On the 47% that don't pay taxes:

[Skjellyfetti]

You might have heard, if you've been watching cable news at any point in the last 72 hours, that 47 percent of Americans will not owe income taxes this year. Conservatives argue that this is just one more way the economy is slipping into a social-egalitarian morass in which more Americans live off the productivity of the few elite who are actually busy putting the capital into capitalism. But if the 47% figure is a monster, it is also a monster that Republicans have helped to create.

To understand why that's true, it's important to understand why half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes. Most of them receive generous tax credits -- the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), child-care credits, subsidies for college and savings -- worth more than their tax burden, according to the Tax Policy Center.

When Republicans rail against the 47% figure, they're railing against features like the EITC. What is the EITC? It's a refundable tax credit that rewards work and offsets the burden of payroll taxes for low-income payers by returning a fixed percent of income up to a maximum credit based on factors like number of children. But the EITC is a Republican creation. It was enacted in 1975 under President Ford (a Republican), and expanded numerous times over the last 35 years by Republicans. President Reagan (Republican) expanded it in 1984 and 1986. President Bush (Republican) expanded it against in 1990 and added supplemental credit for families with more than one child. President Clinton expanded it for childless claimants in 1993. President Bush (Republican) expanded it again in 2001.

Today this $50 billion program is one of the largest component of our welfare system. But rather than appear on the budget (or in the news) as a spending program, it appears as tax relief, and the headline we see is "How the Other Half Lives: No Federal Taxes!" Do you see what's happening here? Both moderate and conservative pols are reluctant to announce new spending programs for fear they will look like socialists. So they execute spending programs through the tax system. As a result, more and more Americans appear to be paying no federal taxes!

This is not to say that Republicans were wrong to expand tax credits for low- and middle-income families. On the contrary, wages have grown painfully slowly for many Americans since the 1970s while payroll taxes have crept higher. The EITC is an easy way to mitigate the burden of payroll taxes for low-income Americans while rewarding work. Rather, Republicans are in the strange position of having eroded the tax base with credits for decades, and now they're complaining that not enough Americans are paying taxes.

America's political/entertainment climate has scared politicians from announcing welfare programs as spending programs. So instead, many of them appear in the budget as tax relief. One inevitable result is that fewer Americans today appear to be paying taxes.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... xes/38919/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dbackjon]

Very good article, shows you have to look beyond the numbers.

[AZGrizFan]

So what. I could give a rats ass WHO invented this crap. Being able to receive more BACK in a refund than you actually paid in in the first place is fucking ludicrous.

[dbackjon]

So what. I could give a rats ass WHO invented this crap. Being able to receive more BACK in a refund than you actually paid in in the first place is fucking ludicrous.

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

[AZGrizFan]

So what. I could give a rats ass WHO invented this crap. Being able to receive more BACK in a refund than you actually paid in in the first place is fucking ludicrous.

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

I never said that. I said receiving MORE back than you actually PAID in is stealing. Plain and simple.

It's akin to PAYING farmers to NOT farm their land. I mean, no fucking country in their right MIND would do such a thing.

[BDKJMU]

So what. I could give a rats ass WHO invented this crap. Being able to receive more BACK in a refund than you actually paid in in the first place is **** ludicrous.

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

Take away welfare too and they won't have that excuse either..

[AZGrizFan]

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

Take away welfare too and they won't have that excuse either..

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Take away welfare too and they won't have that excuse either..

The EITC is welfare in its own way and is another tool for wealth redistribution.

[houndawg]

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

Take away welfare too and they won't have that excuse either..

That would be great if there were enough jobs to go around.

[Baldy]

Take away welfare too and they won't have that excuse either..

That would be great if there were enough jobs to go around.

Didn't make a difference when there were plenty of jobs to go around.

[Skjellyfetti]

We need welfare. There is abuse and excess... but, eliminating all welfare is not an option, imo.

[houndawg]

That would be great if there were enough jobs to go around.

Didn't make a difference when there were plenty of jobs to go around.

When was that?

[OL FU]

So what. I could give a rats ass WHO invented this crap. Being able to receive more BACK in a refund than you actually paid in in the first place is **** ludicrous.

So you don't support the EIC, which takes away the "I can make as much on welfare" excuse, by rewarding those that get jobs and actually WORK.

EIC is welfare without verification. The efficiency argument in favor of EIC disappears once the realization that the IRS does not check the factual accuracy of most tax returns in this income bracket for political and practical reasons.

I don't begrudge legitimate recipients of EIC (because I don't have a problem with us helping those that truly need it), but this program is designed to cheat the government and it happens on a tremendous percentage of returns.

The tax code should be used to raise revenue, not to hand out welfare checks.

[OL FU]

We need welfare. There is abuse and excess... but, eliminating all welfare is not an option, imo.

I agree, but it needs to be done through a welfare monitoring system with all of its problems. Welfare agents verified the condition of a household. The IRS basically accepts a tax returns and says here is your money. Our tax system makes criminals out of way too many Americans from the richest to the poorest.

[Benne]

We need welfare. There is abuse and excess... but, eliminating all welfare is not an option, imo.

I agree, but it needs to be done through a welfare monitoring system with all of its problems. Welfare agents verified the condition of a household. The IRS basically accepts a tax returns and says here is your money. Our tax system makes criminals out of way too many Americans from the richest to the poorest.

Hey, that's a good way to create jobs.

[OL FU]

Efficient delivery of welfare was the reason given for the EIC. The real reason is that calling something a tax refund or rebate is more politically acceptable than calling something welfare.

[Col Hogan]

The tax code should be used to raise revenue, not to hand out welfare checks.

Man, it's never been stated as simply, but accurately, as this......

[Baldy]

Didn't make a difference when there were plenty of jobs to go around.

When was that?

Since +/-5% is known as "full employment" (NAIRU), about half of the time over the last 10 years.

However, Keynesians wrongly believe in literal unemployment (the foolish belief that 0% unemployment is attainable), so of course you won't think so....

[andy7171]

JFC SKJELLY! That girl on the ball is distracting!

[death dealer]

JFC SKJELLY! That girl on the ball is distracting!

I KNOW!!! I have a hard time reading any of his posts coherently. I keep losing my place.

[death dealer]

I said this in the other thread. I don't have a problem paying taxes. I don't probably pay as much as I could and would be willing to pay a little more than I do now if it helps balance the budget. I just simply have a problem with the idea that some people pay nothing and some even get more back than they paid in. It's not a democrat or republican problem. It's a U.S. problem. Everyone should have some skin in the game. If you don't, you don't get to play.

[Skjellyfetti]

JFC SKJELLY! That girl on the ball is distracting!

I KNOW!!! I have a hard time reading any of his posts coherently. I keep losing my place.

I could replace it with my old Dylan avatar.

[Benne]

I KNOW!!! I have a hard time reading any of his posts coherently. I keep losing my place.

I could replace it with my old Dylan avatar.

No. We're good here.

[AZGrizFan]

JFC SKJELLY! That girl on the ball is distracting!

I KNOW!!! I have a hard time reading any of his posts coherently. I keep losing my place.

That's not the girl on the ball. His posts AREN'T coherent.

[death dealer]

I KNOW!!! I have a hard time reading any of his posts coherently. I keep losing my place.

I could replace it with my old Dylan avatar.

NOOOOO!!!!!!!!! It's all good man.