How does someone making $24,000 a year pay federal taxes?

[_beastie]

The "takers," - the so-called 47% of the population who are permanently or semi-permanently, over much or the totality of their lifetimes - Julia, in other words - receiving some form of government assistance, benefits, or government checks on a continual basis, and who receive on average, more in government transfers from their fellow citizens than they pay in taxes, is the problem. Some people receiving some help sometimes, here and there, in some ways, was never the problem (although the central, federal government's role in such a safety net is a fundamental problem).

Please list all the various forms of government assistance, benefits, or government checks that "47%" receive on a continual basis.

And please provide evidence that those folks who receive said benefits simply don't work, thereby distinguishing themselves from you, who started working at 16.

bump

[_Kevin Graham]

You're asking Loran Bloodlust to back up claims, but that's something he refuses to do, for obvious reasons.

The fact is roughly half of the people on government assistance, do in fact work and pay taxes. It is also a fact that welfare claims drop as the economy improves, because people do not prefer to stay on government assistance. This completely shatters the image conjured up by the ignorant on the Right, but those are the facts.

And I'm sick and tired of these idiots whining about things like food stamps, pretending it is only THEIR tax dollars that goes towards that. As if most people receiving food stamps never worked or paid taxes in their lives, and so they have to right to ask anything in return.

Incidentally, a person making $50k a year pays roughly 10 cent daily tax ($36 annually) to help pay for the food stamp program. This is what Droopy and his ilk are choosing to have conniption fits over.

http://www.examiner.com/article/a-perso ... ood-stamps

Yet, the rest of those people earning the same amount have to pay more than $240 a year for a ridiculous military force, whether they like it or not, with a "gun pointed at their heads" (to choose a popular phrase Right Wingers love to use) Droopy has no problem with the government FORCING me to pay for that. He has problems with the government forcing him to pay 10 cents a day to fulfill the mission of Christ!

Oh, and they also pay another $240 for health care they're not even benefiting from, because government taxes subsidize our broken health care system as it is, its just most people don't realize it. Which begs to reason, why can't we just go with universal tax-funded health care since we're all paying for it anyway? Republicans have no problems FORCING me to pay for someone else's health care, as I have been doing for many years now. That's because the current system gives the drug/insurance companies complete control of the industry, and they are the ones stuffing the pockets of politicians (mostly Republicans). So of course it is OK to make us pay for health care so long as these private institutions are the ones getting all the money. Just as it is really OK to keep student loan programs up, so long as those private institutions keep lobbying politicians to keep the money flowing their way.

Hundreds of billions wasted, and yet Droopy is worried about his 10 cents per day, something that actually feeds millions of people and keeps children out of poverty. As usual, Republicans blowhards have no principles worth talking about.

[_Gadianton]

And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number.

How did Bush win twice in a row then? Did welfare not exist a few years ago? Since I don't follow politics and didn't watch the debates, I hadn't seen this Romney quote; it's quite awful, and demonstrates that Romney is either pandering or is really just as confused as Droopy about economics, notwithstanding his fantastic skills as a businessman. I get the resentment Romney may feel towards a deck that seems stacked against him. I get the resentment of lower income people with hard jobs and hard lives, who perceive their neighbors on welfare living as well, or better, than themselves with no effort. But the moral outrage at the lower class is indefensible for advocates of market economics. Romney here suffers from this same mentality as our forum leaders here in Old Testament, apparently, that a free market can't work with so many irrational, entitled, lazy, liberal people banding together to ruin it for everyone else. Perhaps it's his Mormon indoctrination shining through, that we'll never build Zion if people won't repent. On the one hand is the right-wing belief in freedom, on the other hand, righteousness, and the righteousness just can't leave the freedom alone. But the encroachment on freedom by the Christian right is every bit as socialistic as Obama's plans, just in the service of a slightly different vision.

Those of us who put our faith in markets, the rationality of people, and the overly-simplistic graphs and mathematical models that represent them, extend our assumptions freely to everyone, seeking to understand the behavior, and not to lecture on how to behave. "Laziness" is rational. You can't, as a market advocate, fault a man for taking a free handout his whole life. You can't expect to force your morality on him. That's a socialist doctrine: the elite class, the Mormon priesthood holders in this case, expecting to teach, guilt, or scare society into living and thinking like they do. Those of us who put our faith in markets blame the policy, not the exploiters of the policy. Exploitation of policy, in fact, is one of our key predictions about the world. If 47% of Americans are exploiting the system, this only serves to illustrate the rationality of Americans, and the failure of policy makers on the left and the right who stand above us like Moses holding the Ten Commandments. When Moses went up to consult with Jehovah, the Children of Israel built a calf of gold and the economy really started to take off. Romney's suggestion to tax the poor into repentance is so stupid that it's funny, I have to admit I'm laughing at the thought of Romney throwing a tablet down on the Golden Calf in frustration over the failure of the impotent creeds of his God. Human rationality will usually triumph over policy, when the right re-discovers this long-lost fragment of their doctrine, they may be able to offer something that actually differs in substance from the left.

[_bcspace]

Anyone have an answer to that?

By being single renter. However, it's been a while since I looked at the tax table in that salary range.

[_Bond James Bond]

As to Social Security I have a strong suspicion Droopy will start suckling at that teat as soon as he can and will get far more out of it than he paid into it.

(sigh...)

1. I have no choice in the matter.

2. By the time I start receiving those checks, in 2025, the entire system will be in a state of financial collapse (it already is, of course, but its just not obvious yet). The actual fund runs out of money entirely in the 2030s in theory (and in fact, probably far sooner than that) and has no money left to pay new recipients after around 2017 or so. I may never get anything at all, unless Congress wrecks the economy entirely to fund it (and the economy will be entirely destroyed by other factors long before this state of affairs comes about).

So if SS is still there in 2025 will you partake yay or nay? That's only 13 years.

[_beastie]

The "takers," - the so-called 47% of the population who are permanently or semi-permanently, over much or the totality of their lifetimes - Julia, in other words - receiving some form of government assistance, benefits, or government checks on a continual basis, and who receive on average, more in government transfers from their fellow citizens than they pay in taxes, is the problem. Some people receiving some help sometimes, here and there, in some ways, was never the problem (although the central, federal government's role in such a safety net is a fundamental problem).

Please list all the various forms of government assistance, benefits, or government checks that "47%" receive on a continual basis.

And please provide evidence that those folks who receive said benefits simply don't work, thereby distinguishing themselves from you, who started working at 16.

I'm concluding that Droopy has no answer or data for this challenge.

I'm shocked. Just shocked. It appears Droopy is merely repeating someone else's talking points.

[_Analytics]

As to Social Security I have a strong suspicion Droopy will start suckling at that teat as soon as he can and will get far more out of it than he paid into it.

(sigh...)

1. I have no choice in the matter.

2. By the time I start receiving those checks, in 2025, the entire system will be in a state of financial collapse (it already is, of course, but its just not obvious yet). The actual fund runs out of money entirely in the 2030s in theory (and in fact, probably far sooner than that) and has no money left to pay new recipients after around 2017 or so. I may never get anything at all...

We are not on a trajectory for the doomsday scenario you paint here.

The truth of the matter is that if the law isn't changed or the system isn't otherwise fixed, when the Social Security trust fund runs out of money, Social Security payments will drop about 30% or so. That is the worst-case scenario. So, if you are planning on receiving $1,000 a month in SS benefits, be prepared to live off of only $700. That's the worst that could happen.

This is because there are two sources for the money the government spends on Social Security benefits. One is the trust fund, and the other is current Social Security taxes. Even if the trust fund runs out of money, people will still be working and paying Social Security taxes. That money will be paid to beneficiaries. The demographics are such that there will essentially be a one-time cliff of a 30% drop in benefits. With benefits at that reduced level, the system will be on a trajectory of remaining indefinitely solvent.

[_Doctor Steuss]

As to Social Security I have a strong suspicion Droopy will start suckling at that teat as soon as he can and will get far more out of it than he paid into it.

(sigh...)

1. I have no choice in the matter.

I apologize for my ignorance (it is Legion -- especially when it comes to government entitlements as I've never [*knock on wood*] needed them), but I thought that you had to apply for SS in order to receive it. So, it’s automatic? At what age do you start automatically receiving checks (does the age you automatically start receiving SS depend at all if you are still employed)?