Quote:
|
Break for higher income families: The bill includes a one-year provision to protect middle- and upper-middle-income families from having to pay the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT was intended primarily for high-income taxpayers but has in recent years threatened to engulf those lower down the income scale. Estimated cost: $470 billion.
|
Stimulus measures that may help your wallet - Feb. 12, 2009
I thought that this was attempted before, and it hasn't turned out too good in the past. It has been done a few times in the past 8 years, with the only thing it accomplishes is a higher national debt. And with the large majority of democrats in the congress, I thought that things might change. And while it may make things better in the short run, we will have serious problems if the value of the dollar collapses because Asia and the Middle East can't buy up American debt because we are printing more money than we are actually producing in goods.
And why are the Republicans not behind this bill 100%. They couldn't get rid of this tax that taxes a larger percent of republicans than democrats during their time in power. And there were a bunch of attack ads about redistributing wealth to the poor and non-working (who would spend it, mostly on paying CC bills, food, rent, etc.),, and how if Obama won that taxes on the people making more than $250,000 would go through the roof. Yet this is going to give back the tax money to people making $150,000-$400,000 (or something like that). You can argue whether the AMT is good or bad all day based on where people live and cost of living, inflation, etc. But wouldn't it be better to put 60% of the stimulus toward paying off the national debt instead before getting rid of the tax money? And before the government is going to spend a lot of money?
It's true that lower and middle-income workers are getting $400, but still why don't they just modify the income tax rates instead? Or build large infrastructure projects that a bunch of individuals wouldn't be able to do. Like build a bunch of wind power sites in the midwest, and solar sites in the southwest, pay money for banks to repair damaged homes (and pass laws to send people to jail if they trash a place after it gets foreclosed on), etc. We always say that individuals know better what to spend the money they earn for themselves, but if the government can build bigger projects that the people own, I would rather have that. I bet most of this tax rebate will get spent the same way as before, on HDTVs made in Taiwan, cell phones made in Korea, and at Wal-Mart on plastic things made in China.
Quote:
Making Work Pay Credit: The bill provides a $400 credit per worker and a $800 credit per dual-earner couple. The full credit would be paid to people making $75,000 or less ($150,000 per dual-earner couple). A partial credit would be paid to those making above those amounts but no more than $100,000 ($200,000 for couples).
For most working individuals, the credit will be paid over time at roughly $15 per period, assuming 26 pay periods in a year. Estimated cost: $116 billion.
|
Throw in the auto sales tax rebate and 75%+ of this is going towards tax cuts. Yet it is being touted as a spending bill?