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

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

[Constitutional Patriot]

"But don't insult my intelligence by trying to call a hand-out a "tax cut."

That's exactly what they are trying to do. They are trying to frame tax cuts in the context of handouts. It suits their evil purposes to do so.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I heard that she would be receiving around $77. Not a great deal, and she didn't earn it... it is a rebate, right? It is returning the tax funds to those who have paid them. It isn't welfare!

[Constitutional Patriot]

"What can be clearer than that? Or is this another exercise in liberal "logic," where up is down, strong is weak, darkness is light, and inequity is fair?"

...and slavery is freedom....(Hayek?)

[glory]

With six children to look after

an annual income of about $15,000



The 26-year-old

Palmer said. "What do you have to do to get on top?"

Well climb off the top of the man(or men) you are making those babies with Kalala(?). That would be a start! How are people raised this stupid that they don't see that they are the own purveyors of their misfortune! 26 and with 6 children. I hardly doubt there has been time for a college education in the midst of all that baby making and I will be very surprised if those were fathered with one person and if they were, if the parents are married to one another. Kalala made the choice to romp in the sack instead of making it so she didn't have to be "working poor". Yes, 15K a year for a family of 7 is pathetic, but who made one mistake after another to make that a reality by the time they hit their mid 20s?

[glory]

I bet she already gets money back above anything she might pay in in the way of earned income credit and head of household. I've seen people pulling in a pretty penny for a couple of kids, let alone 6!

[glory]

Oh and if we add in her section 8, wic, food stamps, head start, etc...I bet she's making closer to 40k a year on the taxpayers backs!

[glory]

With that many kids, don't you worry, she is getting all kinds of assistance already. Her real "income" is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-40k if you factor that in.

[glory]

This stuff irritates me too because I bet I pay for Kalala's kids in head start--We paid out a pretty penny this year in taxes. The sad thing is I need that money for my own children! Our son was just diagnosed on the autism spectrum and the intervention is outrageous and insurance doesn't cover it. I sure would like back a piece of the several thousand dollars we paid in taxes to cover regular speech therapy with a private provider.

[epow]

Or is this another exercise in liberal "logic," where up is down, strong is weak, darkness is light, and inequity is fair?"

Of course it is. That's the only kind of "logic" a liberal is capable of understanding.

For some unaccountable reason, my wife insists on watching NBC Evening News. If I have to hear that simple-minded buffoon Brokaw chant the "no tax cut for the poor" Democrat mantra one more time, I'll have to drive over to Best Buy the same evening and pick up another Sony to replace the one with the smashed-in screen.

[dljordan]

"Kalala" has certainly been a busy girl. I wonder where the daddie(s) is/are? I also have to wonder how much gubmint assistance she's getting for her little nino's. SOMEONE is paying for her children and it ain't her.

[Ignatz]

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.

...from procreating with deadbeats like an animal and producing children she cannot afford, is what I hope she means.

Actually, Kalala,it is we taxpayers who needed the break from supporting the likes of people whose irresponsible sexual choices, and their failure to hold themselves accountable for their own circumstance, have led to their own poor quality of life. And THAT, as paltry as it is, is what we got.

[glory]

super, I think it depends on the number of dependents you have as well. For example food stamps(just off the top of my head) is somewhere around 24k for a family of 4--so this woman qualifies for quite a bit in food stamps. As for section 8, some of my hubbies neices and nephews who are just as irresponsible as this young lady are getting it and they all work. One couple is even married, but most make out on it because they live with the father(of one of their kids) but claim they are single mothers so most are making in the neighborhood really of 35-40k and then get all of the handouts too because the other income isn't reported. I'm telling you, this thing is a racket, it really is.

[glory]

Holy smokes--I took the EITC and added in the other 400.00 if she received it, plus medicaid for the kids insurance, head start, food stamps, wic, section 8 and this lady makes out the equivalent to between 30k-40k a year! She is making as much as many middle class families who actually have to earn money and pay taxes. In fact, many of them probably end up with less after taxes. This type of crap probably makes tired people just want to throw in the towel.

[Constitutional Patriot]

"I'll have to drive over to Best Buy the same evening and pick up another Sony to replace the one with the smashed-in screen."

I was blessed with a wife who is as conservative as I am. I can remember having to pull her off the Sony during the 2000 election recounts....that is...when she wasn't pulling me off the Sony...

[optimistically_conservative]

Does anyone have specifics?

There are a number of links available for welfare research at http://www.financeprojectinfo.org/win/dataportal.asp

IMHO, the debate is not whether the income tax of the bottom 50% of those that even bother to file a tax return is too high. It's not. According to the IRS, the tax burden is more progressive now than it was under Clinton. (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/01in03at.xls)

The debate is whether there needs to be additional transfers of income from half of us to the other half through mandated government programs like EITC and others. The debate is what happens when 50% or more of us are dependant on the government taking from those that study, sacrifice and strive to finance others' retirement, disabilities, poor choices and desired quality of life.

For example, try the link (http://www.connect2jobs.org/connect2cash/) and type in hourly wages of $5.15, $7.20, and $12.80 for 40 hour weeks, 52 weeks a year and either One or Two+ children.

The bottom line is that the current structures of wealth redistrubution between classes and generations will go bankrupt because of demographics in a few decades. Either we start having serious discussions without the polemic partisanship, or we pay a much higher price with fewer options later.

The actual Center on Budget and Policy Priorities report is at http://www.cbpp.org/.