People are lazy...stop complaining and open your own business

Too bad your friend couldn't keep more of his money (that HE needed) instead having to give way too much away to the government.

I've been telling you all along people wrongly believe that if you make high income today "your rich" so you should give a bigger chunk to the government when instead people should be allowed to keep more of their money because they need to save for "future needs".

Just because he did good last year doesn't mean he'll do good the following year. People are way too short sighted which benefits the government grab.

 

I have to ask...

Was your friend a flaming liberal who believed in giving his money away to the government instead of thinking about his future?

 

Better forms of "income" insurance could have been an option.

 

I asked what exactly he did wrong. You gave no examples, thus I can only conclude that your premise - if someone is struggling to make ends meet it means, by definition, they either have done or are doing something wrong - is incorrect. Thank you for helping me prove my point.

 

I never did learn what his political beliefs are. In any case, I can't imagine anyone, all things being equal, opting to have their taxes increased. Although, I did speak to one very passionate Tea Partier who advocated for the FAIR tax even though it meant he would pay more.

 

It doesn't matter what he believed, government would have taken money that he would need in his future. Just because you're doing good today doesn't mean you'll do well tomorrow and why it's wrong to take too much from people when they will need it. I'll bet with all the money he's made he'll have a hard time getting help from government if any help at all.

People are too short sighted.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe he couldn't afford it but if government would have allowed him to keep more of his money he could have afforded to buy it.

- - - Updated - - -

So you're saying if they can't make ends meet then they're doing something right?

 

So why did you ask?

No he's getting SNAP benefits.

No, I am saying you can do everything right and due to things beyond your control (a health issue, economic downturn, etc.) you can still have trouble making ends meet.

 

I asked if he is a flaming liberal because flaming liberals believe in giving money away to government. If that's the case he supported giving his money away, it's called stupidity.

wow, SNAP benefits. that's living the good life! I'll bet if he had been able to keep more of his money he could have paid for his food himself. Instead he had to go begging the government for money. He's most likely paid a hell of a lot more in.

 

I thought you said it didn't matter what he believed. As I said before, I don't believe anyone would, all things being equal, opt for an increase in their taxes.

Weren't you just complaining that he probably wouldn't be getting any help from the government because he made as much as he did? He did save...remember, he had a retirement account which was wiped out by the Recession. I'm sure that would have been a tidy sum he could have used.

 

Yea that's right, Liberals just vote to increase someone else's taxes.

Wow are you dense. Yes he did save but obviously not enough. If he pays a lot of money in taxes he would have been better off keeping more for his own future needs but as liberals think, if you do well today (above and beyond basic needs TODAY then you should give your money away.. Now he has to beg for a pittance from government. Too deep for you to understand? LOL

 

Let's keep the conversation civil, thank you. What amount should he have been allowed to keep?

 

Then stop acting dense or is it for real? How much should he be able to keep? More of course, he earned it his needs should come first. Not every Tom, Dick and Harry that doesn't want to work.

 

So where's the trade off?

 

huh? what for keeping more of your own money?

 

Savings eventually run out, regardless. If insurance couldn't prevent it, savings won't either.

 

And the few extra dollars he might have had if his taxes were lower wouldn't have mattered at all considering the huge costs he incurred.

But the kinds of tax cuts conservatives call for would mean tat he NOW wouldn't have enough to eat

 

Sure, if you put money in a savings account sure you'll run out of money. That's why you invest "for passive income". People think the save money to see a bigger number, wrong, it's money to invest for cash flow.

The little people work for w2 income. And to change that you have to put money aside (build your nest egg) and invest that money to produce cash flow. But since w2 income is the highest taxed income (government takes a lot of your money that should go to your nest egg instead), it reduces your ability to build up enough money to invest for cash flow.

 

AT & T low point last year, 52 week range is $32.07, if you bought 200 of T stock it would cost you $6,414.00
$0.48 = $96.00 every quarter, instead of taking and spending the dividend reinvest and buy more stock, even add additional money to buy more stock building up your investment that produces passive income.

woopie you say? You don't have that much money you say, you need more money to make a difference you say. Yep, you're right. And that's my point. If government keeps taking your money how do you ever expect to build up enough money to invest for passive income that will make a difference? Even if you end up with a small amount of income it's better than working for it. And you don't have to be rich to invest.

If you would have saved, invested and bought stock you would be better off than you are waiting for government to legislate your prosperity.

 

Socialism exists for many reasons. One of those reasons is social safety nets. They don't call them capital safety nets, for a good reason.

I believe means tested welfare should be for those for whom, solving for a simple poverty of money, may not be enough. For the rest, unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines should be enough.

Only the right alleges to believe in a "work or die" ethic from the Age of Iron

 

taxes won't make enough of a difference to most low income persons. and, if you make enough for it to be a difference; then, you need to (make like the rich and) talk with a tax specialist to lower your tax burden. You may need to re-allocate your budget to take advantage of more tax preferences.

 

it could take more than a few years to save up that much money, below a certain income threshold. add, structural forms of unemployment, and you have a recipe for disaster for any investment strategy. simply referring to ideals is not helpful to most people. social safety nets help most people, below a given income threshold.

private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not official poverty.

 

I'm not talking about welfare recipients and low income people. Both are subsidized with money taken from other people. They already get passive income.

Add up how much of others peoples money the poor and low income get... ask how much would you have to work to make what they have given to them? Calculate how much money the middle class has to work, calculate how much money they have to save and invest to earn the money the poor and low income people get handed to them?

I'm talking about middle income people who would be horrified to find themselves on welfare but want to build enough wealth to build up passive income. You'll never be financially independent working for someone else so you have to work, save and invest for your passive income.

 

I've learned that the income limits are so low for the safety net that middle class people will not qualify for them not even when they are unable to work but these same people (the middle class) who pay for the safety net and are led to believe there is a safety net for them. They are being lied to and mislead. Of the people who do qualify for the safety net you'll live better than the people who work and pay for it but don't qualify for it. The middle class is in for a train wreck but no one will tell them the truth. I know this for a fact!

It's all about the poor who are being well taken care of being they get money and subsidies for no work, no investment and yet they want more. The poor looks at the middle class and "wants what they have" but refuse to understand that most of "that" is because they are up to their eyeballs in debt. If they couldn't take on debt, they'd live almost the same lifestyle as the poor.

If the middle class doesn't want to live in worse poverty than the poor they better stop worrying about the poor and start looking out for themselves.

 

Lets say a single person gets $194 (no tax owed) added to his EBT card each month.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/how-much-could-i-receive

1. Calculate how much you have to work to make the same amount of $ that they get handed to them every month after taxes.
2. A family of 3 on welfare gets $511 a month. How much do you as a middle class person have to work (after taxes) to make the same money? How much time are you away from your family, missing your daughters birthday, away from them at Christmas, missing the first step, not being able to tuck them in at night, all to make the same money that is "given" to them?

I haven't even touched rent subsidies, electric, phone, healthcare subsidies, other services they get given to them at no cost but you'll have to pay full ticket price for.

Now lets say you're middle class saving and investing and want to build a passive income fund. You invested in AT&T stock in 2015 and earning $0.048 in dividends per month. How much stock would you need to own to pay for the same passive income the poor and low income people get?

$194.00 a month ($2,340.00 a year) = How much T stock?
$511.00 a month ($6,132.00 a year) = How much T stock?

And they complain? The poor are being taken care of but they've gotten greedy and want more of your money. They don't care if you have to work till 75, 85, or your death. The middle class better start worrying about themselves.

Believe me, I've looked into it, if you're middle class you won't qualify for the safety net. They soak you dry then slam the door in your face when you need help. And they want to take more money from you.

 

If you don't think my posts are true, ask yourself why people on welfare end up "trapped" on welfare. That's because they make more in subsidies and handouts than they would if they worked. Hence, trapped in welfare. You'd have to make a damn good income to make more than they get in handouts and $15 an hour isn't going to do it especially after the government grab.

Many people work, save and invest all their lives hoping to achieve the same passive income.

I'm tired of the greed and the lies coming from politicians and from people hoping to get more of your money.