2011 Taxes done. check BROKE check

If, and this is a very big if, the TEA Party is able to make big cuts in spending, then Americans won't need to be taxed as much. That is what the tax analysts never consider.

FredHayek wrote: If, and this is a very big if, the TEA Party is able to make big cuts in spending, then Americans won't need to be taxed as much. That is what the tax analysts never consider.

No offense Fred, I want lower taxes, but even if we stopped spending on government next year (budget of zero for all govt entities)...don't we still need to raise taxes just to pay off the stuff we all begged for and got from the govt in the past. I don't think we can bank on govt redesigning the economic landscape in such a way to pay back what we owe in a any reasonable amount of time. We need to come up with ways, methods and programs for Americans, the one's who get all the services from govt spending, to pay back our debt. If enough people send in funds without taxes it would be great, but since that is not what is going to happen, the money needs to be taken from the people by force, it is simply paying back what we owe...not just taxes.

As I said before, most families with kids don't pay any net taxes for much of their working lives....so Republican plans don't look bad for families Archer, they look bad for the debt to be paid by future wealthly families and moderate income people without kids, because they pay just about all the taxes. By paying taxes in net, I mean that you contribute more than you take, which we must on average, again because we owe Sh** tons of money to other people, companies and govts. So when a family of 4 contributes say $250k in taxes over their life, but consume more than that just to educate their two kids, they have paid zero taxes in net, in essence they just paid for the schooling and got every other govt benefit for free (roads, police, SS, etc).

It is unlikely that any major (I said major - I would call major a shift of 30%+ in spending, even though that is still not that much and would not change our finances that much, because it is mostly debt for past crap we wanted from Gov) changes in spending or family programs will occur, even under these new pressies. They may want it, but they are not dictators. If Santorum actually wins, the house and senate will tend to D and it will look a lot like today, lots of gridlock. The only problem is we are gridlocked in a spending mode vs. a saving mode. Wouldn't it be cool if we were gridlocked on policies, but the current policy was to not spend way more than we take in. We could end up stuck in a good situation in stead of this one. If Romney wins, well it will look a lot like Obama (keep believing it wont).

I am sorry to break the news to moderate and low income families with kids that they contribute little to nothing in tax revenue. It does not make you bad, you are just taking advantage of the tax rules just like anyone else, me, Romney, Archer, etc. We need to change these rules so that the biggest direct consumers of govt programs, middle and lower income familes with kids, pay more of their share once they are able to. I am not talking % share, I am talking $. I still say call all welfare a loan, track it and if only 1% pay back their share, we are way better off than today. Even better, when you go on assistance of any kind (food, school etc.) why not have it come from your family, if you have one, in stead of the general public. If you mom or sister had an extra 10% taken out of their check each week while you were on unemployment or sending your kids to school, they would encourage you and help you get back on your feet quicker. Sound crazy? well doesn't your sister owe you more than I do?

It's ok though, sorry to bother you, get back to your two sided issue.

They have a house...student loans....a child on the way....military expenses and so on.
That is the tax code that this administration has given them.

No, actually, that is the tax-code that the Bush administration, and the Republicans gave them... The current administration has made very few changes to the tax-code, and is still operating under the tax-code they inherited from the last administration. But don't let me slow down your outrage.

LadyJazzer wrote: No, actually, that is the tax-code that the Bush administration, and the Republicans gave them... The current administration has made very few changes to the tax-code, and is still operating under the tax-code they inherited from the last administration. But don't let me slow down your outrage.

:faint: The Dems had 2 years to craft the tax code any way they wanted, but they didn't did they? They were more interested in spending like crazy on misdirected stimulus programs than helping out their base.

PE, you are correct, now that debt is at such a high level, it will take a long time to pay it down, even when the interest rate is only 1%. Imagine if it goes up to 10% like in Greece.

So, thank you for admitting that the Dems DIDN'T change the Bush tax-code... And thank you for remembering that it was BUSH who signed the TARP bailout. I love it when you see the light....

FredHayek wrote: The Dems had 2 years to craft the tax code any way they wanted, but they didn't did they?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/us/po ... ml?_r=1&hp

Interesting article dated Dec. 2010. Sounds like there were some ideas for tax reform and simplification before changing gears and focusing on new "tax the rich" campaign.

President Obama is considering whether to push early next year for an overhaul of the income tax code to lower rates and raise revenues in what would be his first major effort to begin addressing the long-term growth of the national debt. .....

The objective is to rid the code of its complex buildup of deductions, credits and exemptions, thereby broadening the base of taxes collected and allowing for lower rates — much like a bipartisan majority on Mr. Obama’s debt-reduction commission recommended..

FYI I use this guy's free Excel Tax spreadsheet to check my Math and estimate quarterly taxes.

http://home.mchsi.com/~taxcalculator/download.htm

Its a pretty cool spreadsheet, the IRS should hire this guy.

I read that 60% of tax payers use a paid service and 30% use software to file. I must be part of the 10% that still grinds out the paper forms. LOL

My oldest dropped out of college and joined the navy.

While I support his decision, would anyone care to guess what it did to my taxes?

Meanwhile, I'm stuck paying off the tuition loan --- AND paying higher taxes to boot.

AND --- if I take on a second job in order to pay off the loan --- my taxes go up even more.

bailey bud wrote: My oldest dropped out of college and joined the navy.

While I support his decision, would anyone care to guess what it did to my taxes?

Meanwhile, I'm stuck paying off the tuition loan --- AND paying higher taxes to boot.

AND --- if I take on a second job in order to pay off the loan --- my taxes go up even more.

If you are paying off the loan you get the tax credit for loan interest........I assume you had him as a dependent when he was in college....so now he is filing his own tax returns. One would suppose not having his expenses would leave you with more disposable income than the rise in your taxes. The second job should pay more than the extra taxes you pay....I am always amused at those who say I don't want a $10,000 raise because I'll have to pay $2000 in taxes on it.....what? you would turn down $8000 in net income to save paying $2000 in taxes? Seriously, I have had clients complain about that.