How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

Gee, and no one is defending me for my opinions being equated to book burning.

Tara, you are above reproach! I seriously doubt anyone thinks you'll be lighting your fireplace this winter with anything bound by a spine!

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

Gee, and no one is defending me for my opinions being equated to book burning. Where's the love?

Tara I didn't mean to imply your opinion was the same of book burning. I was commenting on the overtone of more than one post and more than one poster about the taxes that Obama is supposing. I just don't think that if you try to use taxation for funding, that it's bad. And in this economy you can't have low taxes and for social services to be done. So my satirical comment was really that. You can't have low taxes and for these things to be funded, not today at least. We have to correct improper spending, and slowly lower taxes as things equal out some. I just think to equate this point with socialism is a bit much. That really was my point, but will more verbal flare My parents think big government is the end of the world, but all of our family has been aided by it... I just don't understand how no taxes or low taxes at this time, really benefits the society as a whole. We all benefit when everyone is allowed to prosper in some manner, and to help each other out, well for now, cutting taxes to a really low point won't help - it would eliminate the services we have all become accustom to using. Now reform of expenditures is another thing altogether.

no personal attack meant

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

Okay...back on track to the OT please.

[Sheherezade]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

Wow. :adminpower: :adminpower:

Two pages of this? I concur with Nellie. Back on topic...or we'll lock this thread and start over with a new one.

If you have personal issues with a post, try to handle it with a PM. If you don't feel you can resolve it (or if it is a serious offense to you and potentially others) flag the post for the administration to handle. If we deem the post truly out of line, we'll remove it. That's only happened once in my memory.

Now....you can all calm down by trying to remember that one truly offensive post. I'll never tell.

[Sheherezade]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

So funny....Christine ...I remember that interview! We were in residency so I longed for that point in life. *sigh* Well, we are there. As I've stated in threads similar to this, DH and I have no issue with our tax burden or the suggested increases. We do no currently pay AMT. (This must be because we don't have high state taxes or enough kids? Not sure why we haven't hit it yet.) We are right at that golden "rich" point.....around 250K.

FWIW, my father is also a doc. He was extremely successful in practice and never once complained about tax burdens. He does lots of free clinic work now in retirement. He grew up dirt poor in a three room house literally built by his father with six siblings and a school teacher mother. I was raised with a clear understanding that I had "too much" and that I should be greatful and give back gobs. I was frequently regaled with stories about how bad things could be when I got a little too entitled. I suppose that's why I feel guilty to this day about excess cash. Maybe his influence has shaped my view of tax policy. :huh: BTW, he's not a socialist. He's voted Republican the last few elections but was unclear when I last spoke with him. He was concerned about McCain's age....and Obama's age. No "Goldilocks" in this election.

I realize that this is probably a horrid thing to say in a political debate but I think I equate taxes with tithing. I'm not involved in a religious organization that does charity work. I don't contribute financially to anything like that. For my tax dollars, I get many goods and services (FDA to inspect my food/drugs, grants for research to fund future discoveries, border security, etc.) provided by the government that I wouldn't want to provide for myself. I also get to help others in this country - if I'm able. I can see that this portion of the "deal" would be better if it were voluntary. I wonder how the view of entitlements will change in the future as they become targeted more and more to the elderly from the baby boom and vets with long term disablities from these wars. I wonder if that will affect support. It seems we are always talking about "welfare families" and "the poor" as if they are all able-bodied lay-abouts. I don't think that's an accurate image of many that receive this "wealth re-apportioning".

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

I don't mind saying that I complain about taxes -- but I realize they are a necessary evil. I don't think I should get more representation b/c I pay a higher percentage -- that kind of smacks of all pigs being equal, but some are more equal than others.

There are HUGE problems with the way tax dollars are spent, and plenty of abuse on both sides. I have to make my voting choices based on the future of the supreme court, the plans for our country and it's interaction with the world, etc.

[ladymoreta]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

The idea that we could do a 1. better way by our selves and 2. an even distribution to our society is ... utopia. If people kept every penny they made, the idea that they would only give it out to all the places that depend on monetary resources for societal reasons is just not possible. People would only give to the causes they felt attracted to. For instance maybe giving all your cash to... just one cause.

LOL at the crazy pink ladies! I do agree that taxes are a necessary part of society, and we are better off for paying them. (I wouldn't have a clue how to build a road or operate an action figure museum, so somebody needs to. )

I think that everybody should be responsible for the cost of running our country, because that will give us all a vested interest in seeing it be successful. Even if the very poor only pay $10 a month in taxes, if they have an income, I think they should contribute. And they should not be given "rebate" checks for money they did not pay in. As the saying goes, people need a little skin in the game for it to matter. It is very easy for 95% of people to say that they like Obama's plan, because, according to him, it will end up being cheaper for them with more benefits. If, however, their taxes would increase to pay for it, you'd probably be getting more people asking to recheck his math.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm not against raising taxes. I actually think we need to - across the board - or this deficit is going to become a huge problem really fast. I agree that it is less of a burden for the wealthy to pay more, but I believe it is morally wrong and bad for our society to make the wealthy primarily responsible for funding programs they will not have access to.

This is how DH and I look at it also. We are also on programs like Medicaid and yes, food stamps as is just about every other student we know with no family support. These programs are literally allowing us to get through medical school. We would have literally run out of money had it not been for our food stamps and Medicaid.

Just a thought - I know I'm going to stir up trouble! Would you have gotten married and had kids at the time had there not been Medicaid/food stamps/etc.? (This isn't an attack or anything - my husband and I got married in college because we knew that we would get enough Pell grants and state scholarships to live off of.)

It seems we are always talking about "welfare families" and "the poor" as if they are all able-bodied lay-abouts. I don't think that's an accurate image of many that receive this "wealth re-apportioning".

This is a very good point. I fully expect to support my parents and in-laws as much as I can in their retirement, because I don't think any of them have much else besides social security. It is difficult to think of them - hard working as they are now - as "the poor". And I've heard that the majority of people who have to file bankruptcy do so because of medical reasons. I think this will help me be a little more okay with the fact that when DH is done, we'll be paying crazy taxes...

[houseelf]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

It seems we are always talking about "welfare families" and "the poor" as if they are all able-bodied lay-abouts. I don't think that's an accurate image of many that receive this "wealth re-apportioning".

IMHO, the challenging aspect of taxes in relation to social services is finding that fulcrum where public compassion meets personal responsibility. Everyone agrees that the free rider effect is a terrible burden of providing too many social services. As Friedman opined, individuals will behave rationally. Accordingly, if you provide disincentive to work, people will not work but collect welfare instead. ITA that this unfortunate aspect of social services has been bandied about ad infinitum.

The hard part of finding that balance of providing public compassion while encouraging personal responsibility is that this point seems to be much more fluid than static. In the past, I've firmly supported more conservative ideals concerning both taxation and availability of public services. History tells us that whatever Government gets involved with typically becomes a mess and becomes excrutiatingly hard to undo.

Still, after spending seven years in a county court seeing mostly family law and DUIs AND taking into consideration my current experience in the third most impoverished city in the US, it is hard to believe that a little more government intervention would be take the country in the wrong direction CURRENTLY. It feels like the term "working class poor" and/or "actively seeking employment" encompasses a broadening segment of society. As such, the pendulum needs to swing to ensure that less people fall off the grid.

I'm sure that I'll feel differently when times are different. :huh:

Kelly

[madeintaiwan]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

This is how DH and I look at it also. We are also on programs like Medicaid and yes, food stamps as is just about every other student we know with no family support. These programs are literally allowing us to get through medical school. We would have literally run out of money had it not been for our food stamps and Medicaid.

Just a thought - I know I'm going to stir up trouble! Would you have gotten married and had kids at the time had there not been Medicaid/food stamps/etc.? (This isn't an attack or anything - my husband and I got married in college because we knew that we would get enough Pell grants and state scholarships to live off of.)

I can't speak for Christine AND we have never been on medicaid and had food stamps only during a part of MS4 [we were actually denied the first time we applied]. And applying for food stamps is not a "fun" process. But to answer your question, for us it wouldn't have mattered. And for the other families in our class [we had a large number of families in our class] it wouldn't have mattered because they came to medical school already married and with child(ren). We had J and were married during undergrad. He was a surprise baby thanks to a whooping cough outbreak in which my job required all employees to take antibiotics and the doctor failed to advise me that I should use a back up method. We both worked and both graduated with our degrees; married and with a child and without medicaid or food stamps in CA.

Being in medical school and residency is different than the typical situation. You know that there will be "better" financial days. And do you want to wait that many years to finally start your family? Some people don't mind. We will be 35 and 36 by the time we're finally done with residency and fellowship. We did not want to wait until then to start our family. I remember when J was about a year old and his ped asked if we planned on having any more children and I told him we were going to wait because E was applying to medical school and blah blah blah. I will never forget the look on his face and in his eyes when he told me that there will never be the "perfect" time, you could end up spending your entire life waiting for the perfect time. If J wasn't born when he was, I am sure we would have started a family in medical school or in residency without medicaid and/or food stamps. We are in PGY2 with 3 kids and we do it without medicaid or food stamps. We make sacrifices but so do those people who chose to wait. There is no such thing as having it all. It's all personal choices.

And back to taxes...

[DCJenn]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

I am so glad I am no longer speaking for everyone who has ever been destitute. or disabled. or addicted. AMEN for people who have benefited from social programs for stepping up to the plate to tell their stories. (oh, and count me in for my Pell grant for BOTH grad school programs.)

None of us here, (and by here, I mean living, breathing human beings) gets to judge other people on their behavior. and when we do, we are the biggest jackassian human beings ever. and I say that knowing that I do it daily.

Why do doctors pay more?

1) Because my blind mentally retarded client for whom I got a job at Chili's was rolling the f-ing silverware as fast as he could. But the second he worked more than 20 hours week he would lose all benefits. and with those benefits was housing. So, could he have worked more? YES. Did he want to work more? YES? Could he have afforded a single rental in the DC Metro area on that 40 hour salary? Not no but hell no. So, who paid for his group home? That would be the Medicaid Waiver program. Look it up.

2) If you can? Work- for as long as possible.

3) uh, kids are expensive. and as our most well-educated people here know- SHIT HAPPENS- SOMETIMES PEOLE WHO ARE NOT READY FOR KIDS- have them. They're not demons, they need to feed their kids, you assholes. and yes, there needs to be limits.

Birth control is an obvious solution, except that religion has more than gotten in the way. GIVE POOR PEOPLE THE BIRTH CONTROL THEY WANT! Holy Crap! Why is this so difficult? If you are Anti-abortion then you really ought to be pro birth control. Because, in MY world, abstinence is a concept taught by the Pope. It's really not an applicable construct to your average heroin addict prostituting herself to get her drugs. When the 'average' heroin addict becomes pregnant- she's been sexually abused since she was under 10 years old. She's not an addict to be a druggie. She's an addict because it's a great way to numb the pain of her father sexually assaulting her. and when the equally abusive boyfriend tells her that she 'really' doesn't love him if he has to wear a condom? Uh? Please, as I have begged before- give me the answers oh, sage ones. (hint- the shot)

4) If my taxes at my pathetic social worker salary of $46,000 gets taxed? You know what? I'm ok w/ it. I'm sorry. I have been far more on-call than my husband the fancy pants doctor has ever been. Sure his degrees took longer. So the F what? If Taxing MY 46k at 30% means that one of the clients that I have tried to help over the last 20+ years doesn't have to fight for services- I'm totally cool with that. oh, and BEFORE I get the argument that I'm hanging onto my husband the dawkter's coat-tails: when we got married I had a Master's degree (that I'm still paying for), my own home, my own car, and a job that required 24/7 on-call status. There are no merit badges in social services. You do it because if you don't no one else will.

5) when you make more money- you pay more in taxes. and no, you don't get to pick where it goes, unless you are in Congress. and NO, the President doesn't pick the places the money goes. He/She picks the agenda. Congress spends the money.

and if anyone, and I mean anyone, wants to see in real life living color that perhaps the "overly taxed" doctor might not have it all that bad in the long run, I can find any kind of social services experience wherever you may need to have it. You want to see crappy education? I can get you there. You want to see drug addicts losing their kids? No problem. You want to see adults w/ disabilities demean themselves to get paid at the lowest common denominator? Cool. You want to see elderly people decide between food and insulin? I can walk you down my street. You want to talk to the urban 'home ec' teacher who really teaches about things like how to budget? That's my cousin Sarah. You want to talk to the small business owner trying to make a living competing with Wal-Mart in Podunk, USA? That's my cousin Elizabeth.

I'm so sorry. If you're suffering at the 'Obama' 1/4 million dollars, I got nothing. If you're pissed off that you have to pay more taxes at 1/4 of a million dollars, just know this. I DON'T FEEL BADLY FOR YOU. not even a little bit. I don't give a rats ass how much you pay in taxes.

If that's socialism, sign me up.

Your truly liberal, and really trying to make a difference Medical Spouse,

Jenn

PS- I'm Jennifer Martin Hussey and I approved of this tirade.

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

Another here who did foodstamps in medical school. We got pg with DS while I was on the pill when we were 21 and DH was in undergrad and had recently decided to change his major to biology in hopes of going to medical school. The plan was, reluctantly on my part, to have kids after residency, around the age of 30 (at the time I didn't understand how long residency actually is/can be). When I realized I was pregnant, I was 8 weeks along, eating the pill every morning.

We got married at 18, worked two jobs, made $6.05 an hour, and never once went into debt, had a savings account of several grand, and were very proud of ourselves. Then... in medical school, we took the first debt we ever had, after being married for four years. It wasn't until MS3 that we took foodstamps. For our family (all of us) our insurance bill was $6000 a year through the university. Some good friends in medical school did medicaid, DH and I bit the bullet and took the debt. I never knew if that was a mistake or not since we obviously paid every penny with loans. We decided to have our second child in medical school because for me it was then or never. Our son was 5 yrs old when DH graduated medical school, I wasn't about to have kids 6+ years apart, and I wasn't going to get pregnant in residency and do it all on my own (for me, it would have made me bitter). Well good thing we didn't do in residency in a town without any family because my pregnancy went from great to pure hell. I was on bedrest for 8 weeks, had 17 visits to L&D (DEMANDED by my ob), contracted day and night, took 5 meds a day to keep my DD from being delivered, and wore a pump w/terrabutaline pumping in me non stop. I capped out on my meds, had to detox from meds in the hospital, DH missed a decent amount of the whole deal from being on rough rotations (Surgical and non existent from much of that month). My family, I swear, kept my DD alive. If we had made the decision to wait because of the only government aid we took, foodstamps that we would pay back X's 10 , get pregnant in residency instead - well that would have been a HORRIBLE mistake and quite frankly I might have miscarried by dealing with everything alone. The stress was huge.

So no, foodstamps had no baring on us to have our daughter, and why should it have? Foodstamps itself it to help people in a rough time and put them back on their feet, so to me our purpose was totally legitimate.

BTW financial aid in any more manner, superceeds economic status, race , and geography. Many people need help at some place in their live, whether it is a birth, childhood, adulthood or the end of life. Why should people change there lives because of this possible need - because that is what you are really saying right? Not that what would we do if these aids weren't around, but did/would we make this decision because we would probably have to take government aid - that's what you actually meant, right?

And in cause you are wondering, I got pg while I was working ft and was working on my degree. DH got to stay in school, I had to work and then eventually care for my son. I worked all through the time when DH was in medical school, but made... not much, around $10K. So... what else should I have changed? Abort my son, hell no. Work for $20K and pay almost half to daycare, not adding gas, food, and other work related costs and STILL qualify for aid? I worked my butt off before we got pregnant and after we got pregnant, and still we couldn't make ends meet, like... lots of others.

This question quite frankly is obnoxious. And, I'm not oblivious to the fact that the Pell Grant and scholarships is seen as money you worked for and were given, and Medicaid/FS/WIC is for people who don't "make the mark". Not sure if you see it that way, but to ask the question is almost to imply this. If you don't think this is different why did you even ask if you know the answer for yourself?

[madeintaiwan]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

I can't speak for Christine AND we have never been on medicaid and had food stamps only during a part of MS4 [we were actually denied the first time we applied]. And applying for food stamps is not a "fun" process. But to answer your question, for us it wouldn't have mattered. And for the other families in our class [we had a large number of families in our class] it wouldn't have mattered because they came to medical school already married and with child(ren). We had J and were married during undergrad. He was a surprise baby thanks to a whooping cough outbreak in which my job required all employees to take antibiotics and the doctor failed to advise me that I should use a back up method. We both worked and both graduated with our degrees; married and with a child and without medicaid or food stamps in CA.

Being in medical school and residency is different than the typical situation. You know that there will be "better" financial days. And do you want to wait that many years to finally start your family? Some people don't mind. We will be 35 and 36 by the time we're finally done with residency and fellowship. We did not want to wait until then to start our family. I remember when J was about a year old and his ped asked if we planned on having any more children and I told him we were going to wait because E was applying to medical school and blah blah blah. I will never forget the look on his face and in his eyes when he told me that there will never be the "perfect" time, you could end up spending your entire life waiting for the perfect time. If J wasn't born when he was, I am sure we would have started a family in medical school or in residency without medicaid and/or food stamps. We are in PGY2 with 3 kids and we do it without medicaid or food stamps. We make sacrifices but so do those people who chose to wait. There is no such thing as having it all. It's all personal choices.

And back to taxes...

Of course I still would have gotten married and had my son. I'm sure there are some people out there who actually plan their futures around welfare and Medicaid benefits, but I am not one of them. When I decided to marry my husband and give birth to our son, I didn't say, "Yeah now we can get some food stamps! Goody!" In fact, I didn't even know about food stamps until DH started med. school and my neighbor told me about it. Then I waited several months before finally applying for it. The same goes for Medicaid. For the first few months DH was in school, we were paying $480.00 a month for my COBRA before I just decided that was ridiculous. Unfortunately DH chose Michigan to go to school, which pretty much has the worst economy in the country. Also, Michigan does not let you take out more loans if you have a family. They don't care. I was not able to teach, which I actually have a Master's in. I am too over qualified for them to afford me. So, I could have taken an entry level job at the university, where over 1/2 of my income would have gone to pay for the astronomical daycare prices here, trust me I looked at it really hard, but we instead opted for something different since we had that choice and I have no problem with it considering how much we paid into the system before medical school, and how much we will be paying into it after school. We make plenty of sacrifices ourselves. Even with food stamps, money is very tight. But it is because of those food stamps that we are able to stay afloat in Ann Arbor with rent at over $1,100 a month. Of course, once DH starts residency, and can actually get a paycheck, we will not need that kind of assistance. That's great for everyone who was able to get buy without assistance, we however decided that it was best for our family if we did take the assistance that is available for families in our position.

Christine, I wasn't trying to imply that there was anything wrong with your choices or that you had to defend them. Simply that for us the availability of programs was not a determining factor when WE considered marriage and family planning, which was LadyM's question.

I definitely believe in the availability of social programs. If you qualify for them, go for it. The only issue I have is when I have witnessed on numerous occasions, people who use these programs yet they are still driving around in lexuses, wearing expensive clothes, and living in 4,000 sq ft homes. I believe that these programs are meant to help sustain people who otherwise would not be able to provide safety, shelter, and food to their families NOT provide luxuries. However, despite the few people who abuse these programs I still believe that it is necessary to have these programs available for the people who do need them. I have worked first hand with the same group of people that Jenn H continues to do her good work with. Truly, this world needs more people like you. ITA with your post. A healthy society benefits everyone. And my freshman year in college I received both Cal and Pell grants.

[Sheherezade]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

I read a (depressing) article this morning on the Forbes site about how we all are going to start paying more in taxes in the years to come to pay for these G-awful baby boomers in retirement. (Oh wait....that's my parents we are talking about! ) Increased life expectancy is coming back to bite us in our well laid plans.

Interesting point in the interesting article: We need a VIT. (Consumption tax) They are prevalent in Europe and used to fund lots of social programs. Apparently, it doesn't affect work ethic or cause businesses to flee the country - AND it increases savings individually by raising the cost of consuming. Everyone contributes - including seniors and the poor. What about a flat tax and a VIT for the U.S.?

[ladymoreta]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

This question quite frankly is obnoxious. And, I'm not oblivious to the fact that the Pell Grant and scholarships is seen as money you worked for and were given, and Medicaid/FS/WIC is for people who don't "make the mark". Not sure if you see it that way, but to ask the question is almost to imply this. If you don't think this is different why did you even ask if you know the answer for yourself?

I think I wasn't really clear about why I was asking, and I apologize for offending anyone. My husband and I chose to get married when we did (during undergrad) because we knew that if we needed it, Medicaid, foodstamps, and other programs would be available. We fully intended to use them if we needed, especially if I ended up pregnant. I view things like Pell grants and scholarships as no different from those types of assistance. This is a decision we made before we got married, and I do not think that we are any better or worse than anyone else for the fact that we didn't end up using those options.

My reason for the question (besides my truly random thought process) was basically to continue the line of discussion about things that the government can help with that we use to make our lives better with our tax money. I think that there are things that they do well that none of us can or would be willing to do on our own (like building roads). But I do agree with DCJenn and others that they make some truly stupid policy decisions (like not providing birth control to women who want it but can't afford it, or discontinuing funding to social programs that are helping in order to fund pet projects). I think that our politicians will happily continue to waste our money as long as we are willing to give it to them. There is a lot of room to make better budgeting decisions, and I think that until they fix those, they do not have the right to raise anyone's taxes.

[ladymoreta]

Re: How much should dawkters pay in taxes...

I haven't heard of VIT, but it sounds kind of similar to the Fair Tax that was proposed in the republican primary. (Was it Huckabee or Romney?) Depending on the person's income, they could get some of it refunded after filing taxes. I think it's a great idea. Part of our economic problems, I believe, are caused by our economic policy of encouraging spending (by lowering interest rates). A tax on consumption rather than income could go a long way towards encouraging people to build up their savings.