Will an economic stimulus package help us during recession?

[vern_humphrey]

I can appreciate that. I too served in the military. But I’m still trying to understand your post. Do you believe a SAHM should be taxed?{/quote]
My wife was taxed. Why should another man’s wife not be taxed?
iamrefreshed;3237690:

Me too. I’m just curious based upon your comments if you are in support of Endowment Taxation. I bring this up because you mentioned ‘potential earnings’.

Okay, I’ll 'fess up – so many of us are willing to tax and over-tax the hardest working Americans – the ones who create the businesses the rest of us need so we can have jobs – that I feel it only fair to tax those who are** not** willing to work hard.

Call it the “leisure tax” and base it on what a person of similar age, IQ, health and so on could make.

 

[iamrefreshed]

My wife was taxed. Why should another man’s wife not be taxed?

The simple answer would be ‘because the other mans wife did not earn an income’. But that’s an answer that works if you tax based on income.

Many would argue that a SAHM is no different than volunteer work. You can’t tax volunteer work.

[Okay, I’ll 'fess up – so many of us are willing to tax and over-tax the hardest working Americans – the ones who create the businesses the rest of us need so **we

can have jobs – that I feel it only fair to tax those who are** not** willing to work hard.

Call it the “leisure tax” and base it on what a person of similar age, IQ, health and so on could make.

I’m with you on taxing equally.

However, I couldn’t endorse Endowment Tax. The issue of ‘talent slavery’ is a big one.

‘Could make’ becomes a very sticky issue. I’d hate to see someone who writes beautiful music or poetry have to give that up because they also hold a doctorate.

But we do certainly need an equalizer. Maybe that could come in the form of…if you want to eat, and are not disabled, get a job?

 

[vern_humphrey]

The simple answer would be ‘because the other mans wife did not earn an income’. But that’s an answer that works if you tax based on income.

Many would argue that a SAHM is no different than volunteer work. You can’t tax volunteer work.

I don’t propose taxing volunteer work. I prop[ose taxing leisure – specifically the difference between what a healthy, intelligent, well-educated person “chooses” to make, and what an equivallent hardworking person does make.

I’m with you on taxing equally.
Bingo!
iamrefreshed;3237809:

However, I couldn’t endorse Endowment Tax. The issue of ‘talent slavery’ is a big one.

I never used the term Endowment Tax.

‘Could make’ becomes a very sticky issue. I’d hate to see someone who writes beautiful music or poetry have to give that up because they also hold a doctorate.

Why would they have to give it up? My wife did not give up nursing when we had children. Nor did she give up child raising.

But we do certainly need an equalizer. Maybe that could come in the form of…if you want to eat, and are not disabled, get a job?

Exactly! And the way to enforce that is to tax everyone equally, only making allowances for those who truly cannot work.

 

[mapleoak]

The simple answer would be ‘because the other mans wife did not earn an income’. But that’s an answer that works if you tax based on income.

If someone chooses not to work and earn an income, should they be entitled to all the benefits of living in this country free of charge?

 

[Al_Masetti]

Let me get this right: the gummint has said that if the stimulus package is approved right away = sometime in February ], then the checks will go out in August.

Some stimulus.

Did I get that right?

The economy would perk up faster [actually it’s not doing too badly as it is], if we adopted the tax policy of Ireland which has really sparkplugged its economy.

Cut the size of the tax code … [have you ever read the rules on depreciation??] and cut the tax rates.

When they came out with Individual Retirement Accounts, I was one of the first to get one. At the time, the “rules” fit on one page. NOW, the rules for IRA’s take a whole book. AND, there are so many exceptions, that a lot of people are not permitted to have one.

All they have to do is get back to the original rules for IRA’s.

Just ONE example. And there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other examples.

To quote Strunk & White: “simplify, simplify, simplify”.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I don’t propose taxing volunteer work. I prop[ose taxing leisure – specifically the difference between what a healthy, intelligent, well-educated person “chooses” to make, and what an equivallent hardworking person does make.

This sounds to me like Endowment Tax but I’m not sure that is what you mean.

I never used the term Endowment Tax.

No, I did. That seems to be closest to what you were describing so I thought that you were a proponent. No offense meant.

Why would they have to give it up? My wife did not give up nursing when we had children. Nor did she give up child raising.

My point is that they could not choose to earn their living by writing if they were assigned a tax that could only be paid if they used their doctorate. That is where ‘talent slavery’ comes into play.

Taking your situation into account. If your wife was also an accomplished equities trader besides nurse should she be taxed on her potential earnings as an equities trader?

I think we may be comparing apples to oranges. I probably don’t understand exactly how your ‘leisure tax’ would work and I’m not sure if you are familiar with Endowment Tax. I’m probably projecting my thoughts onto what you are saying and just getting confused in the process:shrug:

This probably is OT anyway.
[/quote]

 

[vern_humphrey]

My point is that they could not choose to earn their living by writing if they were assigned a tax that could only be paid if they used their doctorate. That is where ‘talent slavery’ comes into play.

Why can’t people be writers and doctors? Many writers have had full time professions.

Taking your situation into account. If your wife was also an accomplished equities trader besides nurse should she be taxed on her potential earnings as an equities trader?

She’s taxed on her investments, too.

I think we may be comparing apples to oranges. I probably don’t understand exactly how your ‘leisure tax’ would work and I’m not sure if you are familiar with Endowment Tax. I’m probably projecting my thoughts onto what you are saying and just getting confused in the process:shrug:

This probably is OT anyway.

Probably.

My point is that so many of us are what I call Couch Potato Catholcs. We sit on the sofa, drink beer, eat chips, and cheer for the team, or government program, of our choice. But we don’t do anything to move the ball ourselves.

I think it’s time to suit up and go out and play in the game, not to expect someone else to do everything for us.

 

[Nino]

Dear Hubby,FIrst is to repeal the so called free trade farce…or NAFTA…this has allowed our nation to be invaded by tons of what is basically slave labor goods…under pricing american made…thus putting millions out of work…thank Sen.McCain and others for that! Close the borders by ordering the mexican gov.to use their troops to guard their side or else we will no longer recognize Mexico as an allie but an axis…or enemy! Eliminate all depts of government not mentioned in the constitution…like the department of education. Eliminate the present tax system…mandate a flat tax of 10% for all citizens…no progressive tax ,no seniors paying school or any taxes after age 65…get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!!! Bring the troops home,saving millions of dollars and thousands of lives…put the troops on the US side of the border…reduce the military-industrial complex…they are the ones who profit from their sales of munitions,food stuffs,cloths,etc etc…institute real free choice in education…if parents want to home school their children,they must be given a tax write off…if parents see nothing but waste and gloom in the local public school,they should be allowed to enroll their child in a private school and take the tuition costs off of their income tax…return all laws back to the states not written into the constitution!!!Start a massive oil drilling campaign off of our shores…up in Alaska etc…we have enough to last us some 350 more years but it is tied up in tree hugging propaganda,these nature lovers are owned by the oil interests anyway…ie Audobon etc…this is just page one…boys and girls…next week I will be in Florida next to Ron Paul…I am the younger one…

 

[iamrefreshed]

If someone chooses not to work and earn an income, should they be entitled to all the benefits of living in this country free of charge?

I’m afraid I don’t understand your question.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Why can’t people be writers and doctors? Many writers have had full time professions.

Sure they can but that evades the point. My question is are we going to force them? Can the person who holds a doctorate choose to write poetry for a paltry salary and leave their doctorate?

She’s taxed on her investments, too.

No I meant if, for a living, your wife used to make say $500,000 annually trading equities employed by a firm on Wall Street should she always be taxed based on that ability to earn? Should she be allowed to ‘downsize’ and live her life now making $40K helping humanity as a nurse?

Take me for an example. I’m in technology sales. I’ve earned in the top 1%. I decided money is not as important as it used to be to me. I moved away from NYC and now earn 1/4 the amount. Is that wrong?

Probably.

My point is that so many of us are what I call Couch Potato Catholcs. We sit on the sofa, drink beer, eat chips, and cheer for the team, or government program, of our choice. But we don’t do anything to move the ball ourselves.

I think it’s time to suit up and go out and play in the game, not to expect someone else to do everything for us.

I’m in uniform!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Sure they can but that evades the point. My question is are we going to force them? Can the person who holds a doctorate choose to write poetry for a paltry salary and leave their doctorate?

Force them, how? All I propose is taxing them.

No I meant if, for a living, your wife used to make say $500,000 annually trading equities employed by a firm on Wall Street should she always be taxed based on that ability to earn? Should she be allowed to ‘downsize’ and live her life now making $40K helping humanity as a nurse?

She made investments to the best of her abilaity – and was taxed on the profit. She still saves and invests, and is still taxed.

Take me for an example. I’m in technology sales. I’ve earned in the top 1%. I decided money is not as important as it used to be to me. I moved away from NYC and now earn 1/4 the amount. Is that wrong?

Not as long as you keep paying the same taxes.

I’m in uniform!

Great – and thanks for your service.

I am a retired Infantryman, my wife was an Army Nurse during the Viet Nam War, and my oldest daughter put in 10 years in the Army Reserve.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Force them, how? All I propose is taxing them.

Do you plan on taxing their real income or their potential income?

She made investments to the best of her abilaity – and was taxed on the profit. She still saves and invests, and is still taxed.

That didn’t answer the proposed question. Should she be taxed, ‘prior to income’ as an equtiy trader who earns a $500,000 salary? It would seem to me your answer has to be yes based both on your answer above and below.

I’ve read your posts before and I know you like yes and no answers so let’s give me that same courtsey.

Not as long as you keep paying the same taxes.

2001 was my best year. I paid over $60k in fed taxes. So I am now responsibe to pay $60K every year?

I am a retired Infantryman, my wife was an Army Nurse during the Viet Nam War, and my oldest daughter put in 10 years in the Army Reserve.

It’s great the women in your family served as well!

I served in the USAF but come from a long line of Army personnel.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Do you plan on taxing their real income or their potential income?

Actually, what I’m planning on doing is getting those who practice the politics of envy to stand up and take responsibility for their lives, and quit whining about how other people – who work harder – should be somehow vilified and punished for their success.

That didn’t answer the proposed question. Should she be taxed, ‘prior to income’ as an equtiy trader who earns a $500,000 salary? It would seem to me your answer has to be yes based both on your answer above and below.

She never earmed a fraction of $500,000. But she invested to the best of her ability and was taxed accordingly.

I’ve read your posts before and I know you like yes and no answers so let’s give me that same courtsey.

You haven’t given me a clear question – how can I give you a clear answer?

But if your question is, " Should she be taxed, ‘prior to income’ as an equtiy trader who earns a $500,000 salary?" the answer is no. She should be taxed as an investor of her ability would be taxed – and she **was **(and is) taxed at that rate.

2001 was my best year. I paid over $60k in fed taxes. So I am now responsibe to pay $60K every year?

No, you should be taxed on your ability to earn in an average year.

It’s great the women in your family served as well!

I served in the USAF but come from a long line of Army personnel.

It’s part of our philosophy – everyone should pull his or her share of the load.

 

[goofyjim]

iamrefreshed;3237690:

I can appreciate that. I too served in the military. But I’m still trying to understand your post. Do you believe a SAHM should be taxed?{/quote]
My wife was taxed. Why should another man’s wife not be taxed?

Okay, I’ll 'fess up – so many of us are willing to tax and over-tax the hardest working Americans – the ones who create the businesses the rest of us need so we

can have jobs – that I feel it only fair to tax those who are** not** willing to work hard.

Call it the “leisure tax” and base it on what a person of similar age, IQ, health and so on could make.

There you go again. Do you intend to tax the disabled because in your judgement they aren’t willing to work hard?

 

[goofyjim]

Force them, how? All I propose is taxing them.

She made investments to the best of her abilaity – and was taxed on the profit. She still saves and invests, and is still taxed.

Not as long as you keep paying the same taxes.

Great – and thanks for your service.

I am a retired Infantryman, my wife was an Army Nurse during the Viet Nam War, and my oldest daughter put in 10 years in the Army Reserve.

They shouldn’t pay the same taxes. They should pay the same percentage.

 

[vern_humphrey]

They shouldn’t pay the same taxes. They should pay the same percentage.

Well, I’d take that as a fall-back position. Everyone should pay the same percentage.

 

[goofyjim]

Well, I’d take that as a fall-back position. Everyone should pay the same percentage.

It’s logical. You don’t have someone else determining what someone’s “potential income” is. Everyone is then paying an equal percent of his or her income and we all know for sure whether taxes are cut by just lowering the rate. Anything else would be considered unfair to the wealthy or regressive which would hurt the poor.

 

[vern_humphrey]

It’s logical. You don’t have someone else determining what someone’s “potential income” is. Everyone is then paying an equal percent of his or her income and we all know for sure whether taxes are cut by just lowering the rate. Anything else would be considered unfair to the wealthy or regressive which would hurt the poor.

I lived in Peru for a couple of years, and studied the ancient civilizations there. I always liked their system of taxation. The truly poor couldn’t pay in gold, or corn, or cloth – so they paid in lice.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Actually, what I’m planning on doing is getting those who practice the politics of envy to stand up and take responsibility for their lives, and quit whining about how other people – who work harder – should be somehow vilified and punished for their success.

She never earmed a fraction of $500,000. But she invested to the best of her ability and was taxed accordingly.

You haven’t given me a clear question – how can I give you a clear answer?

But if your question is, " Should she be taxed, ‘prior to income’ as an equtiy trader who earns a $500,000 salary?" the answer is no. She should be taxed as an investor of her ability would be taxed – and she **was **(and is) taxed at that rate.

No, you should be taxed on your ability to earn in an average year.

It’s part of our philosophy – everyone should pull his or her share of the load.

OK. I think I’m starting to understand. In some regards your answers would indicate an advocacy of Endowment Taxation and some indicate taxation based on income. I guess it could best be called an ‘in between’

In regards to your wife’s income maybe I’m not being clear. I’ll try my life as an example

As I mentioned, at one point I earned alot of money. I worked hard at it and was good at what I did. I also paid a lot of taxes. After 9/11 (seen from my office window) and my family’s angst over my safety I decided to ‘downsize’. I’ve decided not to be away from my family all the time and to make them more of a priority. I moved away from NYC to raise my family much more simply and with less priority on money.

Would you still have me taxed at my average income over some pre-determined time period?

If yes, what if I decided to change careers and earned much less money?

Actually, if you’re interested in carrying on this thought, and helping me understand your thoughts on fair taxation, I’ve created a thread called ‘Endowment Taxation’.

Thanks for the chat today.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I lived in Peru for a couple of years, and studied the ancient civilizations there. I always liked their system of taxation. The truly poor couldn’t pay in gold, or corn, or cloth – so they paid in lice.

Oh that I could have done that to the IRS!

Actually, I was going to pay in pennies, wheelbarrows of them, but the thought of an audit every year for the rest of my life stopped me.