An estate (other than a foreign estate), or
• A domestic trust (as defined in Regulations section 301.7701-7)

Illegal Aliens are NOT Resident Aliens. My Wife is a Resident Alien: She has a Green Card AND a Social Security Number.

ANY Illegal Alien who has filled out a Tax I.D. form has committed yet ANOTHER Felony in addition to breaking into this country.

The US Government is not in the business of enabling Law Breakers ON ANY LEVEL!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

Hazlnut spamming the Board with 500 new threads today is a bigger dick move

 

[g5000]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

Hazlnut spamming the Board with 500 new threads today is a bigger dick move

I think he (she?) gets mass emails from Daily Kos or somesuch organization and reposts the stories they send him.

Not that he is the only one on this board who does that sort of thing. I see a lot of right wingers post topics here that are nearly carbon copies of each other. They are clearly getting their cues from the same sources.

A bunch of unthinking copy and paste bots. All of them.

 

[cutter]

A single mother of 2 making $14500 a year would pay $0 in taxes anyway. I'm tired of people who pay nothing demanding a larger refund. If you can't support your kids, don't have them and don't ask me to support them.

 

[shart_attack]

Yes, but are creative posters who can post interesting, relevant things in any forum on the USMB worth more than pathetically insipid, bating, one-trick-pony Lefty hacks like the OP?

 

[Claudette]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

Hazlnutsjob has no credibility. Every thread he starts is based on a lie, half truth, or misinformation. It bears repeating over and over until this entire board ceases to respond to his idiocy.

I agree.

If Nutso isn't blathering about the Tea Party he's blathering about bullshit.

I think he needs an intervention. Any volunteers??

 

[auditor0007]

A single mother of 2 making $14500 a year would pay $0 in taxes anyway. I'm tired of people who pay nothing demanding a larger refund. If you can't support your kids, don't have them and don't ask me to support them.

I bet you are clueless about the history of the earned income credit. Let me help you out some.

The Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit: History, Purpose, Goals, and Effectiveness | Economic Policy Institute

As I've said many times, Ronald Reagan would not be supported by most of today's conservatives, because he just wasn't batshit crazy enough.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...nd-avoid-looking-too-liberal.html#post9526043

Everyone had a great laugh over that one, but it is a dick move to bring it up in a completely unrelated topic.

Hazlnutsjob has no credibility. Every thread he starts is based on a lie, half truth, or misinformation. It bears repeating over and over until this entire board ceases to respond to his idiocy.

...kind of like Rdean

 

[Rikurzhen]

Intelligent people have dismantled haznut's claim, so that can be dispensed with.

What no one has done is addressed the issue by pretending it's true. It's quite easy to justify and we can do it by appealing to policies found in egalitarian Sweden.

In Sweden traffic fines are not fixed, their proportional to income, so millionaires pay higher fines than janitors. Why? Because behavior changes in relation to degree of inducement. A $50 fine will hit a janitor quite hard but a dude making $20 million per year can afford to pay $50 fines every single day and not bat an eye.

The same principles are in play with inducing women to have children. A poor woman can be induced with an offer of $1,000 per year but a high earning career women can bypass $1,000. To get her to have children the inducement has to be higher.

On a different level, society should be trying to curtail poor people from having children and trying to encourage rich people to do so. It's simply a better path for society to take.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Nobody should be getting a child tax credit period.