What's new

Raise the EITC

How do you translate that to a salary employee. Or like me, a guy who is basically never “off the clock” and draws a salary.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
As a life long salaried employee I want to see the laws changed so that we have to be paid OT. You have no idea how often I've heard "you make a lot of money, you need to work a lot of hours" even though I'm getting everything done in 8 hours. Sure there are times it's necessary but more often than not they wear 12 hour work days like a badge of honor. Require OT pay for salaried folks, even if the limit was set at 50 hours per week, and we'd get to spend more time at home.

Not sure what to do with your situation b. My dad was in the same boat. Small business owners need some breaks imo.
 
Bringing it back up because Buffett is bringing it up again. I've been promoting it a bit here for years and think it's easily the smartest way to cure America's poverty problem. It's extremely affordable too.
Thoughts?
I like the EITC far more than raising the federal minimum wage or other federal welfare programs that have major costs to administer. It's not like it's free, though ($50+ Billion Annually). I would be for it if there were cuts to other federal spending.
 
I would argue that the working poor are better served by the collective provisions of services like medicare, decent public transport, quality schools and access to University education. The USA compared to other OECD nations has a fairly low level of taxation, I think around 24 cents out of every dollar in the economy goes through the treasury, Norway and Sweden by comparison redistribute over 60 cents out of every dollar through their treasury. This may have something to do with why they regularly are rated as having the lowest disparity between rich and poor in the developed world.

This is in addition to those programs. Even if it weren't, I'd strongly disagree with what you are implying (outside of healthcare).
 
I like the EITC far more than raising the federal minimum wage or other federal welfare programs that have major costs to administer. It's not like it's free, though ($50+ Billion Annually). I would be for it if there were cuts to other federal spending.

I think we need to redistribute much more income from the top to the bottom. 50 billion is about the number I've come up with in the past that's very reasonable through tax increases on the 1%, especially after Trump's cuts.

At 50 billion, we are talking $5,000 per year for America's 10,000,000 poorest families. Not that that's how we would structure it, but that's the order of magnitude that an affordable program could be. It would mean reversing Trump's cut on the top 1% from and bumping it up a few % higher than under Obama.

For those who care about the federal deficit, an equitable bill like that would provide billions in savings elsewhere.
 
I get that people hate giving cash. However, when compared to programs that offer job skills, or resources, or other types of aid, programs that offer cash almost always give more bang for the buck.
 
I think we need to redistribute much more income from the top to the bottom. 50 billion is about the number I've come up with in the past that's very reasonable through tax increases on the 1%, especially after Trump's cuts.

At 50 billion, we are talking $5,000 per year for America's 10,000,000 poorest families. Not that that's how we would structure it, but that's the order of magnitude that an affordable program could be. It would mean reversing Trump's cut on the top 1% from and bumping it up a few % higher than under Obama.

For those who care about the federal deficit, an equitable bill like that would provide billions in savings elsewhere.

I’d redistribute in a heartbeat (I’m not top 1% fwiw) if I trusted the government to distribute the money in a way that made sense and wasn’t pissed away on their own “administrative fees” or by the people who received that money.

Listen, perhaps the biggest problem with the lowest 10,000,000 is education. And that’s overarching. That encompasses academics, life skills, parenting, health, financial management, and so on. Sorry, but that money would be epically wasted by the far majority of those lower 10,000,000 lest stringent guidelines be put in place.

If it’s me, and I’m dishing out 50 billion, I’m dishing it out to fewer families to start. One third as many. To receive it, one would have to show gainful employment for x months of x years prior, and a minimal (and majority) amount would have to be spent on housing, and certain adult education requirements would have to be met regularly. Not on a weekly basis but something. Something to teach “these people” certain fundamentals that any adult and parent worth a damn should know and pass on down to their child. In order to continue to earn said money year to year, certain things need to be proven. That they’ve attended these classes and passed certain assessments, that they’ve shown they have invested a portion of this money, that their children are demonstrating an understanding of the importance of their academics by minimal performance standards in school. Perhaps these people also need to take part in minimal community service (32 hours?) each year as well to “give back” for what they’ve received.

This needs to be an improved version of our welfare system which is an abomination. It needs to be about education and community and realizing that this gift is just that and it needs to be cherished by those who receive it and that gifts are not always given. There needs to be guidelines in place that are reasonable and yet are a step to improving these families and the whole that is this country. This world for that matter.

If it’s me, I don’t give it to the worst 3.33M families in the country. I give it to a tier or two above them. And to people who’ve demonstrated consistent employment. Get these people who are perhaps upper lower class out of their struggles. Basically, I envision giving them 15K a year untaxed. 12K could go toward a mortgage. That’s about a 200K mortgage. Of the other 3K, perhaps 2K could go toward investments for retirement or higher education that can be used on nothing else and 1K for personal spending. Not much, but considering these people could get a brand new ****ing home down south (that’s where I’m picturing much of this) with little to no mortgage would be amazing for them. This could totally cause a boom in construction nationwide as well and help with jobs (perhaps for many of these people or those below them). This could be life-changing ****.

I’d worry about a neighborhood of 40 new homes that is built for these people turning over time into a ghost town-like Hamsterdams. I mean, you can only “change” these people so quickly, so much. But there could be regular check-ups perhaps to ensure these people are creating a community envisioned. That they’re adhering to some sort of HOA standards or something.

Okay done for now; tldnr

But I envision this working (some will **** up the opportunity) and by showing it works, the lowest 10% would feel hope and see something to strive for, and this could be expanded years later.
 
And btw by these people I meant the poor and uneducated.

I actually picture poor, white thrash tbh.

Just had to say that before the soft libs of the board get their panties in a bunch.
 
It's Earned Income Tax Credit. I dont see a reason to get self-righteous in telling people how they should better their own situation. This is for people who work but still can't get by.
 
It's Earned Income Tax Credit. I dont see a reason to get self-righteous in telling people how they should better their own situation. This is for people who work but still can't get by.

Self-righteous? It’s free ****ing money. They can take it or leave it. They’re basically getting a free or near free ****ing house, money toward higher education and their retirement, and spending money.

**** my wife and I are educated and I’d be the first to say, most of that would be pissed away. Great, it goes back into the economy. But it doesn’t do much if anything at all so far as truly helping these people to better themselves.
 
If the ratio of how money would be allocated should be changed, I’m all ears. But handing out free ****ing money is dumb as ****. There’s a reason that many of these people are poor and it goes far deeper than just, they’re down on their luck.
 
Back
Top