$14.5 B Tax Refunds Issued By "error"

More reasons to legalize marijuana. Crack down on people selling it tax-free.

But really; you'll never get rid of people working off the books.

I'm speaking specifically of legitimate full-time work opportunity for those with nothing more than a high school diploma. The $50k+ jobs out there available for them are going to be hard work, and a lot of those people aren't willing to do hard work. Or barely any work.

I'm not defending those people who are gaming the system; they're lazy carbuncles on society's ***.

I'm solely speaking to the liklihood of many of these people that are claiming the EITCs managing to obtain and maintain that level of income.

I'm not sure I agree with one specific group paying less, but taxes should be lower on everyone anyways. So kudos to them.

As for breeder hate, I really don't get this. Do you really feel guilty having kids? I mean even if the world is overpopulated, you minor contribution of not having kids is pretty clearly less of a potent combination to solving the worlds problems than if you were to have 3-4 kids and pass on your genes and influence. I mean for me the only way I could feel like not having kids was a better option than having them is if I felt that I had nothing to offer my potential children that might enhance their contribution to the world.

You could easily get rid of people working off the books, or at least neuter it. Just replace an income tax with a sales tax.

As for the other point in which I bolded, if people aren't willing to work, they shouldn't be achieving that level of income off of the taxpayer.

My personal situation falls into the "a bit of column A, a bit of column B, and a smattering of columns C-Zed".

But leaving my own situation and bias as far out of it as is possible for me, I really feel like children are a luxury in this day and age.

So many people who can't even afford to pay for themselves, then they go about having multiple children anyhow? When they're not financially stable enough to support themselves without government assistance?

And then the children are on government assistance too?

And even if they're not on government assistance, they're still getting a tax break for putting a bigger burden on society that everyone else is paying for, whether they have children of their own or not?

I mean, really, isn't that the kind of big government you want to avoid, making people pay for things that they shouldn't be responsible for in the first place?

I have no problem with people having children if they're ready to properly care for them on their own dime, and not on mine; I just don't think you should be entitled to any sort of government benefit just for having them, and that includes tax breaks.

You can complain, just no one will care... plight of the white man.

Also a person does not need to break the law to compete with some one making 50k a year. You can make almost half of that working min wage and still qualify for benefits etc.

One reason many people have kids live together but maintain separate addresses. (Moms house etc) is to have a low risk way of having multiple incomes and still maintaining benefits. (Technically illegal but gl proving it)

25k + 25k benefits etc for the woman = 50k and beating your average, then the other 25k+ from the guy is straight gravy.

Kinda crazy how much thought and effort goes into this, Americans might not be #1 in math but damn sure we are #1 in being criminals, no one does it better.

The idea has merit, but I still think you run the risk of lots of off-the-books transactions that would be hell to regulate.


Yeah, again, I don't disagree. I'm just throwing it out there that some people getting the EITC may be doing their best with the position they're in and still legitimately qualifying.

I'm not saying don't change it or modify it to be a bit more selective or particular.

Hell I got it last year, not the full amount mind you, but I still got it.

I'll get it this year and next too (assuming they don't kill it).

Unless the unforeseen happens, in which case, good (assuming better pay). But to be frank even if I started making 40k/year I'd just pay more into my student loans to get the credit, so I can then turn around and pay them off even faster.

My CC debt is slowly dwindling, and I decided last night that I'll eliminate the majority of it before I go and get a new car, even though I'm in bad need of one. I can't justify spending over 1k a month in some sort of credit payments, even if I can afford it right now.

edit: I still think it's funny that all of these people complain about freeloaders off the taxpayer, like any of their money is actually going to them, when it's such a small % of the federal budget. More than likely your money is going to offset the costs of the decade long wars we were in, or some other military funding. I'll not take any politician's "concern" for the debt and or budget and or deficit seriously until they support cutting their own benefits back, and take a severe paycut.

We'll see how fast that happens, from either house.

I can agree with that. I've been sort of looking forward to getting a new vehicle and getting some trade-in value for my truck, but now that paying it off is in sight I'm having second thoughts. Life without a car payment is awfully enticing and my truck's got a lot of miles left in it.

If you do your taxes properly you can make a very high income and still get earned income low enough to qualify. Know what your deductions will be and control your earnings to maximize returns.

There is no difference between this and a Corporation doing it. Actually if Corporations fail to do this stockholders can bring derivative suits against the board for waste. But enough derail, back to taxes.

I've often considered just constantly leasing a car, no you won't get the little bit of equity in it, but as some people do vehicle purchases like a long term rental until they get bored with it and trade it out anyway...

I'm more of the buy it and keep it for 10+ years type, I'm a bad American, and don't really follow in the severe "replace it" mentality.

But after having 3 ball joints break on my in less than 2 years, along with everything else wrong with the car, it's about time to put it to rest. 300+k miles and several wrecks later.

Americans are smart enough to live no doubt. If only the system was designed to channel that energy into something productive instead of what it is now, "gaming the taxpayer". But bring up ending the welfare state and you're told "you don't care" by the usual suspects in this site.

Hey the system is set up so that it rewards those making poor choices and punishes those like you (and me) who want to afford kids before they have them.

Thanks Obama!

Current admistration may perpetuate it, but it's been going on for decades.

"Thanks for the endless cycle of financial abuse of the middle class in some form or another, politicians."

The biggest threat to me is the guy currently pummeling me not the dead guy who was 50 years ago.

I just think it's misguided to blame one president or even his adminstration. It's the entire culture in Washington doing this for a long, long time, and nearly every last person there right now is looking to keep it that way.

Not to mention that the President has little control over what taxes congress passes, unless it gets to his desk.

Well unless he issued an emergency executive order for the IRS to not collect as an attempt to stimulate the economy, for which he'd be accused of over stepping his authority, since you know, he's the first President to ever sign an executive order, ever.

This has been a good chuckle though, and it would be more of one if he weren't serious.

By my own admission I blamed more than one president. Not everyone in Washington wants to grow the welfare state. But of everyone who does currently, Obama has the most influence.

Citation Needed.

Ehh. Not everyone says they do, or maybe they want to reform it in some fashion, but I have a very hard time believing anyone there doesn't want to maintain the status quo of power and finance in this country. And that includes keeping huge portions of the population poor and stupid. Consider the irony of how many of those people dependant upon welfare and other social supports vote Republican due to "moral" issues, despite the fact that some of those on the right would see their benefits cut and have them starve to death.

It's a delicate dance of politics, funding, and spin.

Re: income in small towns.

The town I technically live in has a population of roughly 350. Maybe. The next town over? Perhaps 2000, perhaps not.

Rural Oklahoma sucks like a cheap hooker.

Sure, there's the thriving metropolis with a population of MAYBE 30k thirty miles away, where the Walmart and all the fast food joints are.

Average pay for places like that? A hair over minimum wage. A little more if you happen to be management.

Sure, there's Tulsa an hour off, but to get there you either have to take the toll road to a tune of eight bucks round trip, plus gas, or else take a half hour longer to get to your destination. Good luck finding a decent paying job there without a degree.

Yes, one can always go to school, but how do you live while you're getting that education? How do you pay for it while you're trying to keep a roof over your head and food in your stomach?

School+ working two jobs to survive = what? Four hours sleep a night/day/whatever crappy shift you have to take? Burnout? Insanity?

No, I don't expect things to be handed to people, but if companies actually paid their employees something close to a living wage welfare may look less attractive to some.

I do agree that some benefit programs have too little oversight, and that there are those who abuse it to their advantage. There are those who use it as intended, though, and lumping them in with the classic "welfare mom" is outright insulting.

Back on the original topic. (As if nothing ever gets derailed here, lol.)

For as long as there have been taxes, there have been those who cheat on them. This will always be the case, as I believe that dishonesty is well within the capabilities of most human beings, particularly when in it involves personal gain of whatever flavor.

I seriously wonder if anyone on here has actually applied for benefits and know the hoops that people have to go through to get them, even the legitimate ones.

Yes there are career manipulators of the systems, but the numbers are rather low, and really inconsequential when it comes to the federal budget. Edit: not to mention that a lot of the programs are run at the state level.

Blame McDonald's, Walmart, Haliburton, GE, etc

They are your real government. They make money selling to the poor, if the poor have no money they can't buy their cheap, low quality garbage. Also they need cheap labor, so they want poor, and unemployment, also they wanted a glut of highly educated workers so they could cut pay and get better qualified employees.

Taxes
Welfare
Student Loan crisis
Poor Quality Education
Racism/ perception of Racism

The list goes on, all of it bad for the average American, but supremely lucrative for the 1%.

Which is where the rich also benefit from welfare; they get the government to pay so they don't have to.

It's messed up.

Yeah, there's a reason you can buy a Slurpee on an EBT card.

He doesn't expect a handout or anything just his employer to pay him above market rates for his work in the form of a "living wage".

I have tons of crappy life experience, Brooklyn born and raised and not the pretty parts. Worked my *** off, first to grad HS, College, Masters, etc etc. The process is not simple but its a ton less work then... well work. Also there are many people there to help you fill forms and point out even more benefits. Walmart got a slap on the wrist for basically running a benefit mill for their employees.

Also gaming the system is work, but benefits are huge (real world) and risk is minimal.

Think of drug dealers, your street level thug is worse off then the welfare mom with 6 kids. A smart couple can, as said before, rake in over 75k a year with wages and benefits, all without a HS diploma and having 2 or more kids, oh and day care paid for while they go to work in walmart or Mcdonald.

@ nausi: if the tax payers carry the load then yes Corporations should pay higher taxes or a minimum wage. Corps get the biggest handouts and make the most money / pay least taxes. Both in total taxes and proportional to their earnings.

To be fair, working retail and fast food blows. But until they fully automate it, somebody has to do it, and it's not just students.

Wrong in one- definitely not a he. :D

Not that you can actually TELL such things on an internet forum.

Re: jumping through hoops for assistance: Well, sadly that depends on the office you go to. A LOT is left up to an individual worker's discretion as to what constitutes "verification" I have known people who fabricated things out of rainbows and *** and managed to lie their way into all manner of things.

Seeker we have to make a LS and call it the LivingWagers. Lol.

Hey, I'm all for abolishing corporate welfare too. Level the playing field. I'm not afraid of 10 dollar milk.

At least I get something tangible back from corporate welfare tho.