What what, did I hear "increase the child tax credit"?

[agamemnus]

...in a discussion on helping the middle class...?

Hillary Clinton whispering in Obama's ear much?

[rumrunner]

I haven't heard that. Can I see a source?

[littlelolligagged]

You have a problem with increasing the child tax credit?

I was just reading about this on MSNBC.

[Hazir]

So that's a plan to reduce taxes for people with children? Sounds good to me.

[agamemnus]

Yes, I do lolli. Do you not have a problem with our government throwing money away?

It might be good for Europe, Hazir.. but adding incentives for people to have children isn't a middle class tax credit and it isn't useful for our economy. It adds to the deficit while adding mouths to feed when we have over 17% unemployment. How much sense does this make? Oh, and it tops off at about $85,000 per household. That's a little over 42.5K per parent, assuming two. That's lower-middle-class.

It's disappointing that Obama's people are still pushing crappy ideas with some not-so-bad ideas and hoping we'll swallow.

[EyeKhan]

...in a discussion on helping the middle class...?

Hillary Clinton whispering in Obama's ear much?

Probably only for people who make less than a certain threshold. Damn middle class, they get all the perks in life.

[EyeKhan]

Yes, I do lolli. Do you not have a problem with our government throwing money away?

It might be good for Europe, Hazir.. but adding incentives for people to have children isn't a middle class tax credit and it isn't useful for our economy. It adds to the deficit while adding mouths to feed when we have over 17% unemployment. How much sense does this make? Oh, and it tops off at about $85,000 per household. That's a little over 42.5K per parent, assuming two. That's lower-middle-class.

It's disappointing that Obama's people are still pushing crappy ideas with some not-so-bad ideas and hoping we'll swallow.

You're mixing long term and short term. And I'd be surprised if there's any middle class folks out there rushing to get knocked up because of the wonderful new tax credit they'll get. Give me a break.

[agamemnus]

You're mixing long term and short term. And I'd be surprised if there's any middle class folks out there rushing to get knocked up because of the wonderful new tax credit they'll get. Give me a break.

Same old tired argument from you!

So just throw away the long term implications like it doesn't matter?

It's bad in the short term too. When you get a subsidy for nothing (just having kids), you will be less likely to work, and this will drain the deficit.. these tax credits do not increase the size of the middle class, which is what this latest Obama proposal is about.

[Veldan Rath]

You're mixing long term and short term. And I'd be surprised if there's any middle class folks out there rushing to get knocked up because of the wonderful new tax credit they'll get. Give me a break.

So we just hand out cash to those for having kids they can not afford???

Taxes, theoretically are to adjust behavior...how is this doing that?

[CedarPointer]

That's like saying that people are going to go out and buy another house because of a homebuyer tax credit.

[']['ear]

Taxes used to adjust behavior is a stupid idea. The entire tax code should be cleaned out to give us a moderately progressive tax like we have now.

[EyeKhan]

Same old tired argument from you!

So just throw away the long term implications like it doesn't matter?

It's bad in the short term too. When you get a subsidy for nothing (just having kids), you will be less likely to work, and this will drain the deficit.. these tax credits do not increase the size of the middle class, which is what this latest Obama proposal is about.

Nice of you to sidestep reality. That must be a requirement to be conservative these days. Again, NOBODY is rushing out to get pregnant just to get a bigger tax credit. The very basis of your argument isn't just false, its stupid. Therefore everything that flows from it, long or short term is just as false. A per child tax credit isn't there to increase the middle class, its there to lower the tax burden on people who already have a significant expense - their kids - as opposed to their childless peers who don't have that particular burden.

[EyeKhan]

So we just hand out cash to those for having kids they can not afford???

Taxes, theoretically are to adjust behavior...how is this doing that?

No, that's not what its about. Times have gotten very tough for people so those that have serious repsonsibility and expenses they can't get rid of, such as raising the next generation, are getting a little help. And no, taxes are not to adjust behavior, they are to raise revenue so that civilization can function. Some economists like to use sin taxes to push people away from bad behavior, like drinking and smoking, but that's not the PURPOSE of taxes. It's an experiment in social engineering.

[rumrunner]

So we just hand out cash to those for having kids they can not afford???

Taxes, theoretically are to adjust behavior...how is this doing that?

My god man, how big a credit you think they're giving out. It's just help those people (yes with children) who are struggling, to get out of some of there debt. This in turn would allow them to begin accumulating more. Kids are unbelievably expensive.

[agamemnus]

Nice of you to sidestep reality. That must be a requirement to be conservative these days. Again, NOBODY is rushing out to get pregnant just to get a bigger tax credit. The very basis of your argument isn't just false, its stupid. Therefore everything that flows from it, long or short term is just as false. A per child tax credit isn't there to increase the middle class, its there to lower the tax burden on people who already have a significant expense - their kids - as opposed to their childless peers who don't have that particular burden.

1. I'll direct you again to post 8.
2. Yet, if you see Obama talking on the podium there, what does it say in huge white letters? It says something like "middle class task group", not "let's give handouts to people with gobs of children so we can get their votes next election" task group.

[Hazir]

I doubt that anybody in the middle class would consider having a child for no other reason than a tax-incentive. Lowering the tax-burden for parents should typically make their task of raising their children (which is an interest of society) a little bit easier. Which I consider a good thing, anywhere.

[Ominous Gamer]

Brandy pays in no federal tax, yet still gets ~$6000 back from the IRS every year. I wonder exactly how much more support the government thinks she needs.

Looks like I'll be the one claiming Scarlett this year. Over the years I've gotten my return to work out where I owe or am owed barely nothing. So Scarlett is straight money in the bank.

[EyeKhan]

Brandy pays in no federal tax, yet still gets ~$6000 back from the IRS every year. I wonder exactly how much more support the government thinks she needs.

Looks like I'll be the one claiming Scarlett this year. Over the years I've gotten my return to work out where I owe or am owed barely nothing. So Scarlett is straight money in the bank.

Is that why you had her? And are you planning to have another so you can fleece the system some more?

[EyeKhan]

1. I'll direct you again to post 8.
2. Yet, if you see Obama talking on the podium there, what does it say in huge white letters? It says something like "middle class task group", not "let's give handouts to people with gobs of children so we can get their votes next election" task group.

Ah, yes, post 8:

It's bad in the short term too. When you get a subsidy for nothing (just having kids), you will be less likely to work, and this will drain the deficit.. these tax credits do not increase the size of the middle class, which is what this latest Obama proposal is about.

So you think of the cost and responsibility of raising a family, especially when the economy is in turmoil, as, well, as nothing . And your argument is per-child tax credits encourages middle class parents not to work. Yeah. And that Obama's purpose for increasing this credit is to increase the size of the middle class. If you're going to be voluntarily stupid in your arguments, I'm going to talk to someone else.

And regarding the banners and whatever on the podium, <sigh> <shakes head>. If you think much, those types of things, the one liners, the simplton ads, arn't meant for you. You really need to think about what a policy is meant to do rather than raise a fit about what the banner on the podium says. Most policy is at some level about votes, but if you really think this is only about getting votes... whatever, dude.

[Veldan Rath]

Is that why you had her? And are you planning to have another so you can fleece the system some more?

Re-read what he wrote.

His missus pays NOTHING in federal taxes and still gets $6K in a tax credit.

Where do you think that money comes from?

[EyeKhan]

Re-read what he wrote.

His missus pays NOTHING in federal taxes and still gets $6K in a tax credit.

Where do you think that money comes from?

Me. And I hope he uses it to take good care of his daughter. She's our future.

[Ominous Gamer]

Is that why you had her? And are you planning to have another so you can fleece the system some more?

no and no, but tax time and my dad's health did play a part in when we wanted Scarlett to be born.

I simply don't see the point of this tax credit. We are far from middle class, but surely don't need such a heavy handout. I think this has more to do with trying to win votes with the people disillusioned into thinking they are part of the middle class. Helping the children because the parents are morons and/or living above their means.

[EyeKhan]

no and no, but tax time and my dad's health did play a part in when we wanted Scarlett to be born.

I simply don't see the point of this tax credit. We are far from middle class, but surely don't need such a heavy handout. I think this has more to do with trying to win votes with the people disillusioned into thinking they are part of the middle class. Helping the children because the parents are morons and/or living above their means.

OG, you're not every person. You're an annecdote. Just because you don't need it doesn't mean many others don't legititmately need it. If your credit is too much, then send some of it back. The IRS won't refuse it. Or give it to charity so someone who needs the money can benefit.

[Ominous Gamer]

Me. And I hope he uses it to take good care of his daughter. She's our future.

The money is actually for her first two. Scarlett will go on my return.
I paid 2,330.12 in taxes last year, made just shy of 30 thousand, and now expect to get it all back, at least.

OG, you're not every person. You're an annecdote. Just because you don't need it doesn't mean many others don't legititmately need it. If your credit is too much, then send some of it back. The IRS won't refuse it. Or give it to charity so someone who needs the money can benefit.

When you're middle class and up, you don't legititmately need government hand outs like this. You need to fix your lifestyle. Cable, multiple SUVs, TIVO, Netflix...those aren't needs. The government shouldn't help you maintain a comfortable lifestyle because you popped one to many out.

[Veldan Rath]

When you're middle class and up, you don't legititmately need government hand outs like this. You need to fix your lifestyle. Cable, multiple SUVs, TIVO, Netflix...those aren't needs. The government shouldn't help you maintain a comfortable lifestyle because you popped one to many out.

This!

OG has got it right (and we don't agree very often).

I don't have kids, where is my tax CUT (tax credit is just another word for welfare) for NOT burdening the system?

[Veldan Rath]

Me. And I hope he uses it to take good care of his daughter. She's our future.

Jesus Choobs. There is no guarantee that those that do WILL use it for their kids.

It's vote buying, pure and simple.

[EyeKhan]

The money is actually for her first two. Scarlett will go on my return.
I paid 2,330.12 in taxes last year, made just shy of 30 thousand, and now expect to get it all back, at least.

You shouldn't be paying income tax at all, IMHO. That's the net effect but it seems inefficient to take that money out of your check just to send it back to you.

When you're middle class and up, you don't legititmately need government hand outs like this. You need to fix your lifestyle. Cable, multiple SUVs, TIVO, Netflix...those aren't needs. The government shouldn't help you maintain a comfortable lifestyle because you popped one to many out.

It depends. First, I'm not agreeing that this vague picture your painting is necessarily accurate. However, the government might be looking at this like a kind of stimulus. Most of our economy is founded on consumption, like the stuff your talking about. If middle class folks feeling the pinch tighten up like you recommend, it has the effect of prolonging the recession. Now, obviously the next question becomes 'should our economy be based on consumption and the need for growth and blah blah blah' and then we're in deep water. Those long term questions and arguably this isn't the time to discuss them. No time is, unfortunately, because its the kind of discussion that loses elections.

[Ominous Gamer]

You shouldn't be paying income tax at all, IMHO. That's the net effect but it seems inefficient to take that money out of your check just to send it back to you.

Obviously, hence the fact that my pervious tax returns have balanced out. Niether I or the government was able to predict more than 13 months ago I would be claiming a dependant.

It depends. First, I'm not agreeing that this vague picture your painting is necessarily accurate. However, the government might be looking at this like a kind of stimulus. Most of our economy is founded on consumption, like the stuff your talking about. If middle class folks feeling the pinch tighten up like you recommend, it has the effect of prolonging the recession. Now, obviously the next question becomes 'should our economy be based on consumption and the need for growth and blah blah blah' and then we're in deep water. Those long term questions and arguably this isn't the time to discuss them. No time is, unfortunately, because its the kind of discussion that loses elections.

You're confusing the status of middle class, as well as what defines it. Middle class has disposable income. If you're having to tighten up to the effect of "prolonging the recession" you aren't or never were middle class. You were likely living in a fantasy world.
Next, hasn't research shown that childless adults are far better better consumers than those that have children? Thats one of the strongest arguments used in supporting homosexual relationships.

So why reward the ones who couldn't keep it in their pants?
Because thats the base you have to bribe.
There are far better ways to help the children. Rewarding parents directly, because you're claiming to help the ones that have already shown to be financial fuck ups, its not high on that list of "help that makes sense".

[Hazir]

Not much to add but that I think that Eyekhan is absolutely right; a fair system of taxation takes into account that people who have children are contributing to society and thus can expect to have a smaller portion of their income go to the coffers of the state. Even if that in the silly system we have that means they are getting tax-credits. (It's not much different in the NL than in the US and in principle I agree with the special treatment of people with children).

[Ominous Gamer]

Not much to add but that I think that Eyekhan is absolutely right; a fair system of taxation takes into account that people who have children are contributing to society and thus can expect to have a smaller portion of their income go to the coffers of the state. Even if that in the silly system we have that means they are getting tax-credits. (It's not much different in the NL than in the US and in principle I agree with the special treatment of people with children).

Where is the limit? Parents have always gotten a tax credit for children. Hence the title here talking about "increasing" that credit. As I already pointed out, Brandy's ~$6,000 for a lower income household seems to be more than enough. Is the middleclass expecting the same or better?

Why? So they can still live under the false idea of being middle class?