"Stormin Mormon" writes:

So, I'm writing about giving money to people who don't work, and you use
EITC as a rebuttal. Please include in the rest of the agencies and programs
that give my tax dollars to people who don't work. And give yourself the
bigger picture.

If you aren't talking about EITC, which IS in this thread, then I have
to GUESS what you're talking about?

No thanks.

Let me repeat for the third time:

As far as "rewarding the idle", I'm _still_ pretty sure Newt and company
largely solved that problem. But if you have more reforms you can think
of, I'm all ears. Because I don't want to reward the idle either.

So I guess you and I agree on the matter.

Christopher A. Young
"Dan Espen" wrote in message
...
"Stormin Mormon" writes:

Taking money away from those who work, to give that money to people who
don't work. Sounds communist to me. "From each according to his ability,
to
each according to his needs."

I thought the USA was a constitutional republic with liberty and justice
for
all. Not a regime that rewards the idle.

Here's some information:

To qualify for EITC you must have earned income from employment,
self-employment or another source and meet certain rules.

There are more details, go he

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/artic...=96406,00.html

So, this particular money does not go to "people who don't work".

There goes your "communism" theory.

The people I know that qualify for EITC are doing jobs like dish washing
making minimum wage. You could stop EITC and even tax them. The most
likely result is that they'd end up homeless or resort to crime and wind
up in prison.

Ever wash dishes for a living? I'm glad to say I have not, except when
I was a soda jerk while in HS. Even as a HS student, I was working
pretty hard.

As far as "rewarding the idle", I'm _still_ pretty sure Newt and company
largely solved that problem. But if you have more reforms you can think
of, I'm all ears. Because I don't want to reward the idle either.

--
Dan Espen