Lower Tax Refunds

[countryroads89]

revenue from tax collections hit an all time high in 2018 and expected to be higher in 2019. we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.

Your first statement is misleading. Here are the annual revenues for taxes.
2014 = 3.02 trillion
2015 = 3.25
2016 = 3.27
2017 = 3.32
2018 = 3.34 (estimated)
2019 = 3.42 (estimated)
Obviously 2018 and 2019 are estimates, not actual. So for the last several years, revenue has been flat.

We do need to cut back on the spending. The biggest slice of the spending pie is on military/defense. We should start there. One of the other big areas is healthcare. Obama made an attempt to tackle that problem with very little to no support from the GOP. I would like to see the Democrats take the Senate and the WH so they can address the healthcare problem in this country.

 

[i am herdman]

Does that mean you're not going to work for half as much as you do, you know, so you can get a bigger tax refund?

Sure. So why not make it $20 bucks and hour or maybe even $25?

 

[marshallisqbu]

Have more withheld if you want a bigger refund, dumbass

Seems pretty simple. Why would you want to give the money to the government early though?
Keep it at earn some interest. I purposely pay as little as I can through the year so I can make money off of it instead of the government doing so.

 

[WV-FAN]

Here's the point. In the previous 4 years to cheetos, the federal tax revenue increased an average of .205 trillion per year. With the prediction of 2019 included cheetos average will be .05 trillion.

no, dumbass, that's what you're trying to change the point to, if only to be argumentative. the point is, we're in this bucket of shit because of over spending, not because of revenue collections. hell, old wild bill and gw bush are the only presidents in the last 50 years to not run a deficit (i attribute gw's first year of presidency running a surplus to clinton, he ran a deficit each year thereafter).

and, you like facts, right? your hero ran deficits three times as high as his predecessor's highest deficit, and no lower than 5 times as high as every single president prior to that.

 

[WV-FAN]

Your first statement is misleading. Here are the annual revenues for taxes.
2014 = 3.02 trillion
2015 = 3.25
2016 = 3.27
2017 = 3.32
2018 = 3.34 (estimated)
2019 = 3.42 (estimated)
Obviously 2018 and 2019 are estimates, not actual. So for the last several years, revenue has been flat.

We do need to cut back on the spending. The biggest slice of the spending pie is on military/defense. We should start there. One of the other big areas is healthcare. Obama made an attempt to tackle that problem with very little to no support from the GOP. I would like to see the Democrats take the Senate and the WH so they can address the healthcare problem in this country.

how is the statement misleading? it's a fact.

obama made an attempt to cut spending on healthcare? lol, that's like the fail of the century if that's what he was trying to do.

wtf are you doing getting involved in a discussion about finance, mr. debt v deficit?

 

[Dorrej]

Seems pretty simple. Why would you want to give the money to the government early though?
Keep it at earn some interest. I purposely pay as little as I can through the year so I can make money off of it instead of the government doing so.

Everyone that is financially literate has that same view. The people who like getting large refunds for vacations and other large purchases are the same people that live paycheck to paycheck and have inadequate retirement savings.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

revenue from tax collections hit an all time high in 2018 and expected to be higher in 2019. we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.

We could have all time low revenue and have a balanced budget. That does not mean our needs are being met.

I know revenues increased to new records the last six years of Obama's terms. I wonder why....maybe our population is growing?

We know we will not cut SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. That's over half the budget. 8% is paying debt. The rest is split between the military and then the rest of stuff. I'll believe we have a spending problem when people are serious about cutting military spending...and I am not a big advocate of that. We have a "fvck it, let's just run up the debt and sell tax cuts at the same time" problem.

 

[extragreen]

Sure.

So, you're not willing to work for half as much as you are now, but you want other people to work for half as much. That's the normal conservative view which is...."we are worth more money, but no one else is."

So why not make it $20 bucks and hour or maybe even $25?

I was being quite reasonable, but I'm fine with it.

 

[extragreen]

the point is, we're in this bucket of shit because of over spending, not because of revenue collections.

Then let's have another cheetos tax cut, and let's triple it this time, and you can still blame spending for the national debt.

 

[i am herdman]

So, you're not willing to work for half as much as you are now, but you want other people to work for half as much. That's the normal conservative view which is...."we are worth more money, but no one else is."



I was being quite reasonable, but I'm fine with it.

$35 or $40?

 

[extragreen]

$35 or $40?

Wouldn't need to raise the minimum wage if everybody else takes a 50% wage cut. You in?

 

[i am herdman]

Wouldn't need to raise the minimum wage if everybody else takes a 50% wage cut. You in?

It is all relative. They would still be making minimum wage.

 

[mlblack16.]

Wouldn't need to raise the minimum wage if everybody else takes a 50% wage cut. You in?

Yeah, we all know you will be the first to bitch and the last to give.

You are aware of your board name...GREED?

 

[extragreen]

It is all relative. They would still be making minimum wage.

Of course, but their purchasing power would increase a lot. You in?

 

[big_country90]

Of course, but their purchasing power would increase a lot. You in?

What was minimum wage 50 years ago? Was purchasing power back then higher or lower?

 

[extragreen]

You are aware of your board name...GREED?

Yes, a lie falsely obtained and warmly adopted by the compassionate conservatives on this board who are against paying a minimum wage that would lift millions out of poverty level.

 

[wvkeeper(HN)]

 

[raleighherdfan]

Wouldn't need to raise the minimum wage if everybody else takes a 50% wage cut. You in?

So you think crashing incomes, wages and salaries would improve the financial lives of minimum wage workers??

 

[i am herdman]

Of course, but their purchasing power would increase a lot. You in?

You really think so? Cmon seriouslY?

 

[i am herdman]

So you think crashing incomes, wages and salaries would improve the financial lives of minimum wage workers??

I think he does.

 

[big_country90]

Extragreed, will you please answer my question?

 

[extragreen]

What was minimum wage 50 years ago? Was purchasing power back then higher or lower?

Hey, idiot, the purchasing power of minimum wage workers 50 years ago is equivalent to $11.29 now.

 

[extragreen]

So you think crashing incomes, wages and salaries would improve the financial lives of minimum wage workers??

If everyone that now makes more than twice the minimum wage had their wages cut in half and minimum wage workers made the same as they do now, of course it would improve their situation. Prices would come down and their purchasing power would go up.

 

[big_country90]

Hey, idiot, the purchasing power of minimum wage workers 50 years ago is equivalent to $11.29 now.

Great. You know how to use the internet. So now explain to me why purchasing power as decreased even though there have been multiple minimum wage increases since then. By your logic, that shouldn't have happened.

 

[countryroads89]

Great. You know how to use the internet. So now explain to me why purchasing power as decreased even though there have been multiple minimum wage increases since then. By your logic, that shouldn't have happened.

Are you f’ucking serious? His post made it self explanatory.

 

[extragreen]

Great. You know how to use the internet. So now explain to me why purchasing power as decreased even though there have been multiple minimum wage increases since then. By your logic, that shouldn't have happened.

Because the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation.

 

[big_country90]

Are you f’ucking serious? His post made it self explanatory.

No, it didn't. He claimed that raising the minimum wage would increase people's purchasing power, and I provided him with a stat that proved the opposite. The minimum wage was lower and the spending power was higher in 50 years and go than it is today. So why would raising it again result in greater purchasing power? Actually, since 1984, purchasing power has continually decreased, despite multiple minimum wage increases.

Besides, anybody with a base level knowledge of economics knows what happens to the price of goods and services when the government arbitrarily raises minimum wage. This is not difficult.

 

[big_country90]

Because the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation.

Adjusted for inflation, it has still dropped.

$3.35 in 1984
$2.33 in 1994
$1.84 in 2004
$1.46 in 2014

Anything else you want me to disprove?

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

View embedded media

This is anecdotal, but in my experience the first people to file are the ones expecting a big refund.

They would then buy a beater car for the year, take a month off work, go on a bender, etc.

 

[extragreen]

Besides, anybody with a base level knowledge of economics knows what happens to the price of goods and services when the government arbitrarily raises minimum wage. This is not difficult.

It must be difficult for you, since you ask stupid questions and give stupid answers. If the minimum wage is increased faster than inflation rates, the purchasing power of minimum wage earners would increase. But are you one of those who thinks that raising the minimum wage to $15 would create $13 Happy Meals?

 

[i am herdman]

If everyone that now makes more than twice the minimum wage had their wages cut in half and minimum wage workers made the same as they do now, of course it would improve their situation. Prices would come down and their purchasing power would go up.

Stupid analogy. Minimum wage is a forced mandate by the govt. Most business pay people what they are worth.

 

[Bankerreturns]

Why is a man who worked his whole life, but can't afford to provide he and his wife with health insurance, allowed to post in a thread about finances and purchasing power?

 

[extragreen]

Why is a man who worked his whole life, but can't afford to provide he and his wife with health insurance, allowed to post in a thread about finances and purchasing power?

In other words you don't have any thing worthwhile to contribute, unless you want to make some more ridiculous claims. Those are amusing.

 

[Bankerreturns]

No, my words were clear. You worked your whole life, did not properly prepare for retirement, and now have to count on others to take care of you and your wife. That means that you failed financially at life, either though intentional acts or ignorance, but failed none the less.

 

[extragreen]

No, my words were clear. You worked your whole life, did not properly prepare for retirement, and now have to count on others to take care of you and your wife. That means that you failed financially at life, either though intentional acts or ignorance, but failed none the less.

Better that, than a liar like you whose profession got bailed out by our tax money while taking people's houses.

 

[mlblack16.]

But are you one of those who thinks that raising the minimum wage to $15 would create $13 Happy Meals?

1) No one on here has provided that specific analogy and was serious. There will be a substantial increase in the product being sold. It may not be a $13 Happy Meal, but it sure as hell could be the cost of everything will double.

2) The fact that you believe forcing a business to now pay a 75% increase in labor, and it won't do anything to recoup that loss (the only thing it can do is increase the price of its product, since it now costs way more to produce) shows you're either ignorant or naive from growing up OW and never left the tri-state area. That cost increase is based on minimum wage for Ohio, BTW (before you try arguing)

3) The ONLY way a corporation will take the loss in revenue is if the Government somehow forced it to. I know in the pretend Liberal world you live in, that will happen, but again you and reality do not seem to have met.

 

[raleighherdfan]

If everyone that now makes more than twice the minimum wage had their wages cut in half and minimum wage workers made the same as they do now, of course it would improve their situation. Prices would come down and their purchasing power would go up.

^^^This is economic ignorance at it absolute finest^^^

 

[WV-FAN]

If everyone that now makes more than twice the minimum wage had their wages cut in half and minimum wage workers made the same as they do now, of course it would improve their situation. Prices would come down and their purchasing power would go up.

^^^This is economic ignorance at it absolute finest^^^

he believes that as wages are reduced that prices would come down yet doesn't believe that if minimum wage is increased, prices would not increase.

wtf am i missing here? a quick google search shows the opposite of the latter actually occurring presently across america in states where the min wage has been increased.

he's gotta be a troll, nobody can be that stupid.

 

[extragreen]

LIE #1

1) No one on here has provided that specific analogy and was serious. There will be a substantial increase in the product being sold. It may not be a $13 Happy Meal, but it sure as hell could be the cost of everything will double.

That specific statement was made on this board, and yeah, he was serious. And no, the cost of everything wouldn't double, moron.

LIE #2

2) The fact that you believe forcing a business to now pay a 75% increase in labor, and it won't do anything to recoup that loss (the only thing it can do is increase the price of its product, since it now costs way more to produce) shows you're either ignorant or naive from growing up OW and never left the tri-state area. That cost increase is based on minimum wage for Ohio, BTW (before you try arguing)

I have NEVER argued it wouldn't increase the price of products. I KNOW that it will in most cases. It just wouldn't do so anywhere close to what you cons have stated. I KNOW what it would cost my particular business if I had to raise my prices to take care of the increase if my employees had made minimum wage and I had to compensate for an extra $7.75 per hour. How much do you think I'd have to raise the cost of a $15,000 kitchen to compensate for that type of raise?

LIE #3

3) The ONLY way a corporation will take the loss in revenue is if the Government somehow forced it to. I know in the pretend Liberal world you live in, that will happen, but again you and reality do not seem to have met.

You just can't stop lying.

 

[mlblack16.]

LIE #1


That specific statement was made on this board, and yeah, he was serious. And no, the cost of everything wouldn't double, moron.

LIE #2


I have NEVER argued it wouldn't increase the price of products. I KNOW that it will in most cases. It just wouldn't do so anywhere close to what you cons have stated. I KNOW what it would cost my particular business if I had to raise my prices to take care of the increase if my employees had made minimum wage and I had to compensate for an extra $7.75 per hour. How much do you think I'd have to raise the cost of a $15,000 kitchen to compensate for that type of raise?

LIE #3


You just can't stop lying.

Comparing the impact of increasing wages for the small crew at your failed cabinet business to that in fast food chains is apples to oranges. Either you know this and playing dumb or you truly are stupid.