2008 Tax Rebate

Submitted by taxman on February 8, 2008 - 11:15am.
The 2008 tax rebates have passed both the House and Senate as of Thursday February 08, 2008. The bill still has to be signed by President Bush but he is expected to sign the legislation. Individuals that earn at least $3000 will be eligible for a minimum of $300 and a maximum of up to $600 based on income. Also, individuals receiving at least $3000 in social security or disabled veteran benefits will receive $300. Couples will be eligible for up to $1200 and then $300 additional for each child.

Well that covers the tax rebates but for all of you that like to think about things just a little consider this. Congress is doing this to stimulate the economy. The belief is that after sending out these rebates people will spend this money and the economy will warm up a bit. The vote in the Senate was 81-16 and in the House it was 380-34. Folks this is an admission by the majority of the U.S Politicians that taxes are bad for our economy.

So why not just reduce the amount of taxes that we pay? The answer is because our politicians are playing class warfare games with the people. They tax and then redistribute the wealth as they deem appropriate so it gives them power. They can sell the underclass that the wealthier people deserve to pay a higher percentage of their earnings in taxes. Allow me to say that is pure bull and this vote proves that those of us that believe that taxes are counter productive to our economy are vindicated.
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
The Cost Just Keep Adding Up
Submitted by taxman on December 26, 2008 - 10:49am.

I stumped about the cost of this stimulus stuff from the time that our politicians started talking about it.  I thought at the time and I think now that the cost of such programs are excessive and that there are better ways to administrate taxpayer dollars.  The start would be to stop confiscating such a large percentage of what wage earners and producers earn.

The cost to the government (that is supposed to be you and I) to not confiscate for the purpose of redistribution is zero while the cost to do the same is very high.  The only logical assumption one can make is that Politicians and political parties do so in order to increase their power by having control of larger sums of money.  On this point I challenge anyone to argue against that conclusion.

The thing that prompted me to comment on this was a recent article that I read concerning the cost of this program.  According to the article the IRS had a 3 billion reduction in collections in 2008 because they diverted their audit staff to help facilitate the rebate check program. So you take a highly trained revenue producing member of your team and place them in a position to distribute money so a politician can purchase a few votes.  Just add that to the cost and keep the ledger ready because it is the cost that keeps on costing.  If you think I am wrong please explain your position.  I want to understand how any thinking person can back this bunch of crap.

Barry S. Thompson, CPA

login or register to post comments