What's new
By:
Filters

Raise the EITC

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.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

I posted in haste. Your point is helping people help themselves, a noble position. This is for people already working who struggle to make ends meat. I.E. a single mother of three working 40+ hours/week at Walmart for $25k/yr. I don't see a need to tell or teach that person how to better their own situation as I see fitting. They probably already know but simply can't. They're trapped.

As far as all the other assistance goes, this would displace some of that. That's where you get budget savings, and for those like you who distrust government efficiency, it's a way to cut some out and thus reduce overhead and waste.

And it's not free money. You have to work to get it. I think anyone who works and contributes to the massive output this society produces deserves a decent share of that product. Right now, the wealthy disproportionately gain from everything society provides to make this production possible while others are working hard but being left out of a reasonable share of the gain. Where is the equal outrage for giving the rich all this free money? I say take it from them and give it to the poorest working citizens so they can provide for themselves. Many of the rich say this as well. I don't care at all to tell them how they should spend it either. If people make enough to get by and blow it then that's their problem.
 
Also, I didnt think this would be controversial at all. Maybe some minor complaints, but overall something acceptable. We already do this and it's been arguably the greatest poverty fighting tool since the mid-70's. I don't recall ever hearing a complaint about it like I do with LBJ's programs, or food stamps, or social security, or minimum wage, or pretty much any other welfare program. Why not? Because it's a damn good program. Work hard, earn a living, simple logic there.
 
Like I said, if you want to change the ratio, fine. But to give carte blanche with the money is foolish. Someone who works 40 hours a week is gonna get the money and do whatever they want with it. Their kids will most of the time grow up the same, working a crap job seeing that free money, so long as they work, in their future. There will be no reason to better their selves. Heck, many will complain it’s not enough too. As if the 1% is the reason they’re in their situation. As if they deserve more. Sorry, but I see it as a dumb move. Everyone had it beaten into their heads in school from the time they start kindergarten. Education is huge. School is important. And yet many don’t give a ****. They say they do. But they do nothing about it. I see it in my school district which is predominantly poor. And why do they do nothing about it? Because they don’t have parents in place to teach them right from wrong. To stress education and not only stress it but be involved in it. This won’t change that. You’ll be giving a **** ton of money away to people who don’t know how to better themselves. To people who will piss it away because they don’t know how important savings are or a budget is or other life incidents. They’ll grow, in very short term, to expect that money. As will their children. I see it already with my students. They think receiving said money (welfare) is normal and to be expected. They don’t understand the principle of it. Nor do they care to. They just want the money. Which is what would happen here should carte blanche be afforded. They’ll get their money and there’ll be more Range Rovers driving the urban streets. More nights spent out at the bar. More money spent on weed because heck, it’s legal now or will be. Don’t fool yourself. The money will be pissed away by the far majority. And those people, no matter how much the federal government gives them a year, will still be poor. And why shouldn’t it? It’s theirs, right.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

Self-contradictory.

Wes Mantooth said:
Something to teach “these people” certain fundamentals that any adult and parent worth a damn should know and pass on down to their child.
Click to expand...

I'd like to tell you that you don't sound at all judgmental and ignorant. It's just that you make it very hard sometimes.

Wes Mantooth said:
... 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.
Click to expand...

They need to be better parents and to spend less time at home parenting. OK.


Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

If you place requirements on transfer, it's not a gift.

Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

You mean, the people who qualify for the EITC?


Wes Mantooth said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you have all kinds of thoughts about "those people".
 
Wes Mantooth said:
**** 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.
Click to expand...

We used to spend the EITC on things like better food, paying off a loan, etc. Nice to know it wasn't any help.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
For those who care about the federal deficit, an equitable bill like that would provide billions in savings elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I hope everyone cares about the federal deficit. So are you suggesting cuts to other welfare programs and replacing it with a larger EITC? Tax increases on the rich don't have as great of an impact on federal receipts as people think. For instance, Trump instituted tax decreases on the rich.........and federal receipts have increased during his administration. Anyone proposing that tax increases on the rich can solve our federal deficit is not thinking deep enough about the issue.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
I hope everyone cares about the federal deficit. So are you suggesting cuts to other welfare programs and replacing it with a larger EITC? Tax increases on the rich don't have as great of an impact on federal receipts as people think. For instance, Trump instituted tax decreases on the rich.........and federal receipts have increased during his administration. Anyone proposing that tax increases on the rich can solve our federal deficit is not thinking deep enough about the issue.
Click to expand...

A larger EITC would (has) roll people off of other assistance programs.

I would tackle the deficit problem as a separate discussion that dives into much more detail. EOTC is much more, to me, about smoothing out our increasing wealth imbalance. We've done a fine job the last several decades of elevating people from middle class to upper class. I think that should be celebrated more. The side effect is we've also left more behind and see the lower class growing. I think we can solve the lower class poverty problem, at least to some extent better than we currently do, by applying some minor discomfort to the upper class. I look at as a price they should pay for the benefits they have already have received.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
Like I said, if you want to change the ratio, fine. But to give carte blanche with the money is foolish. Someone who works 40 hours a week is gonna get the money and do whatever they want with it. Their kids will most of the time grow up the same, working a crap job seeing that free money, so long as they work, in their future. There will be no reason to better their selves. Heck, many will complain it’s not enough too. As if the 1% is the reason they’re in their situation. As if they deserve more. Sorry, but I see it as a dumb move. Everyone had it beaten into their heads in school from the time they start kindergarten. Education is huge. School is important. And yet many don’t give a ****. They say they do. But they do nothing about it. I see it in my school district which is predominantly poor. And why do they do nothing about it? Because they don’t have parents in place to teach them right from wrong. To stress education and not only stress it but be involved in it. This won’t change that. You’ll be giving a **** ton of money away to people who don’t know how to better themselves. To people who will piss it away because they don’t know how important savings are or a budget is or other life incidents. They’ll grow, in very short term, to expect that money. As will their children. I see it already with my students. They think receiving said money (welfare) is normal and to be expected. They don’t understand the principle of it. Nor do they care to. They just want the money. Which is what would happen here should carte blanche be afforded. They’ll get their money and there’ll be more Range Rovers driving the urban streets. More nights spent out at the bar. More money spent on weed because heck, it’s legal now or will be. Don’t fool yourself. The money will be pissed away by the far majority. And those people, no matter how much the federal government gives them a year, will still be poor. And why shouldn’t it? It’s theirs, right.
Click to expand...

It doesnt bother me if people make choices that keep them poorer. Besides, I need grocery store workers and drywallers and all the other low wage workers doing jobs I dont want to do for that pay. But I don't want them starving while they do them for 40+ years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top