Comments on: Higher taxes hit working wives http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Jon http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-24276 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:33:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-24276 No country lasts long with a continuing huge wealth disparity and the majority of its citizens struggling simply to survive. Pretending that we’re different from all other historical examples is silly. The right-wingers willfully ignore this issue and simply say “to hell with the rest.” What will happen when “the rest” is 90% of your own country? Do you honestly think you have enough shells for your constitutionally-protected assault rifle to kill that many “deserving” people when the riots start … ?

As for the left, do you think that by increasing government income through taxes creates effective government? Get over yourselves! I knew a government worker with a TV in her office so she could watch the daytime soaps, and she’s not exceptional by any stretch. What percentage of that tax revenue do you think makes it through the juggernaut of government bureaucracy to actually do anything useful?

]]>
By: Denise Burke http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-14163 Sat, 09 May 2009 08:04:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-14163 I just discovered that the tax system is taking 78% of my working effort in federal and state taxes. I’ve run our 2009 estimated taxes if I work through the end of 2009. Then I ran the estimated tax if I cease working in August. My income is reduced, but family taxes are reduced (33% bracket back to 28%) so that the net effect of my working is that my family gets to keep only 22% of my hourly rate. This is a MAJOR ISSUE. I feel like marching on Washington screaming at the top of my lungs! I did what I thought society wanted, went to college and worked hard. Married a college educated man and manage 3 children. We founded two companies (job creation) and I am burnt out and or what? My mother stayed home and my father (did not attend college), and my standard of living is not yet what I grew up with. The President needs to attempt to live in California before he decides $250K is rich. He should also study the time value of money. I’m sure my $260K is not the equivalent of $70K in 1970. I’m quitting. I’m taking my life back for a while. The Presidents threat for 2011 means that this horrible penalty to working wives will only get worse. One of those companies we spent the last 15 years on sought to encourage STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematical) career choices in our youth. It has remained a continued disappointment to me that females were so under-represented in our programs (thirty boys and maybe one girl). Now I believe that we were wrong. Society is really not ready for women (wives) in force in the workplace (or were the old male lawyers giggling at what this type of policy would do)?
Paying my fair is fine, but getting to keep only 22% (I did not go into the AMT/SSN complications in that analysis) so it is probably worse, is ludicrous. The national media needs to focus attention on this issue. I have long known it was an issue but I did not know it was this bad. Most women probably don’t either. It was a long and arduous spreadsheet calculation, difficult for me, and I am an Excel Master. I advise all wives to contact a tax professional and forecast their family’s tax liability for the year then repeat the forecast as if they were not working. Compare the difference to your income. Is it worth it? See how keeping the tax code so complicated hides facts from us? MAD! FURIOUS! I am opting out.

]]>
By: Chad http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9619 Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:37:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9619 First of all, mothers aren’t the only ones that stay home these days, so the glass ceiling argument doesn’t apply here. My wife made more money, so I stayed home for 5 years. She would have gladly traded places with me if she could.
Secondly, marriage is the joining of two separate entities that the law recognizes as one. There are many benefits to this arrangement, so why is it so bad that we are taxed as one?
I don’t agree with income tax as a whole, but not because it discriminates against married people. It seems counter-productive to pay the government to work and to pay the government more if you are fortunate enough to be successful in your job.

]]>
By: eisenhower http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9571 Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:40:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9571 maybe a move to just everyone just entering into a “civil union” would be in order.

we could all go back to the good ole days of Ike and the top bracket could be taxed 90%.

]]>
By: andy http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9556 Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:48:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9556 The overall argument to tax members of the household as individuals was good and appealing. But the attempt to give a feminist twist to the whole argument was quite disgusting.

]]>
By: darlene http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9481 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:22:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9481 I marvel at the arguments over the notion of a progressive
tax system…the whining from the “free lunch bunch” never
ends. I pay taxes, my neighbors pay taxes and YOU should
pay taxes too. The suggestions for draft legislation that
the President and the Congress have submitted are reasonable, and I believe that they should be adopted.

]]>
By: LS http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9474 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:41:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9474 In response to “RA” and others who think that they are being punished for their educations and hard work: I’m actually in the top 1%, thanks to the education my husband and I received. Before you hurt yourself patting your own back, remember that there is a reason we choose to live together in society with other people. If you were given a public education, I helped pay for it, even though I get nothing in return for your edcucation. Similarly, I am paying for the clean water that comes from your pipes, the firefighter who saves your home, and the highways you drive on, without seeing any direct benefit to myself for all the money I’m spending for you. Those student loans you all are struggling to meet? I paid to subsidize the lenders you borrowed from, and if I hadn’t done so, you might never have been able to earn those “hard won” degrees. Yet, oddly enough, I and all the other taxpayers who have been carrying you through your life have never submitted a bill to you and your husband for all the benefits you enjoy every day. We are all in this life together. How do you propose we pay for the many blessings you have become so accustomed to that you don’t even notice them anymore? I help you afford them, and you help everybody else afford theirs. Think back to that time you decided to pursue your degrees and at least be honest to yourself: would the knowledge that your tax bracket might have been raised really have convinced you not to continue your education? By accepting as gospel the so-called ‘facts’ spewed out at you by people like Ms. Roth, you are carrying the water for companies that have nothing in common with you, in the hope that someday you, too could be rich. Stop currying favor with people whose economic interests are completely opposit to your own. The truly wealthy don’t really want your company.

]]>
By: Ananke http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9442 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:06:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9442 Dear Bill from Texas,

Money has always been the foundation of any conflict :), don’t live so brainwashed. Even the mere existence of religion is to facilitate wealth distribution.

]]>
By: bill in texas http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9427 Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:27:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9427 Quote” “What I said is, and most economists would agree, regressive or flat taxation increases wealth disparity, and wealth disparity is the reason why wars naturally happen. No nation’s riches want catastrophic events, since in such scenario there is no ordinary political guarantee for them to have their wealth protected.”

What a heap!! Go wave your little red book somewhere else. Religion is the cause of wars, culture difference is the cause of wars, oil is the cause of wars, next, water will be the cause of wars.

]]>
By: Brian Choi http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/03/04/higher-taxes-hit-working-wives/#comment-9393 Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:32:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2326#comment-9393 Democrats discourages marriage? Through taxes? If your combined income is over 200K and afraid to get married for slight increase in taxes, you shouldn’t get married in the first place. It’ll actually save you money in divorce proceedings later on.

]]>