Are the people paying 20k-30k the people who cant afford the 500$ emergency spending though. Not saying there aren’t any (as someone might have a ridiculous amount of debt) but those making that much are way more likely to afford the 500$ emergency fund than the low income who almost pay no income tax in the first place (no federal, as thats returned in the form of a refund, and variable state based on state.)
Changing icome tax doesnt adresss the majority of people who have the problem the post is about. Theres already like 8(?) States without income tax
You have to understand how expensive it is supporting a family right now. People are spending an insane amount of money on groceries alone. $1,000 - $1,800 a month
The gas to get to work for a two income household could be upwards of $1,000 a month.
Mortgage renewal? Hope you have an extra $700 a month laying around.
Cad payments? Ya that’s going to add another $200-$300 a month in interest payments alone now.
And forget it if you have kids. Daycare, physical activities, summer camp? Maybe another $12k per year depending on how many kids you have!
The issue here is that the middle class are also being destroyed and without them there’s no money to even give to the government to help lower income people.
In Canada, $150k a year for a family of 5 is low income now.
At least lower income people get subsidized food and housing. Middle class? They get 20% interest on credit cards to keep afloat.
This isn’t about wages, it’s about costs. All of them of which taxes are just one. A big one, but just one.
You can attack the corpo’s later, right now the fight is with the government to get the money going out under control.
You can get a 50% raise, but if you’re still spending 70% more to eat and have a roof over your head, it doesn’t really matter does it?
If shit was more affordable, maybe $40k a year could be a livable wage again. Cause right now it’s not.
So your answer to fixing a problem is lowering imcome tax? A solution that doesnt even fix the problem for the target audience in the first place. Its nonsensical to completely ignore the likely largest group of people that need the help.
The people who have debt in mortgages is based on what kind of home they bought. Its an opportunity cost on why they chose x home over what might have been the cheapest home they could have bought (not saying that there arent people who just buys the cheapest home possible in an area, but they arent likely the majoirty). The person who has a mortgage at least has a house, the people that cant afford the 500 month to month emergency fund likely has nothing.
I wont even get to the point where its the people who have houses are the ones making it harder for more houses to get built because they want to maintain the value of their house at the cost of those who have not.
So what I hear you saying is that families with homes should just lose their homes because funding the government is more important? And they should have thought of that before buying a home?
Are you a fucking idiot?
Let’s just make MORE poverty stricken people, the government comes before all! It sounds like you just want everyone to hand over their pay cheques to the government so they can decide who gets what and when they get it, so we can all be totally fucked.
where did i state that I said it’s more important. I only stated that ignoring the main group of people that the article is discussing is a pretty dumb fix.
there are a lot of adjustments a person could make per month due to less income, and housing doesn’t have to be first. if one is spending 1000$ on groceries for a group, but someone barely making it by is making it with less means there’s discrepancy in spending habits with groceries. can dial it down to the rest. Same goes with Children and other choices of spending, but it ultimately goes down to fixing costs because thats whats boning everyone, while the original comment chain was about fixing debt (in a way that doesn’t help everyone, as there are already regions and people who are completely unaffected by income tax), which not exactly everyone who cant afford 500$ month to month is necessarily in.
Income tax is not a fix, its a band aid that works for some that makes no progress on fixing the actual problem and only kicks it down the road for the discussion to happen again later. You haven’t even discussed what happens when there is no income tax and things get expensive enough then, what are you going to do then? You had all the time to discuss it at the point I mentioned some people already pay no income tax.
Are the people paying 20k-30k the people who cant afford the 500$ emergency spending though. Not saying there aren’t any (as someone might have a ridiculous amount of debt) but those making that much are way more likely to afford the 500$ emergency fund than the low income who almost pay no income tax in the first place (no federal, as thats returned in the form of a refund, and variable state based on state.)
Changing icome tax doesnt adresss the majority of people who have the problem the post is about. Theres already like 8(?) States without income tax
You have to understand how expensive it is supporting a family right now. People are spending an insane amount of money on groceries alone. $1,000 - $1,800 a month
The gas to get to work for a two income household could be upwards of $1,000 a month.
Mortgage renewal? Hope you have an extra $700 a month laying around.
Cad payments? Ya that’s going to add another $200-$300 a month in interest payments alone now.
And forget it if you have kids. Daycare, physical activities, summer camp? Maybe another $12k per year depending on how many kids you have!
The issue here is that the middle class are also being destroyed and without them there’s no money to even give to the government to help lower income people.
In Canada, $150k a year for a family of 5 is low income now.
At least lower income people get subsidized food and housing. Middle class? They get 20% interest on credit cards to keep afloat.
This isn’t about wages, it’s about costs. All of them of which taxes are just one. A big one, but just one.
You can attack the corpo’s later, right now the fight is with the government to get the money going out under control.
You can get a 50% raise, but if you’re still spending 70% more to eat and have a roof over your head, it doesn’t really matter does it?
If shit was more affordable, maybe $40k a year could be a livable wage again. Cause right now it’s not.
So your answer to fixing a problem is lowering imcome tax? A solution that doesnt even fix the problem for the target audience in the first place. Its nonsensical to completely ignore the likely largest group of people that need the help.
The people who have debt in mortgages is based on what kind of home they bought. Its an opportunity cost on why they chose x home over what might have been the cheapest home they could have bought (not saying that there arent people who just buys the cheapest home possible in an area, but they arent likely the majoirty). The person who has a mortgage at least has a house, the people that cant afford the 500 month to month emergency fund likely has nothing.
I wont even get to the point where its the people who have houses are the ones making it harder for more houses to get built because they want to maintain the value of their house at the cost of those who have not.
So what I hear you saying is that families with homes should just lose their homes because funding the government is more important? And they should have thought of that before buying a home?
Are you a fucking idiot?
Let’s just make MORE poverty stricken people, the government comes before all! It sounds like you just want everyone to hand over their pay cheques to the government so they can decide who gets what and when they get it, so we can all be totally fucked.
This Lemmy crowd is filled with morons.
where did i state that I said it’s more important. I only stated that ignoring the main group of people that the article is discussing is a pretty dumb fix.
there are a lot of adjustments a person could make per month due to less income, and housing doesn’t have to be first. if one is spending 1000$ on groceries for a group, but someone barely making it by is making it with less means there’s discrepancy in spending habits with groceries. can dial it down to the rest. Same goes with Children and other choices of spending, but it ultimately goes down to fixing costs because thats whats boning everyone, while the original comment chain was about fixing debt (in a way that doesn’t help everyone, as there are already regions and people who are completely unaffected by income tax), which not exactly everyone who cant afford 500$ month to month is necessarily in.
Income tax is not a fix, its a band aid that works for some that makes no progress on fixing the actual problem and only kicks it down the road for the discussion to happen again later. You haven’t even discussed what happens when there is no income tax and things get expensive enough then, what are you going to do then? You had all the time to discuss it at the point I mentioned some people already pay no income tax.
What are you driving, two Escalades?