BigRobSA said:

---

It's all Tom Fox and Elon.

---

I appreciate the inclusion with Daddy Elon, but if I had that much, I wouldn't really care. Those bros have ways to shelter their money. I'm still just selling my time like everyone else, but at a much higher hourly rate.

infinity ag said:

---

If the Government gives our DOGE dividend and tax breaks to the people, won't that increase inflation?

One of the positive things from Governments giving the rich more tax breaks and making them richer is that the rich guys cannot spend any more so inflation is not affected as much. Making everyone richer means no one is richer.

---

The top brackets are the ones paying most of it anyway so focus the cuts on them and inflation will not be exacerbated.

Tom Fox said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

If the Government gives our DOGE dividend and tax breaks to the people, won't that increase inflation?

One of the positive things from Governments giving the rich more tax breaks and making them richer is that the rich guys cannot spend any more so inflation is not affected as much. Making everyone richer means no one is richer.

---

The top brackets are the ones paying most of it anyway so focus the cuts on them and inflation will not be exacerbated.

---

The talk about DOGE sending money back. I assume it would be to only those that actually paid income tax. So the question was, were there 100 million returns last year that effectively paid in...more or less?

I agree they should use all the savings to pay down debt first, but I also understand the political capital that could be gained from sending savings back to the people. So, if they find $100 Billion in fwa and there are 100 million returns...everyone would get $1,000 back.

I think it would be too difficult to pay it back based on how much was paid in...but I guess Elon could figure it out.

Aggie95 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

If the Government gives our DOGE dividend and tax breaks to the people, won't that increase inflation?

One of the positive things from Governments giving the rich more tax breaks and making them richer is that the rich guys cannot spend any more so inflation is not affected as much. Making everyone richer means no one is richer.

---

The top brackets are the ones paying most of it anyway so focus the cuts on them and inflation will not be exacerbated.

---

The talk about DOGE sending money back. I assume it would be to only those that actually paid income tax. So the question was, were there 100 million returns last year that effectively paid in...more or less?

I agree they should use all the savings to pay down debt first, but I also understand the political capital that could be gained from sending savings back to the people. So, if they find $100 Billion in fwa and there are 100 million returns...everyone would get $1,000 back.

I think it would be too difficult to pay it back based on how much was paid in...but I guess Elon could figure it out.

---

If it is paid back proportional to receipts, the top1% would get 40% of the savings.

Last round of stimulus, I lost out on $11,200 because I made a little too much, and they didn't take # of dependents under consideration when they phased it out. All I got out of it was more artificially propped up stocks and higher-priced groceries.

So, if they decided to run the printing presses hot and send out a bunch of funny money to a bunch of high-earning Gen-Xers who don't need it, it would be good way to prop up the stock market. I guess this would help the Fortune 500 boys keep the dividend gravy train rolling, alleviating their need to do any real investing, keeping the facade of a healthy economy alive, while the millennials and Gen Zers get further and further away from home ownership.

I reiterate, this is a populist administration. I don't think they would survive sending bigger checks to bigger tax-payers. They'll have to be more subtle than that (like keeping me from deducting operating losses on small-time rental properties).

The top earners did not receive stimulus money either. I honestly don't care. If they give out free money to everyone, I'll capture a ton with people paying the legal balances. It will just cause more inflation however. Giving it to the people primarily footing the income tax bill will not.

Those stimulus check months were great for people paying legal bills.

Unless they claim to find $2 Trillion, I don't think the DOGE "payback" would cause much inflation, if at all. In all likelihood, we are talking about $100 billion to $250 billion sent back to actual tax payers. The COVID stimulus was $840-ish billion sent mostly to those in the middle class and below that could not wait to spend it on "stuff".

In the DOGE case, an average of $1,000 to $2,000 per filer isn't going to do the same...most of it will go to savings, investment...paying next years taxes, etc.

I didn't get any stimulus money and didn't want any.

I don't think it should be the role of government to borrow money from other countries so they can send stimulus checks to citizens, only to come back and demand that those who didn't get the stimulus checks pay higher taxes to help pay the debt.

I had rather be in the high income group which has to send money to the treasury, than in the low income group which does not.

malibucharles said:

---

I had rather be in the high income group which has to send money to the treasury, than in the low income group which does not.

---

Sure but I would also rather be in the high income group that is not sending six figures to a federal government that wastes and abuses that hard earned income.

Quote:

---

I know the percentages are out there....roughly 50% of the population pays $0 in income tax ...

---

Or, if you want to state it in context, 100 percent of people don't pay income tax on amounts that roughly 50 percent of them make.

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

SS and Medicare taxes are paid to the US Treasury. Government accounting and budgeting separate these funds and expenditures. When the SS program ran a surplus, the "extra" funds were spent by other departments in the Federal Government in exchange for issuance of special obligation bonds which are held by the SS trust fund.

The trust fund hit its peak balance of $2.9 trillion in 2020. Surpluses were run except for 1959, 1962, 1965, and 1975-1981. Once SS started running deficits in 2021 it began drawing down the trust fund, which has decreased by $186 billion since then. The mechanism to do that is to sell special obligation bonds back to itself - the US Federal government. YES, this is like you or I transferring money for IOU's between your left pocket and right pocket and charging interest to yourself. The only way the US Federal government gets cash to pay for anything (in this case SS retiree benefits) - is by extracting taxes/duties/tariffs OR by issuing more public debt.

It is a total farce to discuss the SS trust fund "running out" in the year 2034. ALL of the trust funds have been spent! The US Government will have to raise other taxes OR issue an additional $2.7 trillion in debt to pay SS retirees between now and 2034 unless there are funding increases via tax increases or expenses reductions through reduced benefits .

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

The "tax system" is the same for high and low earners. It's all published up front. If you don't want to pay income tax, don't make so much. But as the rock suggests above, I suspect most non-payers would much rather be in your shoes.

AggieAL1 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

The "tax system" is the same for high and low earners. It's all published up front. If you don't want to pay income tax, don't make so much. But as the rock suggests above, I suspect most non-payers would much rather be in your shoes.

---

This is utter BS. Everyone should pay the same rate. Low wage earners utilize more of the services paid for by high earners. We are not a socialist country. The founders intended everyone to have skin in the game if you want to vote.

And what the poster you responded to is telling yours that the highest earners do not pay the same high rates because they earn so much of their money through passive income like capital gains.

It is the merchant class (professionals and small business earners) that are getting squeezed. And most of them did not come from money. They just did better than the wage slaves at taking risk and playing the game. That should be rewarded, not penalized.

Deductions should not be eliminated just because you make more money. If I still could claim everything that I could when I made <$400k, it would at least be tolerable. But nope, everything is phased out because law makers are not stupid. What can the top few percent do about it? They have zero recourse at the ballot box because the bottom 65-70% is essentially immunized against tax consequences under the current system.

AggieAL1 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

The "tax system" is the same for high and low earners. It's all published up front. If you don't want to pay income tax, don't make so much. But as the rock suggests above, I suspect most non-payers would much rather be in your shoes.

---

The truly wealthy have tax shelters and tax attorneys to minimize their taxable income. Educated workers that show up and work every day and make a good living get shafted by the current system and pay well above the "fair share" that the millionaires evade.

Dirt 05 said:

---

SS and Medicare taxes are paid to the US Treasury. Government accounting and budgeting separate these funds and expenditures. When the SS program ran a surplus, the "extra" funds were spent by other departments in the Federal Government in exchange for issuance of special obligation bonds which are held by the SS trust fund.

The trust fund hit its peak balance of $2.9 trillion in 2020. Surpluses were run except for 1959, 1962, 1965, and 1975-1981. Once SS started running deficits in 2021 it began drawing down the trust fund, which has decreased by $186 billion since then. The mechanism to do that is to sell special obligation bonds back to itself - the US Federal government. YES, this is like you or I transferring money for IOU's between your left pocket and right pocket and charging interest to yourself. The only way the US Federal government gets cash to pay for anything (in this case SS retiree benefits) - is by extracting taxes/duties/tariffs OR by issuing more public debt.

It is a total farce to discuss the SS trust fund "running out" in the year 2034. ALL of the trust funds have been spent! The US Government will have to raise other taxes OR issue an additional $2.7 trillion in debt to pay SS retirees between now and 2034 unless there are funding increases via tax increases or expenses reductions through reduced benefits .

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html

---

Social Security bonds are little different than other debt instruments issued by the government, except they are call debts. When the fund ran annual surpluses it was real money the government borrowed (mandated by law) from the fund and spent. When Social Security cashes in bonds, it is merely recovering a loan.

The Social Security (OASDI) insurance premiums fund (FICA) is one of the few government funds prepaid through a special dedicated tax approved by law and set well in advance. The amount remaining in the bond fund was paid in cash and is owed through other government sources. If the government must borrow elsewhere to meet the obligation, that's because of a failure to raise sufficient taxes to pay its other bills.

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

That's my point - write-offs have been mostly eliminated for the middle class. The child tax credits do not make up for the loss of exemptions and deductions, or the massive increases in SS taxes, interest deduction limitations, business operating loss limitations.

This country is headed toward becoming western Europe or Japan. Our government needs to be encouraging bigger families NOW.

Dirt 05 said:

---

It is a total farce to discuss the SS trust fund "running out" in the year 2034. ALL of the trust funds have been spent! The US Government will have to raise other taxes OR issue an additional $2.7 trillion in debt to pay SS retirees between now and 2034 unless there are funding increases via tax increases or expenses reductions through reduced benefits .

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html

---

1. Based on the info you shared, which aligns with other info I've seen elsewhere, I think it's correct to say that the funds collected from SS taxes since it started -- in total -- will match the payments to SS recipients since it started, in total. Basically, the program will have paid for itself until 2034, at which point it begins to go in the hole.

2. It can also be correct as you stated that the government spent the SS surplus on other stuff instead of saving it for SS, meaning that the government now has to borrow money to pay SS benefits.

Both of those statements can be correct. Feel free to challenge that if you see it differently.

Tom Fox said:

---

AggieAL1 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

The "tax system" is the same for high and low earners. It's all published up front. If you don't want to pay income tax, don't make so much. But as the rock suggests above, I suspect most non-payers would much rather be in your shoes.

---

This is utter BS. Everyone should pay the same rate. Low wage earners utilize more of the services paid for by high earners. We are not a socialist country. The founders intended everyone to have skin in the game if you want to vote.

And what the poster you responded to is telling yours that the highest earners do not pay the same high rates because they earn so much of their money through passive income like capital gains.

It is the merchant class (professionals and small business earners) that are getting squeezed. And most of them did not come from money. They just did better than the wage slaves at taking risk and playing the game. That should be rewarded, not penalized.

Deductions should not be eliminated just because you make more money. If I still could claim everything that I could when I made <$400k, it would at least be tolerable. But nope, everything is phased out because law makers are not stupid. What can the top few percent do about it? They have zero recourse at the ballot box because the bottom 65-70% is essentially immunized against tax consequences under the current system.

---

BS? My post deals with the existing tax "system."It is the same for all

Your response suggests you want a different system.That's fine. Have at it. But you'll need some congressmen.

Meanwhile, the fact remains that you now pay no income tax on the amounts you currently earn that equal those of non-payers.

And yet those that do not pay get to vote on those same congressmen. And since they make up the majority of the electorate, there is zero recourse at the ballot box.

Everyone should pay the same rate. The top 1% should not pay over 40% of income taxes and yet only get 22% of the agi. If not a flat rate, they only other possible argument is that each bracket is taxed based on their share of the agi, but even that is bs.

And that is not true. I still got additional deductions when I made less that I do not receive now. So it is not the same tax burden.

Tom Fox said:

---

And yet those that do not pay get to vote on those same congressmen. And since they make up the majority of the electorate, there is zero recourse at the ballot box.

Everyone should pay the same rate. The top 1% should not pay over 40% of income taxes and yet only get 22% of the agi. If not a flat rate, they only other possible argument is that each bracket is taxed based on their share of the agi, but even that is bs.

And that is not true. I still got additional deductions when I made less that I do not receive now. So it is not the same tax burden.

---

ibid

AggieAL1 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

And yet those that do not pay get to vote on those same congressmen. And since they make up the majority of the electorate, there is zero recourse at the ballot box.

Everyone should pay the same rate. The top 1% should not pay over 40% of income taxes and yet only get 22% of the agi. If not a flat rate, they only other possible argument is that each bracket is taxed based on their share of the agi, but even that is bs.

And that is not true. I still got additional deductions when I made less that I do not receive now. So it is not the same tax burden.

---

ibid

---

Let me guess, you are an academic leech.

AggieAL1 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

94chem said:

---

The tax situation has become worse for large families who itemize; you know, the kind who have good incomes, own homes, and tithe.

---

The tax system for high earners without those write offs are crushing. It's pathetic what the government wants so others don't have to pay

---

The "tax system" is the same for high and low earners. It's all published up front. If you don't want to pay income tax, don't make so much. But as the rock suggests above, I suspect most non-payers would much rather be in your shoes.

---

lol what a stupid argument but I guess if people don't have health insurance they should go get some instead of mooching off the government. If you are poor make more money and don't be leeches.


Some may want to trade. Others may not want to have to work and make sacrifices.


I understand there are deadbeats that pay nothing in income tax. They need some skin. Let's do a flat tax. You ok with that? Everyone pays 10%