Itinerant Air-Cooled

steve74baywin wrote: I actually am getting more back than I paid.
The truth to the matter is some of the money they are giving me is probably entered into the gov system from borrowed or created money which lowers the value of my dollar, which is a hidden tax. So I really didn't gain anything, I can expect the cost of things to go up even more.

Amskeptic wrote:That money floods back into the economy.

Amskeptic wrote:

steve74baywin wrote: I actually am getting more back than I paid.
The truth to the matter is some of the money they are giving me is probably entered into the gov system from borrowed or created money which lowers the value of my dollar, which is a hidden tax. So I really didn't gain anything, I can expect the cost of things to go up even more.

Well, your "hidden tax" rationale hits those of us who pay taxes, too!

I am all for tax refund for the little guys. That money floods back into the economy.
Colin

steve74baywin wrote:

Amskeptic wrote:

steve74baywin wrote: I actually am getting more back than I paid.
The truth to the matter is some of the money they are giving me is probably entered into the gov system from borrowed or created money which lowers the value of my dollar, which is a hidden tax. So I really didn't gain anything, I can expect the cost of things to go up even more.

Well, your "hidden tax" rationale hits those of us who pay taxes, too!

I am all for tax refund for the little guys. That money floods back into the economy.
Colin

Yes, the hidden tax effects those who paid and those who don't.
You state that money flows back into the economy. Let me think about that.
If that money that is flowing back into the economy is created out of nothing, overall I think the greater harm far outweighs any good. It may on a temporary basis extend living for a time, but what happens later? It is creating a beast that must keep getting fed, more money must get created and fed into the system. This to me is one of the roots of the problem, those needing this are dependent on those creating it. Those wealthy many of us do not like are needed to keep us fed. I would much rather break the chains from this system and start creating the ability to live without it.

Amskeptic wrote:

steve74baywin wrote:

Amskeptic wrote:

steve74baywin wrote: I actually am getting more back than I paid.
The truth to the matter is some of the money they are giving me is probably entered into the gov system from borrowed or created money which lowers the value of my dollar, which is a hidden tax. So I really didn't gain anything, I can expect the cost of things to go up even more.

Well, your "hidden tax" rationale hits those of us who pay taxes, too!

I am all for tax refund for the little guys. That money floods back into the economy.
Colin

Yes, the hidden tax effects those who paid and those who don't.
You state that money flows back into the economy. Let me think about that.
If that money that is flowing back into the economy is created out of nothing, overall I think the greater harm far outweighs any good. It may on a temporary basis extend living for a time, but what happens later? It is creating a beast that must keep getting fed, more money must get created and fed into the system. This to me is one of the roots of the problem, those needing this are dependent on those creating it. Those wealthy many of us do not like are needed to keep us fed. I would much rather break the chains from this system and start creating the ability to live without it.

We are a *consumer economy*, like it or not. To increase *demand* we need people who can consume. The best utilization of funds is NOT to give GE a 4 billion dollar refund, but to ease the burdens on the middle and lower classes. If I hear the argument that we are "giving" money to the poor and fostering "dependency", I am going to redirect you to the first post in this thread.
Colin

Do you know why the "withholding tax" system was put into place? Let me provide you with just one shocking example of how things work behind the scenes:


Declassified (Confidential Committee Print)
Withholding Tax Hearing Before A Subcommittee of The Committee on Finance,
United States Senate, 77th Congress, Second Session on:
Data Relative to Withholding Provisions of the 1942 Revenue Act, August 21 and 22, 1942
(Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance)
United States Government Printing Office, Washington 1942
SUMMARY/Contents Statement of:
Friedman, Milton, Division of Tax Research, Treasury Department
Hardy, Charles O., of Brookings Institution
Jacobstein, Meyer, of Brookings Institution
Paul, Randolph E., Treasury Department

Overview

Because the war effort resulted in increased production and employment, which caused a sudden large influx of money into circulation, the Federal Government and Federal Reserve System had to find a method of "mopping up excess purchasing power" thereby control inflation and obtain immediate funds for the Treasury. Several plans were put forth before the House, Ways & Means Committee and the Senate Committee on Finance to accomplish this purpose.

The following points were made by the Senators and those testifying before the committee:

1. The overall purpose was to obtain immediate money for the war effort, to control inflation and to get the income tax on a current basis instead of being one year behind.

2. To accomplish this goal, it was recognized that a scheme was needed to reach the largest number of people.

3. That the scheme, regardless of whether it was a "coupon," "stamp" or "withholding of income tax at source," would constitute a "forced loan" to the Federal Government and it would apply to taxpayers and nontaxpayers alike, with exceptions.

4. Where an individual had money withheld and ultimately no tax liability, the individual would file an income tax return and that income tax return would constitute an automatic claim for refund.

5. The proposed plan was an emergency war time measure.