The child tax credit in the stimulus bill will reduce child poverty by 42%: study

[Notaradical60]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

A high quality education for our children is better for our economy and our country as a whole than anything a $2000 handout will result in. Break the Teachers unions, Install un biased regulatory committees, pay teachers like professionals, expect Educational excellence, and reward them on a performance basis. If they don't measure up to the task they should not be teaching our children anything. Standardized testing is a reflection on the teachers not the student. It's why teachers unions want them eliminated.

 

[Notaradical60]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

42%.

And the cow jumped over the moon.

Hey!!!!!! Look over there!

 

[dudmuck]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

How much do you suppose tRump's tax cuts for rich people helped child poverty?

Hint: it didn't.

.....the rich create the businesses that create jobs .....the poverty people are lazy dumbasses

Trickle down economics doesn't work.

Get over it.

the rich pay MORE than their fair share--DUH!!!!!

The Rich Pay More Than Their Fair Share of Federal Income Taxes

The top 1 percent of income earners pay 39.5 percent of all federal income taxes, nearly twice the share of national income they earn.

observer.com

The 1% have 90% of the wealth. Their fair share is 90% of the taxes.

LinK?

It's well I own but here's one for ya.

Nation’s top 1 percent now have greater wealth than the bottom 90 percent

The wealth gap is growing faster than the income gap — and now, if all U.S. wealth is thought of as 100 slices of pie, the wealthiest one fifth of households would have 90.

www.seattletimes.com

You skipped this part: "Originally published December 8, 2017 at 6:00 am Updated December 8, 2017 at 6:11 am"

This means it is discussing the Obama administration, not the Trump administration.


JOBS
Published January 24, 2020
Income inequality declining under Trump policies, says Labor secretary
Workers are seeing faster wage growth than their bosses

“At the end of the Obama administration, what we saw is wage growth for the high wage earners [and] slow wage growth for the low wage earners," Scalia told FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo in an exclusive interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. "We’ve flipped that in this economy,”

Income inequality declining under Trump policies, says Labor secretary

Due to President Trump's economic policies, workers' wages are growing faster than their bosses, according to Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia.

www.foxbusiness.com

inequality has been holding steady for 10 years.

Gini Index of household income U.S. 2024| Statista

In 2024, the Gini coefficient of household income distribution in the United States was 0.49.

www.statista.com

 

[AMart]

More weed and Hennessy, but really can't they put a muffler on that car? Jeez.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The way Dems will cut poverty in half, is to use the Media to stifle any reporting on poverty . If they aren't reported on then there's no problem. And politicians can retain plausible deniability by saying "we didn't know there was a problem the media didn't report on it"

It is the job of the Government to figure it out, not read the media to wade through the bullshit to find polished turds.

 

[Muhammed]

$15 billion in charity given to Haiti after the earthquake,

And Bill Clinton went there with the U.S State Department having the final say of who gets the money.

And instead of using the money to build housing for the homeless, they spent it to build a duty free industrial park on a park in a northern region of the country that was far away from the land and people who were devastated by the earthquake. And via the wikileaked emails we also know that the Clinton State Department protected a human trafficker who was caught trying to illegally smuggle children into the Dominican Republic.

But Walmart got a free duty free industrial park. And also donated a shitload of money to Hillary's campaign.

Pay for play, they say.

 

[Markle]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

For some strange reason, you left off part of that headline.

"The American Family Act would move 4 million children out of poverty, but continuing to tie the credit to earnings nearly halves that impact"

Other than money, what is the single most frequent reason for the difference between a child being raised in poverty or above the poverty level?

You’re missing the context of this entirely. That is referring to what it was before. The old tax credit had an earnings requirement. This tax credit does not require income to go along with it.

You didn't even read the headline much less comprehend any of that LONG sentence, did you?

I also asked this question but, of course, you ignored that totally, did you not?

Hey idiot you splice two phrases from two different sentences. You completely distorted the context. There is no answer to your question because it’s a stupid false premise.

Thank you for your intelligent response. If you will notice, I did not splice two phrases together, I copied and pasted YOUR source exactly. It doesn't distort the meaning as you did by only posting part of the headline, it makes it much clearer.

Yes, there is a solid, absolute answer to my question and it is no false premise. You know the answer, you just don't anyone else to know the difference. It does tie back strongly to the phrase "You never, ever, reward bad behavior."

Lol you aren’t fooling anyone. You just hoped I hadn’t read this. This is the full CONTEXT:

“The American Family Act's (AFA) proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit (CTC) present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty among children in half. If the CTC’s credit values were to increase, as they do in the AFA, but with the credit still tied to earnings, this impact would be greatly reduced, and children with the fewest resources would again be left out. Even a less generous hike in the credit value alongside the elimination of the earnings requirement would do more to reduce child poverty than a more generous credit tied to earnings.”

The new law is NOT tied to earnings.

Please see the sentence I highlighted in YOUR source.

Do you now admit that it was not me who "split sentences" and put them together. Do you also concede that the sentence above does NOT say what you thought it said?

When will you answer my question? Aside from money, what is the major difference between a child being raised in poverty or one raised above the poverty level?

 

[Billy000]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

For some strange reason, you left off part of that headline.

"The American Family Act would move 4 million children out of poverty, but continuing to tie the credit to earnings nearly halves that impact"

Other than money, what is the single most frequent reason for the difference between a child being raised in poverty or above the poverty level?

You’re missing the context of this entirely. That is referring to what it was before. The old tax credit had an earnings requirement. This tax credit does not require income to go along with it.

You didn't even read the headline much less comprehend any of that LONG sentence, did you?

I also asked this question but, of course, you ignored that totally, did you not?

Hey idiot you splice two phrases from two different sentences. You completely distorted the context. There is no answer to your question because it’s a stupid false premise.

Thank you for your intelligent response. If you will notice, I did not splice two phrases together, I copied and pasted YOUR source exactly. It doesn't distort the meaning as you did by only posting part of the headline, it makes it much clearer.

Yes, there is a solid, absolute answer to my question and it is no false premise. You know the answer, you just don't anyone else to know the difference. It does tie back strongly to the phrase "You never, ever, reward bad behavior."

Lol you aren’t fooling anyone. You just hoped I hadn’t read this. This is the full CONTEXT:

“The American Family Act's (AFA) proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit (CTC) present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty among children in half. If the CTC’s credit values were to increase, as they do in the AFA, but with the credit still tied to earnings, this impact would be greatly reduced, and children with the fewest resources would again be left out. Even a less generous hike in the credit value alongside the elimination of the earnings requirement would do more to reduce child poverty than a more generous credit tied to earnings.”

The new law is NOT tied to earnings.

Please see the sentence I highlighted in YOUR source.

Do you now admit that it was not me who "split sentences" and put them together. Do you also concede that the sentence above does NOT say what you thought it said?

When will you answer my question? Aside from money, what is the major difference between a child being raised in poverty or one raised above the poverty level?

Oh my god dude. It said exactly what I said it said. Once the law is passed, the credit will no longer be tied to income. That is the point the article is trying to make.

Meanwhile, THIS was your exact quote before splicing shit together:

"The American Family Act would move 4 million children out of poverty, but continuing to tie the credit to earnings nearly halves that impact"

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Trump’s across the board tax cuts DOUBLED the child tax credit.

Mine went from $2,000 in 2019 to zero last year, my economic situation was unchanged as it is the same since 2016.

Tell your child happy belated 17th birthday for me will you?

 

[OKTexas]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

More welfare through the tax code, most of it will probably go to noncitizens with anchor babies. Got to keep the incoming flow going.

.

 

[BS Filter]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

Having worked with a lot of low income parents in a county full of opiate addicts, I just wish there was a way to keep the less sensible among them from spending the extra cash on drugs and scratch off tickets and a new phone and tatoos. Some will.

Of course, many will benefit and be able to provide a more stable home for their kids. But that paints some rosy picture right there.

Probably that shocks some of the liberal posters here, but it's just reality. Of course, I mostly met the bottom of that barrel, too. So I suppose I should shut up.

Keep telling the truth. I used to work at the welfare office. Many people were in need and rightly got help. Then I saw many drive up in new cars, smoking cigarettes, tattoos all over, dressed like a professional athlete in the newest team colors, going to get their food card. Shameless.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Good, every child deserves a chance at the American dream and every child deserves food in their stomach.

Sure, that's a nice Utopian platitude, but I missed where it says their parents deserve to have someone else deliver that when they slack in their parental duties.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Good, every child deserves a chance at the American dream and every child deserves food in their stomach.

Yummy!

 

[OldLady]

Turns out a couple thousand bucks more per year goes a long way for those who need it most.

Center on Poverty and Social Policy

The American Family Act's proposed reforms to the Child Tax Credit present an opportunity to transform the credit into one that works for all children, not just those whose parents earn enough to qualify. We find that the AFA would move 4 million children out of poverty and cut deep poverty amon

www.povertycenter.columbia.edu

Having worked with a lot of low income parents in a county full of opiate addicts, I just wish there was a way to keep the less sensible among them from spending the extra cash on drugs and scratch off tickets and a new phone and tatoos. Some will.

Of course, many will benefit and be able to provide a more stable home for their kids. But that paints some rosy picture right there.

Probably that shocks some of the liberal posters here, but it's just reality. Of course, I mostly met the bottom of that barrel, too. So I suppose I should shut up.

Keep telling the truth. I used to work at the welfare office. Many people were in need and rightly got help. Then I saw many drive up in new cars, smoking cigarettes, tattoos all over, dressed like a professional athlete in the newest team colors, going to get their food card. Shameless.

Never had a client with a new car--if they had one it wasn't running half the time, and if it was, half the time they couldn't afford the gas. Or the registration, and they could only drive at night because their sticker was the wrong color and the cops knew them. Another job, I drove sixty miles to the nearest Goodwill to buy a student of mine a winter coat because her car had given up the ghost and she was walking three miles to class in Maine winter in nothing but a hoodie. Up here, we do poor right.

 

[Markle]

Never had a client with a new car--if they had one it wasn't running half the time, and if it was, half the time they couldn't afford the gas. Or the registration, and they could only drive at night because their sticker was the wrong color and the cops knew them. Another job, I drove sixty miles to the nearest Goodwill to buy a student of mine a winter coat because her car had given up the ghost and she was walking three miles to class in Maine winter in nothing but a hoodie. Up here, we do poor right.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself that there isn't major corruption and fraud in the SNAP programs?

 

[OldLady]

Good, every child deserves a chance at the American dream and every child deserves food in their stomach.

Sure, that's a nice Utopian platitude, but I missed where it says their parents deserve to have someone else deliver that when they slack in their parental duties.

Sometimes, you just want to wring these parents' necks, but the bottom line is, if we don't try to help, the children grow up in ways that cost us more in the long run. It might sound cold, but it's true. If they aren't mentally ill or addicted, most parents want to do right by their children, but things happen and sometimes financially, they just can't. Or they had crappy parents and don't know any better. Parenting education and support by people who aren't talking down to them is as important as anything else that can be offered.

We have a great program here (probably dc'd during Covid, unfortunately) where a visiting nurse will come to the home of every new mom (first child) from the time they leave the maternity ward. They can work with the parents as long as the parents want, and they're good at what they do. They show them stuff, teach 'em simple things like reading to your kids, discipline, nutritional info, medical questions. You name it. A lot of kids benefit from that, although the work is all with the parents. And hopefully those kids grow up to be better parents, too.

Social programs take a long time to show results sometimes because we're really working for the next generation.

 

[OldLady]

Never had a client with a new car--if they had one it wasn't running half the time, and if it was, half the time they couldn't afford the gas. Or the registration, and they could only drive at night because their sticker was the wrong color and the cops knew them. Another job, I drove sixty miles to the nearest Goodwill to buy a student of mine a winter coat because her car had given up the ghost and she was walking three miles to class in Maine winter in nothing but a hoodie. Up here, we do poor right.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself that there isn't major corruption and fraud in the SNAP programs?

When did we start talking about SNAP? Have you got some kind of list you're working from there? But no, I don't have any experience with SNAP issues.

 

[AFrench2]

Good, every child deserves a chance at the American dream and every child deserves food in their stomach.

Sure, that's a nice Utopian platitude, but I missed where it says their parents deserve to have someone else deliver that when they slack in their parental duties.

Be quiet, dude.

 

[toobfreak]

The child tax credit in the stimulus bill will reduce child poverty by 42%: study

B-but, this is just hardworking taxpayers giving their hard-earned earnings that they kill themselves for in order to achieve liberty in life being forced at gunpoint to give it over to the government instead who obviously don't need it in the first place because they are just giving it away to other people! People that are benefiting from the work of others!

That is just a form of welfare, redistribution of wealth, the government creating a whole class of people who cannot survive on their own, then forcing others to pay for it who need that money themselves------ ------ and EARNED it.

That just puts the taxpayer in a worse off position bringing HIM closer now to becoming another one of the needy people who need the government to survive.

By any reasonable standard, that is the perfect recipe to just keep creating more and more needy people as time goes on, bigger and bigger government to manage it, and fewer and fewer truly independent and self-actualized people in the private sector CONTRIBUTING to society.

Put another way, that is the formula for CENTRALIZED POWER: ---A small 5% group of super-wealthy entrepreneurs combined with a massively giant government in a synergistic relationship together holding 95% of all the economic wealth, direction and control of the country (world?) in order to lord it over the other 95% of the people who only have the other 5% of the wealth, whom gov-ind. all collectively manage, decide who, when, where and how you fit in society--- --- not necessarily YOU specifically as an individual, just as part of wherever the system ends up taking you (part by their design intent / part by the random machinery of the indifference of the program). Indifferent about the real efficacy of the results and outcome of their efforts, so long as it serves their immediate needs.

And that is where crime fits in: Crime is just a function of conformity defined by the government by how well you comply. Those that comply well, whatever their strata or deed in society, get along well with government. The actual theft, stealing, murder, larson, extortion, etc., of the situation isn't what really matters most;,, it is however the people doing it comport with government! Those that comport well with government by conforming to government aren't likely to be seen harshly. Those that try to employ privately what the government reserves for itself publicly will be called mobsters and hoods and hunted, fined or taxed.

But those that refuse to concede government's dominance over their allodial rights altogether, believing they are instead free people (free to live strictly by their own rules wholly independent and indifferent of government) will be called criminals, hunted down and arrested. If you won't comply with government, you're simply no good to them and they collect those people. Non-compliance to their rule is called a crime. not the actual act itself. It's not that you killed someone really, government kills people by the hundreds, thousands, millions! You are really charged a criminal for breaking from their control. That is the function of government and the most raw, naked, basic way to control you is through money. That is why really EVERYTHING THEY DO is about . . . .

 

[BS Filter]

Never had a client with a new car--if they had one it wasn't running half the time, and if it was, half the time they couldn't afford the gas. Or the registration, and they could only drive at night because their sticker was the wrong color and the cops knew them. Another job, I drove sixty miles to the nearest Goodwill to buy a student of mine a winter coat because her car had given up the ghost and she was walking three miles to class in Maine winter in nothing but a hoodie. Up here, we do poor right.

Are you trying to convince us or yourself that there isn't major corruption and fraud in the SNAP programs?

When did we start talking about SNAP? Have you got some kind of list you're working from there? But no, I don't have any experience with SNAP issues.

There are certainly a lot of people getting government funding for food that don't need it.