and also invite those that are interested to read the link to Lindsey’s proposal and comment.

But you’re probably right, it’s not necessary to call it welfare. Although, that too, is just another form of socialism.

If we truly cared about the lower middle-class taxpayer, we’d cut corporate and business taxes to the point said taxpayer would would rise in level of income and could enjoy paying federal income tax once again.

That’s how we ensure “everybody pays their fair share.”

I believe, and could be wrong, that FICA/SS taxes occur as a percentage of the income earned. With this in mind a disproportionate cut for low wage earners would equate to a form of welfare regardless of the work done by the recipients.

If i had a job paying me $150000.00 annually I would end up paying a much greater amount in FICA/SS then someone earning $30,000.00. But because of my ability to earn this larger amount of money I would be excluded from reaping in the benefits of the “tax cut”. This despite the fact that as a higher wage earning consumer I would in a far better position to stimulate the economy with that money as opposed to the lower wage earner, who realistically would be paying off debt or simply saving the money.

Full disclosure, I only make about $60,000.00 annually.

Some people don’t play FICA either… with programs like EITC and other refundable credits, some people pay a personal income tax of much less than $0. You have to subtract the money they get from that from their FICA payroll deductions.

I’m fine with a payroll tax cut, but that would leave even more people paying nothing at all, or even worse, a negative tax rate. I don’t think taking people off the rolls entirely is healthy long-term. Everyone should have some skin in the game. I’d prefer a regular income tax cut. But either is vastly superior to welfare… I mean stimulus… checks.

One of Reagan’s biggest mistakes was the EITC. If you want to reduce the burden of payroll taxes, then cut payroll taxes. Of course then you would also have to cut the benefits payed by payroll taxes. With no benefit cut, the EITC is simply welfare disguised as a tax cut. This may have worked well and dandy for Reagan, but since then the Democrats have caught on to the scheme and claimed it for their own. Now Obama can hand out welfare checks through the IRS and claim it is a tax cut.

to label welfare checks as tax cuts.

…then it’s welfare.

That doesn’t include middle income families, but people who are not working (or who earn so little that they pay little or no taxes) would then be receiving a “welfare” check, not a tax refund.

A couple of years ago, my daughter, who is a single mother and at that time earned about $35K annually, not only got every penny she paid in taxes back, but additional money to boot! Between the earned income credit and this child credit and that child deduction, she was already getting welfare. IMHO. Now, she was living very comfortably, and could have easily done without the extra refund money. So no, they shouldn’t get any “tax rebate.”

But, you’re correct GC, the left will use it against us politicaly.

A GOP Congressman from Texas has suggested a 2 month tax holiday to stimulate the economy. This would give the working men and women more money to keep from their payroll check sooner rather than later. It is wrong for Ds to label stimulus money as a tax cut. Having said that, I also think it is wrong for the Rs to oppose a temporary suspension of FICA to help stimulate the economy.

This plan also has an additional benefit of educating people about how much money the Fed. Gov’t takes from them monthly.

---

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots

the economy – and that is through tax cuts. Stimulus checks are generally saved, or wasted – and who’s to say that all of that money won’t be spent on foreign goods?

I say, that if they really want to stimulate the economy – there are three things they can do:

• Cut the corporate tax rate on all corporations to zero, for a period of at least a year (preferably FOREVER). It should become a major educational point that corporations don’t pay taxes – their customers do. This will draw capital into the country in Billions, perhaps Trillions.
• Cut the Capitol Gains taxes to zero, for a period of at least a year (preferably FOREVER). Once again, money will go where it can return the best. You can’t get much better in this world than to start your profit with the first cent!
• Anyone in the armed services should not have to pay one dime in taxes. For each year that a service person serves they should have an additional year that they do not have to pay taxes after they leave the military. (It just seems to be a really great incentive, while also cutting down on a strange circle: we pay the government to pay our soldiers . . . who pay the government to . . . )

Don’t know if these would truly help or not – just seems that they would. I am not a financial guru (but, hey, it doesn’t seem like any of the bozo’s leading this circus are either.)

Who’s calling what plan ‘welfare’ now?

Does this refer to EITC or what?

P.S. When you use terms like ‘middle class’ you feed into socialism. America has no “classes.” That’s a fiction of the far left, who want to turn Americans of different wealth levels against each other.