Anyone have thoughts on this?

[jainen]

>>At last, a real answer.... Hillary <<

I thank you for your opinion of Mrs. Clinton's position, kc, but the fact is that legislation actually passed over the last six years proves that every GOP candidate is just as committed to EIC as any Democrat. The reason I suggest tightening eligibility is because the Republicans have loosened it.

In tying benefits to W-2 wages, I mean to cut out Schedule C. Self-employment is almost never a viable option for people with minimal job skills. They need the support of a regular schedule, performance evaluations, training, and so on. I would have the tax benefit reflect such opportunities.

[kcjenkins]

I can see how you may think she was implying that some people should be stuck in the 'class' in which they were born like in the Feudal system. However, I see no such implication. I have known a lot of people who have moved up from poverty. Some of the top administrators in the Dallas School system were the children of migrant workers. I believe the current superintendent came from such a family. Some others who grew up when I was growing up also came from Mexican descent--which usually meant discrimination by Anglos, yet managed to became highly successful: one becoming a four-star general to whom Colin Powell and Norman Schwartzkopf once reported to and who they mention favorably in their autobiography. The general's brother became President of Texas Tech and later Secretary of Education.

When I worked at ARCO I once attended a meeting of all Management employees in which we were asked to tell a little about ourselves. All but one of us (the only female in the group) mentioned that we had grown up in a low-income family.

I agree, Atticus. Contrary to what a lot of people seem to assume about me, my husband and I worked our way through college, at the University of Mississippi, both working 40 hours a week while taking a full load in college at the same time. And we had three kids at the time. It was hard, and we did borrow as much as possible in student loans, and ate a lot of rice and beans, but we did it. We did not have it easy, but unlike LBB thinks, we are living proof that being poor does NOT mean you are stuck in that 'class'. One reason I got an accounting degree was that was what my husband wanted to take, and we could not afford to buy books for two different majors, so we both majored in Accounting, and he took MWF classes and I took T-Th and night classes, and we traded off baby-sitting and job hours.

Believe me, when I was teaching, I had little sympathy for those who complained of being overworked taking 12 or 15 hours per semester, because I took 18 hours every semester except the one when I took 21. And finished my MBA in two semesters and one summer. But I had to, because we could not afford to stretch it out more than we had to. And it was worth it.

My grade point was high enough to get into the Accounting Honorary Fraternity Beta Alpha Psi, and also Phi Gamma Nu. I am living proof that if you want something enough to really work for it, you can do almost anything. Teachers who recognized that I wanted to learn and was willing to work hard to achieve helped me by hiring me, for example, for their work-study jobs. We could not afford a car, although we did have an ancient delivery van that we used to go shopping for groceries, and it only caught fire about once a month or so. We always carried a jug of water just in case, and taught the kids to jump out and get away from the van when it did that!

[kcjenkins]

The reason I suggest tightening eligibility is because the Republicans have loosened it.

In tying benefits to W-2 wages, I mean to cut out Schedule C. Self-employment is almost never a viable option for people with minimal job skills. They need the support of a regular schedule, performance evaluations, training, and so on. I would have the tax benefit reflect such opportunities.

Well, I don't see that as you do, because I don't see a problem with someone getting the EIC while he/she starts a business. I don't think that everyone who gets EIC has low job skills, I see clients with good skills who are trying to build up their own business, often after being laid off a job, or having finally decided to take the plunge and create something that will give them more than just a pay-check that can stop at any time. I don't mind them getting the help, as long as the business is legit, because over time, they will pay much more if they succeed. They deserve the chance as much as the high school dropout who makes minimum wage because they did not bother to learn good grammar, or spelling, or even simple math, and can not even make change without help.

[bertrans]

As usual, you neglected an important part of the statement. So are you stating that Americans who work full time should live in poverty? Are you saying that only the members of the lucky sperm club are entitled to a living wage? Your statements sound as if you belong back in the feudal system. It sounds like you are saying if you are born into a family that encourages and supports you to have minimally an undergraduate degree you are worthy. If you are born into a family that's poverty ridden, you are just going to stay that way. I thought you right wing zealots were big believers in personal responsibility. There are thousands of Americans working full time, live in poverty, and have to medical care. What's there incentive to keep working? Too bad for them? I've got it, you don't like Hillary Clinton. You are right wing. You are Republican. When did this new site become a zone for the ultra conservatives? I haven't had time to read much lately, (putting in a new computer system) but I used to have a lot more respect for you KC when you talked about tax. I agree to disagree. I will check in on this site soon, and if it continues to be a love fest for the right wing moral majority I will move on. lbb

"Seventh, let's ensure that people who work hard every day can support their families and save for the future. I do not believe anyone who works full-time in America should draw a wage that puts that person below the poverty line. If you are a full time worker you should make more than poverty.

Now that we've finally reach the minimum wage, let's expand and simplify the Earned Income Tax Credit so no one working full time lives in poverty."

Let it be assumed, for the sake of argument, that every statement in your post is correct. A simplification of the Earned Income Credit would still, inevitably, lead to increased abuse and outright fraud. But that would be perpetrated by the deserving and genetically disenfranchised, and would therefore be 'fair'.

[Daune/CA]

Check back over the years and you will find that whenever legislators say "simplified taxes" it is guaranteed employment for tax preparers. Check the "Tax Simplication Acts" and you will see they are anything but simplified.

No matter which party writes the bill before the legislators. Simplified and Congress are oxymorons.

[JohnH]

In a slight departure from the main topic of this thread and its permutations, but still following the political theme, I'd like to recommend the latest Charles Krauthamer article concerning the phenomenon of the 2-year political campaigns for president. The main focus & title of the article is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but a secondary point is quite good - he insists that the ordeal of the long political campaign actually does give us some insight in the managerial abilities & skills of the candidates. Political differences aside, if the candidate can't effectively manage his/her campaign how in the world will that person be able to manage the actual job of president? Much of what he says is self-evident, but in his usual style he offers a slightly different twist to the issues. Well worth reading.

[kcjenkins]

Charles Krauthammer is always worth reading. He's one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people writing today. That combination of traits is not a 'given'. It is a true shame that his medical condition means it's unlikely that he will be with us as long as we could hope. And I do like his 'dry humor'.

It is ironic, I think, that he got into the area of political commentary through his Democratic connections, and is today such a respected conservative voice. In 1978 Krauthammer quit his medical practice to direct the planning in psychiatric research for the Jimmy Carter administration, and began contributing to the magazine The New Republic. During the presidential campaign of 1980, Krauthammer served as a speech writer to VP Walter Mondale. I must admit that I see him as a classic example of how maturity turns any thinking person toward conservatism. In 2006 the Financial Times named Krauthammer as America's most influential commentator, saying he "has influenced US foreign policy for more than two decades [and] writes with wit and occasional venom."

[taxxcpa]

Financial Times named Krauthammer as America's most influential commentator, saying he "has influenced US foreign policy for more than two decades [and] writes with wit and occasional venom."

Reminds me of a quote I've heard attributed to Winston Churchill: "Anyone who is not a socialist at age 20 has no heart and anyone who is still a socialist at age 40 has no brain".

[SCL]

KC, who the heck do you think "they" is? - some of us on this board, that's who! Like LLBWest, if you can't stop disparaging us and move back to the topic of tax & software, I'll be moving on. Funny, I don't seem to enjoy being insulted on a regular basis.

you are to the point MontanaEA and LLBWest - tax and software topics. political discussions are tempting, but it is better if they find a different and more appropriate forum. kc does not launch these right leaning RPG's on her yahoo web site. i also request not here either.

[kcjenkins]

SCL, I will merely point out again that this started with a question about tax policy, not politics per se. And that no one was 'disparaged' or insulted by me. Tax policy is a subject that I believe is one of the things we SHOULD be able to discuss, because it affects us all, and our clients as well.

Just as a simple, and current, example, the new preparer penalties in the latest tax law were to take effect as of May 25. Discussion among tax professionals on boards like this led to many thoughtful arguments for delaying them during a 'transitional' period, and to many letters to the IRS explaining those reasons. And lo and behold, the IRS has just announced new 'transitional' rules that give us at least a good part of what we needed. Without the discussions on many boards, the appeals might not have been as effective.

PS I do not even HAVE a yahoo website.

[JohnH]

I think it's worth noting that the heading for this part of the Forum is "General Chit Chat",

not "General Chit Chat Except Politics, Religion, or Something Else That Might Offend Someone "

[redux]

I think it's worth noting that the heading for this part of the Forum is "General Chit Chat",

not "General Chit Chat Except Politics, Religion, or Something Else That Might Offend Someone "

Well said and duly noted John.