The $ 600 per person economic stimulus package

[truedelphi]

Almost everything you need to know abt the President's Economic Stimulus Package -

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?

A. It is money that the Federal Government will send to
taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?

A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?

A. Only a smidgen.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?

A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a
high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?

A. Shut up.

[cliffordu]

1. lol

[Orrex]

2. This joke is in very poor taste IMO

Those fake fireworks and cute lip-synching kids cost money, you know!


By the way--your joke was fine; it was mine that was in very poor taste IMO!

:evilgrin:

[truedelphi]

3. I've chuckled over far worse.

My corny and poor taste sense of humor is legendary (at least inside the walls of this household)

[Rebelscum954]

4. It's income redistribution. Isn't that something you support?

Higher income families do not benefit from the economic stimulus package, (Because they don't get one) so what's happening here is that the group of people who carry somewhere between 39%-50% (or higher) of the tax burden are not receiving a check. The greatest beneficiaries are those in the bottom 50% of the income scale, of which the total tax burden is in the 2-3% area.

IE money is being taken from richer folks and given to poorer folks via handout. Isn't that something you guys, err *cough us guys *cough should support?

Or are you just criticizing it because it's a Bush/GOP plan? If it had been the "Lower/middle income economic assistance package" would you have supported it?

[truedelphi]

5. I wish what you were saying is true

The rich first of all, have many many chances to not pay ANY taxes.

I remember going for a job interview as a personal assistant. The man invited me into his office, where he concluded his talk with some other party via the telephone about putting 12 million dollars into off shore tax free accounts.

So much for your theory of the rich paying so much in taxes!!

Also if you have money you have a great deal of property. In California, if you have owned that property since the mid-seventies, you are paying far less in state taxes than any other group of people does. Remember Prop 13? That was popular because the media sold it as an idea to keep little old ladies from being booted from the house that had been $ 76 thousand dollars in 1977 and then sudenly escalated to $ 200,000 almost over night, in 1978-79. That proposition now allows people to live in huge hourses and pay little in taxes. There should have been a cap on the Prop 13 tax situation - once a house is worth $ 500K, Grabnny should be able to sell it and move into a smaller dwelling or pay taxes on it. Prop 13 allows Disney to pay far less to the state of CA than it ought to be paying on their property holdings. And the same is true of every other California corporation that owned property at the time the Proposition was put into effect.

[Rebelscum954]

6. That's really not true anymore, and the numbers I used were (almost) completely accurate

It's much, much harder for the rich to get by without paying anything these days. While certain super-rich folks (Warren Buffet types) can get by with paying a lower percentage (17% or so in his case) because of the lower capital gains tax, things like the Alternative Minimum Tax now make it a hell of a lot harder to get by with paying nothing.

Also, the numbers I used weren't "my theory", they're official IRS data numbers.

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=133521,00.html

Scroll down to "Individual Income Tax Returns with Positive Adjusted Gross Income (AGI)
Returns Classified by Tax Percentile - Early Release".

There will be two links, both with "1986-2006" listed as the hyperlink. Click the first one. Scroll down until you see "Total income tax share (percentage)" on the left hand column. There you can see the individual tax burdens over time.

In 2006, the top 1% carried 39.89% of the total income tax burden. The top 5% carried 60.14%. The bottom fifty? 2.99%

[A HERETIC I AM]

7. I see a long future of posting for you on this site.

I'm sure you'll fit right in.















.

















Just in case your powers of perception are as flawed as your assumption that you won't get noticed, I am being sarcastic.

[NMDemDist2]

8. while that is all true, none of us would have to bear this burden so heavily

if the corportations paid at least a *little* towards the cost of our country. a tad to help keep those roads and bridges up, a bit of health care so folks could afford 'toys' instead of barely scraping by.

it was a freaking joke.

lighten up.

enjoy your stay :hi:

[truedelphi]

9. As far as I am concerned - the top one percent should be carrying

49 or even 50 percent of the tax burden. These billionaires own far more than they can ever ever use. And quite a few of them have gotten this money through mergers that wiped out jobs, and/or Golden Parachutes, while jettisonning the pension funds off the workers at the firms so bankrupted.

For some reason, I just cannot feel they pay enough!!

And as far as it being so difficult for the uber rich to avoid taxes, I guess you haven't paid much attention to the whistle blower in Lichtenstein who gave up the names and Social Security numbers, bank account numbers of those Americans who had "off-shored" their money in that country's tax free banking havens. That's been a big running story over the last few weeks.

[Hugin]

11. Ahahahaha! You believe the 'offical IRS numbers'!

The same numbers which don't account for all of those UBS tax shelter accounts! (Along with many others which
weren't exposed).

Ahahahaha!


Remind me to come back by, I've got a bridge to sell ya!


:lol:

[A HERETIC I AM]

12. That Rebelscum person got a rubble milkshake sometime late Saturday...

[fasttense]

10. You are wrong Rebelscum954

The only requirement to obtain your measly $300 to $600, is that you file an income tax return for more than $3,000 in income.

"Who Is Eligible?

Individuals must have had $3,000 or more in income from earnings; Social Security benefits, Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI); Veterans disability benefits; Railroad Retirement benefits; OR a combination of any of these benefits and pay in 2007. Individuals (and their spouses and children) must have a valid Social Security number. Individuals cannot get the ESP if they can be claimed as a dependent by another person."

http://www.cbpp.org/stimuluspayment2008/

Many of the uber wealthy file income taxes, especially CEOs who make hundreds of millions of dollars. So they get their $600 too. But I suppose to them $600 is merely a partial payment on tune up on their Lamborghini or a one year old's birthday gift.

Don't worry the Waltons, Gates and Murdochs will all get their $600 too.

[spooky3]

13. S/he was wrong about some things but right that there are income limits

Middle to higher income people (whatever your definition is) didn't get the stimulus money, or got a reduced amount:

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179095,00.html

"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."

So if you are an individual with no kids who made $90000, 5% of the the excess over $75000 ($15000 * .05) = $750, which is more than $600, so you wouldn't get anything.