Slashdot Mirror
Let's Drug Test The Rich Before Approving Tax Deductions, Says US Congresswoman (theguardian.com)
Press2ToContinue writes from a report via The Guardian: "The [tax] benefits we give to poor people are so limited compared to what we give to the top 1% [of taxpayers]," Congresswoman Gwen Moore says. "It's a drop in the bucket." Many states implement drug-testing programs to qualify for benefit programs so that states feel they are not wasting the value they dole out. However, seven states who implemented drug testing for tax benefit program recipients spent $1 million on drug testing from the inception of their programs through 2014. But the average rate of drug use among those recipients has been far below the national average -- around 1% overall, compared with 9.4% in the general population -- meaning there's been little cost savings from the drug testing program. Why? "Probably because they can't afford it," says Moore. "We might really save some money by drug-testing folks on Wall Street, who might have a little cocaine before they get their deal done," she said, and proposes a bill requiring tests for returns with itemized deductions of more than $150,000. "We spend $81bn on everything -- everything -- that you could consider a poverty program," she explained. But just by taxing capital gains at a lower rate than other income, a bit of the tax code far more likely to benefit the rich than the poor, "that's a $93bn expenditure. Just capital gains," she added. Why not drug-test the rich to ensure they won't waste their tax benefits? She is "sick and tired of the criminalization of poverty." And, she added: "We're not going to get rid of the federal deficit by cutting poor people off Snap. But if we are going to drug-test people to reduce the deficit, let's start on the other end of the income spectrum."
So, you missed the part where it would only kick in if you had itemized deductions over $150,000?
If they don't want to be drug tested, don't claim the deductions.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Are you one of those people that thinks that it's not your money, it's the government's.
It actually belongs to the Federal Reserve. It says so right on the bill. It is owed back to them, with interest.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
I work 12 hours days writing software
Given that productivity for activities like writing software peaks at 20 hours a week, plateaus until 40, and then decreases, you must be writing some really bad code.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well...I suppose they could do something radical and say, try to educate/better themselves and get a fucking JOB and pay their own way, no?
You could suppose that, but you'd be wrong. You think most poor people are poor because they just don't feel like getting a job? Beyond that, some people with jobs still have to go on public assistance because their job doesn't pay enough to live on. What do you think of raising the minimum wage?
Welfare, or SNAP, or whatever don't pay very much. It's not like these people are kicking back while the rest of us work. It's no fun to be poor, working or not.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Another person who thinks taxes are the government "taking" your money. It's an exchange - in return, you get roads, security, stability, infrastructure, many public services, and a range of safety nets if/when you are no longer able to earn money.
And yes, you have a choice. You're free to opt out of this social contract at any time, by leaving the country. (Also by making your income low enough to avoid taxes, or high enough to avoid taxes.)
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
I'm from the UK, and I have to say that each time a US tax-orientated discussion comes up here on Slashdot or elsewhere, especially around US based "filing dates", I get the distinct impression that it doesn't matter how rich you are or how much your tax return is going to be, you *all* scrutinize your returns for as many deductions as you can possibly squeeze out of the system, with many of you suggesting to others to seek professional help to squeeze even more.
But that's just a foreigners impression gained from what US tax payers discuss online...
Yeah, that's about right. There is an aspect to the American character that leads people to feel that if they haven't squeezed out every last drop, even if they have to be an asshole to do it, they are suckers leaving money on the table. There is a certain amount of "I've got mine, fuck you" going on here.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
They cost more than they save as already proven in Florida. Guess who owned shares in the drug company that got the testing contract in Florida? Rick Scott's wife.
... if you're a capitalist. If you accept you live in a purely capitalist society, then someone "bad at capitalism" is as a natural extension of that a "bad societal actor", or more concisely, a "bad citizen". It isn't hard to see how someone who views the world through a lens of "money is the all important" that someone without money or who is bad at managing it would be a criminal. It's wrong but I've known people who believe the abolition of debtor's prison was one of the single biggest blows to modern capitalism. Think about that. It's nuts. That being said, making the rich take drug tests before receiving those tax breaks is about as likely as the rich actually paying their fair share of taxes.
Pure and utter drivel. The basis of capitalism is not worship of money. The fact that some person you talked to favored debtor's prisons doesn't mean that everybody who believes in liberty worships money. The basis of capitalism is that the free market is the most efficient and just way to distribute scarce resources.
The problem is, free markets don't really exist; they are all managed and regulated in some way. And the reason for that is that truly free markets lead to monopoly and rule by the wealthy, because the return on capital is higher than the return on labor. So the truth is that properly regulated markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources. But Capitalists don't like properly regulated markets, because that hinders their ability to maximize their profits. And, contrary to your assertion, profit is why Capitalists do what they do. If they weren't making money, they wouldn't be in business.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Money that was made using infrastructure paid for by taxpayers. Money that was often made by pushing costs onto taxpayers.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
"Well...I suppose they could do something radical and say, try to educate/better themselves and get a fucking JOB and pay their own way, no?"
Nothing is free, certainly not educating and bettering themselves. This also doesn't work for the disabled and the mentally ill. Disability is also riddled with red tape.
Hell, a huge portion of the people on these programs have jobs sometimes more than one. That is the big joke, sometimes you see measures targeted at minimum wage/near minimum wage earners but they always apply to full time employees. Employers in this segment won't hire full time workers, they know their employees are desperate and they can get a new "deadbeat" in a heartbeat from that pool of lazy don't want to work people who apply every day without them even having to advertise. They usually won't permit any scheduling requirements, they over hire and then computer generate part time schedules each week which can vary from 25 hours to 9 each week. And as a rule anyone who is off for whatever reason and doesn't answer their phone or come in when called to cover shifts with no notice is fired for this "offense" or given a number of strikes as if they had done something wrong.
That is exactly what they think. They know somebody who's cousin is like that. Therefore all poor people are lazy bums!
Real unemployment (as measured by taking the inverse of the labor participation rate) is at levels not seen in this country since the great depression.
Uh, it looks like it's at 1980s levels, to me
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Side note: you want to keep capital gains low because it encourages companies to re-invest in themselves and the economy, but I have always thought it should be taxed as salary when people pull it out for personal use.
40+ years of Reaganomics--low capital gains and low top marginal tax rates--has only increased the disparity in wealth and income. There is no trickle-down. There is no rising tide that lifts all of the boats. Automation is steadily increasing the value of capital relative to labor. People who have little or no discretionary income from their labor cannot make capital investments, so there is no end to the rich getting richer while the poor and middle class muddle along.
When you make an allegation of corruption you need to back it up. Link to some source.
I'm not the OP (an AC), but for starters:
The Tampa Bay Times.
Forbes.
For those just tuning in, Rick Scott, Governor of the State of Florida, was previously the CEO of Columbia/HCA when it was found to have committed the largest Medicare fraud ever, up to that time ($1.7 Billion in 1997), leading to his resignation.
Check out the economic success of 1st generation African immigrants relative to native African Americans. Likewise for 1st generation immigrants from Asia. You'll see that coming from absolute poverty - MUCH worse than what we have in the US, with a background of war, rape, and in many cases one or both parents killed - and you'll see immigrants greatly outpace our native poor. Why? Perhaps because once you've experience REAL poverty and oppression, that which the SJWs in the US scream about is nothing.
First world problem: they're going to drug-test welfare recipients!
3rd world problem: the local gang is back to take all the crops I just harvested from my garden and to gang-rape my wife and daughter again. Hide the books, if they find we were reading they'll gouge my eyes out and set me on fire.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
They aren't gifts; they are money you never owed. If you keep any tax money that you owe the government, it's called tax fraud.
In 2011, 7000 households with income over $1M paid no federal income tax whatsoever.
Tell me, how is it anything less than a gift to completely absolve these people from their tax burden? Seriously? Whether I give you $10 directly or allow you to avoid paying $10 that you would otherwise owe, the outcome is the same. And the rich are disproportionately benefiting from our current tax structure.
The fact of the matter is that we've increasingly got government regulation in favor of the rich. Inequality is skyrocketing in the country, class mobility is tanking. Every metric we've got shows that we're trending towards a two-class society of haves and have-nots. Stop being an apologist for the greed of the rich.