If you make over 75,000 a year, are you rich?

I know. I don't mean to imply anything else. That was just the reaction that came to mind. It reminded me of someone saying "Let's take this outside". Sorry, I only meant it as a joke.

 

Nutshell, are you in favor of spending more money on welfare? What do you suggest be done?

I don't doubt there are children hungry in America; however, I would bet the responsibility falls on the decisions of the parents. Of course children should not have to suffer for their parents choices. But just giving the parents more money is only a bandaid on a bigger problem.

This bigger problem will continue to grow as long as immorality grows. If children weren't being raised in single parent homes to the degree that they are today, poverty would greatly diminish. Unwed pregnancy and absent fathers, and everything that encourages and leads to that is the bigger problem. It's all part of the collapse of the family. This lifestyle repeats generation after generation.

This is where we need to focus. But since we "cannot legislate morality" or "judge other's lifestyles", it's a difficult battle. Everything we do to strengthen and protect families is politically incorrect to someone.

So, what do you suggest?

 

Please stay tuned for the one-on-one between the good reverend and me. Perhaps you'd like to start a one-on-one debate comment thread.

 

Poor, fat Americans are a product of fast food. A typical diner costs me about $7, before tips. Sushi costs me $14 for a filling meal. A 6" sandwich at Subway costs me about $2.50, but it's certainly not going to fill you up. A two-patty cheeseburger with fries and a large drink at $4 is a good deal.

Poor Americans have two choices. Either they eat fast food and become seriously ill later on in their life, or they stick to a strict regiment of peanut-butter sandwiches and cereal which is absolutely terrible for your health.

Food stamps are never meant (nor can they be used) to cover a household's total food expenses.

 

This is a myth. Poor Americans can buy and make healthy food for the same cost. It's been demonstrated many times.


Oh - and I just ate a peanut-butter and banana sandwich.

 

75k a year where I live means you are very rich. 50k - 60k is more than enough money to live without financial stress, and very comfortably.

 

I make less than 10k a year, and I can even afford to eat better than that.

 

Well, according to my accountant (the wife) we screwed up. She worked her @ss off this year and got a few raises. I got a great new job where I'm making more than the last job. So we make too much to get a rebate check. But the "disabled" woman next door who doesn't work but cleans her gutters, rides motorcycles, gardens, mows, babysits under the table and pays no taxes will be getting the maximum allowable amount.

G-d bless America!

 

So you and your wife must make well over $150K. Oh - boo hoo.


From the IRS:

"Eligibility for the stimulus payment is subject to maximum income limits. The payment, including the basic amount and the amount for qualifying children, will be reduced by 5 percent of the amount of income in excess of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for those with a Married Filing Jointly filing status."

As for the "disabled" person, how could you possibly know her tax status? If she pays no taxes she's not getting the maximum benefit.

 

Forgive me if redistribution of wealth makes me a little cranky.

 

The point of the rebate is to stimulate the economy by encouraging spending. You already have the money to spend - others do not.

 

Oh I know what the "point" of the rebate is. The only thing is that it won't work. Short term it is like applying a band aid to a decapitation and long term it is just more money give aways we don't even have.

And, of course, it is unfair that only a certain sector of our society will receive a check. But because it is the $75,000+ that get to pay the bill but get shut out no one cares. If it was everyone below $24,000 that didn't get anything everyone would throw a hissy fit.

 

Well, I'm not here to debate whether the rebate works or not - in fact, I agree with you - I don't think it will.

As for what's unfair or not - that's a matter of perspective.

 

"Fair" is such a muddied word these days. It's like trying to figure out what is "good". Now a word that can be nailed down is "equal". That is a great word that should be self explanatory but even it is being used in the cause of redistribution of wealth.

 

I agree. Sometimes we find what we were meant to do with our lives and that thing simply may not pay the best. I do agree it is easier (or it always has been in the past) to make it in America. But at the same time I'm not going to tell someone they are a loser for not having a bunch of money.

Some people have never known real desperation. Some have never had disaster come into their family. Some people have lived their whole lives without an illness. Some people simply don't know what others go through.

I consider myself rich even if I only made minimum wage because I see the blessings I have in my life every single day.

 

However, you could think of it as a one-time retroactive tax adjustment. You got your final rate right up front; everyone else had the government hold onto their money for months when it really shouldn't have had the money to begin with.

Kind of like with tax returns. All else being equal, I suppose it's better to have money in your pocket, but when people say, "Hooray! I got a big cheque from the government!" I hear, "Hooray! I gave the government a big interest-free loan all year!"

 

The fact that the government doesn't even have this money they are "giving back" would lead me to believe it isn't even a tax rebate. It's a money give away.

 

Yeah. I agree the checks will do nothing but hurt the economy with millions of dollars suddenly being pumped into the economy.