MISSING OUT: Poor families face the reality of no tax rebate

The Grand Rapids Press ^ | Wednesday, June 04, 2003 | Ted Roelofs

[FourPeas]

What is so hard to understand about a tax cut cutting the taxes of those who pay them not being a hand-out to those who don't pay taxes?

[basil]

Isn't that the truth! The dims will harp on this forever. They are so ingenius about things like this. Unless people really look into the truth of the matter, the dims will persuade them that the Republicans are once more starving the chilrun!

[HassanBenSobar]

This is so dumb. How much does someone with 6 dependents and 15k in income pay in the first place? With all the deductions, exemptions and credits, it's got to be really miniscule.

[fightinJAG]

This is just the latest attempt by the Rats to impose their Alternate Reality.

A poor person who does not pay taxes and who "needs a break" is looking for welfare, not a tax cut.

If the Rats want to advocate increasing welfare payments, have it, you rodents. But don't insult my intelligence by trying to call a hand-out a "tax cut."

Puh-leeze.

[Coffee_drinker]

She pays ZERO

[TheDon]

The Demorats voted down the tax credit for those who don't pay taxes.

[highpockets]

I believe this womens problem is not tax cuts, it is that her men have not been cut.

[CHICAGOFARMER]

Here is the deal>

26 years old, and six kids.

Sounds like the sperm donor don't live with the kids. The sperm donor does not work but his #$@@$% works.

Sounds to me like the lady needs to take two aspirin each night for birth control. Two aspirins held tightly between her knees.

[verity]

26 year-old with six kids. Typical profile!

[evaporation-plus]

I'm still trying to figure out why I won't get a credit for
my 17 year old son....

[Centurion2000]

With six children to look after, a broken-down van and an annual income of about $15,000, Kalala Palmer figures she could use a break.

She's GOT a break ... she pays NO INCOME TAX.

[Nat Turner]

With six children to look after, a broken-down van and an annual income of about $15,000, Kalala Palmer figures she could use a break.

Well maybe if she wasnt forced to attend a govt school she would have been smart enough not to have 6 kids or try to raise them on 15,000$ a year. Then she would realize there is no free lunch and become a producer instead of a consumer of other peoples labor

[supercat]

With six children to look after, a broken-down van and an annual income of about $15,000, Kalala Palmer figures she could use a break.

Out of curiosity, how does her take-home pay compare with what she'd get on welfare?

[Steven W.]

how about "poor families face the reality of having no taxes"!

[FITZ]

With six children to look after, a broken-down van and an annual income of about $15,000

Maybe her husband could try and find a higher paying job, or she could quit being a stay-at-home mother. If she's divorced, then maybe she ought to have the father(s) pay a little more in child support. Having 6 kids is a good enough decision as long as you can afford to provide for those kids ---why expect to steal from others and their own kids?

[ErnBatavia]

This reminds me of Larry Elder on his radio program, laying out quite plainly....certain "strata" (to be PC) have a whole different 'sense of logic'. I remember him saying this in reference to the O.J. Simpson jury.

[Steely Tom]

The solution to the problem of people "missing out" is simple: make the tax cuts permanent, so that when the people who are now "missing out" finally make it into the upper-income levels, President Bush's tax cut is still there to benefit them as well.

There ya go. Didn't even break a sweat.

(steely)

[spodefly]

Just so I am sure I understand the purpose of the Federal Government, as I would understand it from this article: the purpose is to take money from productive people and give that money to semi-literate baby-making machines. 6 kids, no mention of a husband, a lack of education and marginal job skills, and the Federal Government is supposed to come to her rescue. Zero personal responsibility ... just crank out the kids and wait on the checks to roll in.

The tone and slant of this article expertly panders to the Lowest Common Denominator mentality.

[Xenalyte]

Husband? Stop, you're killin' me!

[wingnuts'nbolts]

Back to WELFARE that Clinton lowered. That is what a child contribution is more money for having more children. We have been here before.