Exactly...Many of today's "upper middle class" are bureaucrats.

silly rabbit, don't you know all those kids are needed to fuel the economy. who will go to the movies Hugh works on if there were no kids.
who will fight the wars
who will be around to stop the Muslims from taking over the country

Life's a b!tch. I went back to college in my late '20s with 2 kids and a full-time job because I didn't want to be stuck in that rut. Now I will pay more in taxes because others don't share my ambition. I will be punished by the govt for my hard work.

Regardless of good or bad, they made the choices. Why should I be forced to supplement it?

you really think that person behind the car rental counter window has the same aptitude, intelligence as you??

I repeat myself... form a corporation ;)

nonsense, Jeff.

from your link


90% of zero tax filers earn less than 30K
35% are less than 24 yrs old
79% are white
most are working full time

To be an engineer, perhaps not. But to be something in America, all you need is a work ethic and ambition. You can easily make $50k+ as an electrician, plumber, bricklayer, truck driver, etc. The opportunities are out there for everyone, you just have to work for it. That is what seperates the haves from the have nots in America.

oops, someone else did before he got a chance. They chose to have children they could not afford, they chose to drop out of school, I could go on and on, but that would not be persuasive to you in the least, or historically has not been.

We are talking about two different things. You are talking about the working poor, EVERYONE else is talking about welfare bunnies, though the demographic is largely the same

again, nonsense. reread the thread.

I'm talking about both...they is a part of our society that does not work and sits back and collects a welfare check, or rolls up to the food pantry on 24's to pick up their free groceries. They is also the part of our society that wakes up at 6am and hauls off to their minimum wage job and works all day and brings in $25K a year. I have respect for one group and disdain for the other. However, I believe that someone from either group that can not afford to have children should not have children.

And we certainly need to reform the welfare, handout, tax break criteria so as not to encourage the cycle repeating. But I have respect for those who make a fraction of what I make and resist going for the handout until they have no other avenue of help.

You know what I WOULD support? A program that helps people that are TRYING to better themselves. Not through handouts, but by connecting them with programs that can help them advance in this world. Someone to point them in the right direction, and give them advice to better their situation.

Those who don't care enough to work for a better future? I have little interest in them. I don't believe society is responsible for supporting ANYONE, except those who physically cannot support themselves. Nobody would starve or freeze, every town has a soup kitchen and homeless shelter. The reason we have so many people milking the system today is they have it too good. Take away that incentive, and I think you'd see a lot more people with jobs.

+1 to Matt.

(And -$20,000 to my taxes while you're at it...)

I agree with that.

you are right, it is nonsense, I was just trying to make sense out of what you are saying, my mistake.

This thread needs to get back on topic. Its degrading to rants about taxes and such. The purpose of it was to draw on the irony of stupid messages that the government sends with its special programs and incentives/disincentives. Another one that comes to my mind was a few years ago, you could buy a business vehicle with a GVW (Gross Vehicle Weight, for our friends in Sweden) of in excess of 5,000 pounds and get an accelerated depreciation rate for tax purposes. The intent of the legislation was to aid farmers, like they need more tax breaks, but the result was that you, as a realtor in Beverly Hills could get a nice tax break for shuttling your clients around looking at houses in your Hummer. Which is a gas hog, un-environmental, polluting, etc.

Does that mean that I am required to support them? Well yes, I guess so...:mad: I realize that I don't have the same mental capacity as many on this board. That has not slowed me up one bit. All through life, I just made up the difference with harder work and an inbred revulsion to handouts. I have done just fine all on my own. Novel idea huh! I especially love when I go to the store and see somebody buying real cherrios in the checkout line with food stamps and I'm there with my generic or storebrand paying with my own money. Kinda ironic.I really like the big fat tattooed broads with multiple screaming dirty kids, buying food with stamps and paying cash for the dog food and cigarettes. Great system we got here.:rolleyes: Once again you libs seem to think that you know so much better than I, how to spend my money.

The system is set up on steps. You reach a certain amount of year salary and the dole goes "poof" ...
Once that happens you are in a worse situation than if you work up to that limit and get the dole too!

So, the system needs to be on a sliding scale which works like a limit function from math. The closer you get to goal (upper lower class/lower middle class) the dole becomes so little that you don't miss it anymore. Basically wheen the people off the system who would have normally gone through shock.

This type of wheening helps those who want to help themselves. I have nothing against this and wouldn't mind my taxes going to such folk.

It's those who live off of food stamps, work seasonally, and use the system to food stamp an easier life with vacations that work the system for all it's worth.

I remember even at 13 years old, why can folks buy smokes and booze but yet live off of food stamps ??? This has never made any sense to me. When I got older I realized that they were smart --- they used the system ;)