It’s Fix the Tax Code Friday!
We’ve been talking about the proposed economic stimulus package for weeks now. It’s seems like everyone has an opinion about what should be included – and what should be left out.
Today’s Fix the Tax Code Friday question is:
What would you like to see included in a final stimulus package?
Take care of the Retired citizens who have cortributed over the years in building the country by adjustment to Social Security deductions
How about a national health plan instead. It would be cheaper, would help all of us, whether employed or unemployed, prevent many bankrupcies and help two problems at once.
How about a section that says if this stimulus does not work within some particular time frame then the entire elected government resigns? And everyone up there be forbidden to run again. How many votes do you think the stimulus would get then?
Now on to a more serious suggestion although I meant the above one with all seriousness – I would like to see a tax break for every new employee hired by any business. Not much – just something to show me that the numbskulls running this zoo understand that the economy is not going to turn around until folks start getting hired – and that all the folks that are currently unemployed cannot all go build roads.
The only other item I can think of to add would be a section that excluded all accountants over the age of 66 and living in Geneva, Alabama would forever be exempted from any tax including but not limited to income, sales, fuel, estate, or any other type of tax now in existence or invented while he is still above ground.
Another comment that is much, much too late to make and then I have to go to work – Does anyone remember exactly what the bail outs consisted of in 1982 – back when unemployment was higher than it is now, inflation was higher then it is now, the economy was growing slower then it is now and housing was in worse shape then it is now and interest rates when right through the roof? Oh – there wasn’t one? Gee.
If the banks won’t lend, then then I’d like to see the government encourage private individuals to lend. Provide individuals who owner-finance the sale of real property a tax break by making the interest earned tax-free. To curb abuse, set a limit on the amount that could be earned (taxing the excess). Increase the capital loss cap per year from $3,000 to an inflation adjusted amount equivalent to what the $3,000 was in 1986. Prices have adjusted on real estate and expectations are now more realistic on the values. This would encourage private lending, move real estate inventory, employ everyone in that food chain and in turn stimulate the economy.
While there are large employers, the majority of Americans work for small businesses. By providing employment tax credits to small businesses, or relaxing the employer required contributions for FICA would increase the cash flow of these businesses and allow the employment of more Americans.
Allow withdrawals from individual IRA’s and 401k”s without paying the Federal taxes.
The two biggest things I would like to see are accountability and benchmarking. We threw $350+ billion at the banks and have received no information on how it was spent, nor, apparently, according to the banks, are we entitled to receive that information. If we’re going to put another $800+ billion into this economy, I want a blow-by-blow of where those dollars are going and whether they are having any effect.
why cant everone work on the roads and briges.
you need suppliers
trafic controll, supervisers, bosses, secretaries, clerks, sighn makers,
map makers, blueprint readers,. need i say more
Like many of the above comments, accountability and more transparency in where the money is going should be top of the agenda.
There are several other good commentsand can be made by tweeting present laws. No new bureaucracy, just reshaping policy. Change doesn’t have to be a campaign promise. Politicians and the average American need to accept new ways in promoting for the common good.
Basic health care that covers all Americans. I have health care through my employer of 32 years, DuPont. DuPont has become greedy and has begun to deny health benefits to their pensioners. Corporate greed with a vengance. I pay a good premium every month out of my pension, for health insurance I cannot use for fear that DuPont will not pay the claims. The clause that supposedly protects the pensions against catastrophic health bills is being denied more and more. A cap on out-of-pocket expense means nothing anymore.
Delete the penalty for those who retire, draw social security, and then due to current economical circumstances, have to return to the work force. Their social security is penalized every tax year. Many folks have been the victim of down-sizing, “offered” a package deal that will require their taking early Social Security. Workers who return to the work force, if they can find a job, are contributing to the tax base, and also to social security at the same time. That is a contibuting citizen, not one of the dole.
I particularly agree with the responder who says if the stimulus package doesn’t work, the whole government should resign.
E Morris – Do you mean withdrawals without early withdrawal penalty or without income tax?
I would like to see free health care for all and what about a cap on what the states can do to the people. See I live in California and it is getting out of control with the tax’s. I would also like to see retirement homes get some money, some reassurance with the retirement plan and some help with our schools. lets face it the little one’s are going to be deciding what happens to us.
Robert Volstad – The reason they can’t all go build bridges and roads and the like is simply because there are too many of them – unemployed, that is. Even if you included the indirectly employed. But then a lot of the unemployed will just stay home anyway – and wait for their next government check. So maybe you’re right.
How about a return to the gold standard and an across the board spending cut as well as lower federal income and capital gains taxes.
Ah, the fantasy of “free” healthcare for all.
Basic economics would dictate that without some cost, the demand for healthcare would then skyrocket, resulting in either limitless cost (not feasible) or rationing. Rationing is either accomplished through limiting what is covered, delay in care (limiting supply), or some combination. How many Americans will wait 6 months to have a non-emergent (elective) procedure? The answer is not many who can either afford to pay cash, or pay for private supplemental insurance which would cover it. Just seems like another layer of (inefficient) government bureaucracy, doesn’t it? I can assure you than any physician or other “healthcare provider” who is able will convert much if not all of their practice to cash or private insurance. Or simply opt out entirely of the government system. Of course, that would take care of the “limiting supply” side of the equation.
Also, considering the track record of our government officials (elected and otherwise), do you really want them having more say over your healthcare?
Restricting the coverage to bare-bones (primary care, generic drugs only, immunizations) might gain some traction. It would still be expensive. And it wouldn’t exactly convince many medical students to go into a primary care field. And with more and more elderly living longer, we will need many more primary care & geriatrician physicians.
The unfunded liability of Medicare/Medicaid is staggering. It is worse than the Social Security mess. Not many people talk about this openly, but it will prove to be untenable sooner than Social Security will.
The only way to “solve” anything is to starve the beast that has become our government…federal, state and even local.
Oh yeah…how about a flat tax?
Thought above something this weekend – our economy is in a crisis demanding “immediate” and “emergency” action. So we will go build roads. Isn’t that kinda sorta like responding to someone trying to break into your house and kill you by sending a letter to the folks at 911? Just exactly how does this long term “solution” solve the short term “crisis”. Another point. If I understand this correctly – the government is giving the banks my money so the banks will loan me my money and charge me interest. Why don’t they just let me keep the money? That would get it back into the economy in a heart beat. If I had time I would look up how much is collected in taxes each year compared to how much money we are giving banks. Bet the figures ain’t too far apart. But I could be wrong. Now the government is going to own part of the car companies as well as the banks? So these folks who can’t figure out how to pay their taxes properly are going to tell folks how to run banks and how to make cars?
Skip
Here’s a crazy thought…how about funding programs that were in the works and planned to be done say, 3-5 years from now? Just move them up and spend on them first. If they were in the works before the crisis, chances are they are still worthy programs.
I’d also like to see tax incentives to companies who make capital purchases. Example-FedEx wants to buy a new plane-incentivize them to buy one now from a US company and suddenly you have a whole lot of workers back to work.
Or how about jsut not spending $10/month in Iraq…again a crazy notion.