Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
SQ744 - more info
I know we already had a post about this but I thought I would follow up with an answer to a question everyone seemed to have: Where is this money going to come from?
The money is going to come from increased taxes on our state's oil and gas companies. Yes, oil and gas companies make a lot of money but they also employ a large portion of our working population in the state. Increased taxes = less money to pay their employees = employees getting laid off = higher unemployment in Oklahoma.
I am also not convinced, if this passes, that the money would be used for our children and teachers and not placed into the pockets of the superintendents. Supposedly the lottery has added $300m to our school system but somehow our school system is worse off than it was five years ago.
Anyway, just my two cents. It does seem that we all agree on this one!
Re: SQ744 - more info
I, personally, think the state wants to increase taxes for the oil and gas companies and the only way it will fly is to tie the increased taxes to a hot button topic like education. I am still not convinced the lottery has done anything for our public schools.
Also, while I am on my taxes tirade, you all need to google a tax calculator. Several very important tax items expire at the end of this year - if Obama doesn't increase the length of these items, the taxes we pay will be severely impacted. For one thing, the marriage penalty comes back - meaning, married people with a joint income of $100k will pay more in taxes than a single person with $100k in income. There are a lot of other items involved in this, but I highly suggested you find a tax calculator. My taxes will increase $700 PER MONTH. PER.MONTH if he does not sign these bills. I suggest you check it out - you might have a rude awakening!!
Increased taxes = decreased spending by our citizens = economic hardship
I've decided not to support it since the "Education governor" is against it, but there are a couple of issues. Higher taxes on oil and gas companies don't necessarily have to mean lower wages for employees. It could just mean slightly lower profits for the major corporations (though, yes, they'll probably rationalize a way to pass that issue on to the little man.)
The reason the lottery program didn't work is because while it DID add money to our schools, the legislature reappropriated some of the money that was already being spent on schools for other things. So while technically the lottery money was spent on schools, I don't think anyone realized the legislature would be taking away some of the money they'd been spending before which means that, overall, it was a wash (though, without the lottery money, maybe they just would have spent less on schools with nothing to make up the shortfall.)
Also, if allowed to expire the estate tax will rise to 55% (for estates over $1 mil). That is just wrong. How dare you work hard all your life to save money and leave an inheritance for your family! You must PAY! And a penalty for being married? Really? How corrupt is that?!
Neither of these issues directly affect my family... but I still think they're ridiculous.
ETA: Oh, and SQ744 will be getting a big fat no from me.
As morbid as it sounds...a massive number of older people have committed suicide this year to prevent their families from having to pay the massive estate taxes when they die in the future. In fact, a couple that lives down the street from me did this.
To make matters worse, because this is happening, the Obama administration is considering retroactively reinstating the higher estate tax to January 2010!!!!!!!!!
And Tavia, you have a right to be mad, this affects all of us. The more taxes we pay, the worse off the economy is because people's disposable incomes decrease resulting in our citizens adding less to our economy.
Actually, it does mean lower wages for the employees as tax expense is not included in the "bottom line" that you are refering to. These companies are public (or are in the process of IPOs) and they have to meet certain cash flow projections to have a certain stock price. When taxes increase the first thing large companies start doing is cutting wages and laying off their employees to minimize the effect on cash flow.
Every federal proposal I've seen on not letting the Bush federal tax cuts expire (i.e., reupping them) either reinstates them for everyone OR reinstates them for every family earning less than $250,000. Has anyone seen any evidence to the contrary?
Regardless, taxes HAVE to go up at some point. We're 13 trillion dollars in debt and have a federal deficit of a trillion dollars/year. There's only so much you can cut and rob Peter to pay Paul (I'm looking at you, Social Security!) It's like when people on MM post their budgets and their bare necessary expenses are $3000/month, their discretionary expenses are $1000/month, and they only earn $2500/month. All of the grocery coupon clipping, finding cheaper cell phone plans, and cutting cable in the world isn't going to balance their budget. The primary solution at that point is to bring in more income.
Honestly, I am not very well-informed about the estate tax, but I am pretty sure that as far as income taxes go, the only part of the Bush tax cuts Obama is opposed to renewing is that for the wealthiest 2%.
This chart seems to lay it out really well:
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/taxcuts.jpg/8516961-1-eng-US/taxcuts.jpg_full_600.jpg
Trust me, honey, I am not in the weathiest 2%. The marriage penalty will be financially devastating to a lot of couples and not just those in the wealthiest 2%.
Further, it also reinstates the AMT tax back down to $200k. This level was determined in the 1980s when a yearly income of $200k was a massive amount of money - it isn't now.
And Tavia is correct about the estate tax. I am not sure about your link b/c I can't get it to work - sorry!
I think you're both looking at different data- Stripes is looking at the "what if the tax cuts aren't extended for anyone" chart (which isn't even being discussed, as I understand it, though correct me if I'm wrong) and Critti is looking at the "what if they're not extended for the 250k+ folks" chart (which is one of the current proposals.)
I know teachers who don't support it and that speak volumes to me.
I'm not sure about Stripes, but you are correct about the data I'm looking at. Here is the link to the full article with the chart I was trying to link earlier:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Tax-VOX/2010/0823/Bush-Obama-tax-cuts-both-plans-extend-the-tax-cuts-for-most-Americans
Factcheck.org also has a good article about the 2011 tax increases:
http://factcheck.org/2010/09/2011-tax-increases/When it comes to this kind of stuff, I totally avoid all mainstream media and only utilize the information that I pay for from the FASB, IRS, etc. I receive these newsletters through email. These three things are discussed:
1. Reinstatement of the marriage penalty (which effects everyone that files MFJ or MJS)
2. Reinstatement of the estate tax (generally, which effects everyone but estate taxes are a very complicated matter)
3. Issues with AMT and the current AGI limitations
$200k a year is a massive amount of money, not ridiculously wealthy, but better off than the majority of Americans.
Luzern, Switzerland
Bios
Adventures of A. Cook
It's about 8 times the median family income here, so yeah, that is far above average for our location.
Yes, but when you consider that this limitation was set in the 1980s and has yet to be adjusted.....it was MUCH more money in the 80s than it is now. And although it is a lot of money in Oklahoma, it is not a lot of money in other areas of the country due to high cost of living. It needs to be adjusted.