... That chart in FAQ #3 lists the 2004 HHS Annual Poverty Level , so I assume that s what you want. The chart is somewhat confusing, but the text says thatMay 3, 2004 1 of 65View SourceOn May 3, 2004, at 5:20 PM, betty@... wrote:
> Stoney,That chart in FAQ #3 lists the 2004 "HHS Annual Poverty Level", so I
> Do you know what the poverty level is currently? I would still like to
> see some examples at different income levels.
assume that's what you want. The chart is somewhat confusing, but the
text says that every family will get the consumption tax for the
poverty level rebated. If I'm reading this right, a family of 4 with
married adults would get $5745 rebated annually. That's 23% of the
poverty level for that kind of family, listed as $24,980. Every family
(assuming that a single person is a one-person family) would get
$5745/year, regardless of their income. The only variables are family
size and married status. Income is not considered.
>> I am not convinced that this either will work, or is the right answer.That's part of what's confusing me. Also real estate, art, etc.
>> It just seems to me that this is a better solution than anything else
>> I've seen. I'm still confused by parts of it, such as why "used" items
>> aren't taxed, and what constitutes a "used" item.
> Dunno, but it does appear to be the first part of "some are more equal
> than others". If "used" means "someone owned it before", it surely
> save the wealthy a nice little piece of change when they buy their
> dollar early American highboys.
> Sorry if I seem skeptical; it is just that I think that we have to playSure. This is not obviously correct.
> devil's advocate with all proposed sweeping changes. :-)
... Possibly you have hit one of the background issues - just possibly many folks who are buying in Concord today are willing to saddle themselves with muchMay 7, 2004 65 of 65View Source
>TherePossibly you have hit one of the background issues - just possibly many
> are lots of people that are saddled with huge student loan payments.
> Many working families in Concord are making very large mortgage
> payments each month.
folks who are buying in Concord today are willing to saddle themselves with
much greater (proportional) debt than folks were willing to back in
mid-2oth century. This willingness to take on greater debt, has then
contributed to the price increases.
Many "older" folk were children during the depression and children who grew
up during the depression tend to have a different view of money. I don't
know what the sociologists "say" but across the years time and again as I
have had informal conversations with depression era "kids", they have
commented on how their view of money is very different from that of both
their parents and their children. I mention this only because I think that
it may be a background issue in our "mindsets" that influences how we view
many issues, including the steep rise in property taxes and the types of
services that those who are younger believe should be provided at town expense.
>This volatile income stream may be problematic forPerhaps we (local, state, federal) should begin to recognize that there are
> Concord to plan its budgets going forward (similar to the problems
> the state has been faced with the past few years when income tax
> receipts plummeted).
swings, and that we should put monies away in the good times for the bad
times. There will probably always be some "crushing" times such as the
depression, but we should begin to learn to manage our budgets (local,
state, federal) to ride out the lesser waves. At the local level, free
cash works toward this end, but at the state and federal level....