B-Man Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Politico headline: "Senate bill would increase middle class taxes" Politico fine print: ". . . when it expires in 2025." THE MEDIA SUCKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 4 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Tax cut do lead to long term growth, but not necessarily immediate growth, as it takes time for spending habits to change, and for savings to grow and become future spending, where as short term public sector job loss is an immediate impact. So about how long did it take for Bush2's tax cuts to increase long term growth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 8 minutes ago, TPS said: So about how long did it take for Bush2's tax cuts to increase long term growth? That stuff never matters, it's all about declaring "we are open for business again" to get people to invest in research and old-type businesses to get jobs going And new regimes can certainly pick up a country or state or township after a spell of government seen as being against business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, B-Man said: Politico headline: "Senate bill would increase middle class taxes" Politico fine print: ". . . when it expires in 2025." THE MEDIA SUCKS My taxes will go up if the Senate plan stays as is without being able to deduct state income taxes and property taxes. If it meant avoiding cuts to medicare/medicaid and other social programs I'd be fine with it, but the opposite of course is true. Oh, and we'll get rid of the individual mandate as if health care premiums aren't high enough. Thanks GOP. Edited November 16, 2017 by Doc Brown 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 4 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: My taxes will go up if the Senate plan stays as is without being able to deduct state and property taxes. If it meant avoiding cuts to medicare/medicaid and other social programs I'd be fine with it, but the opposite of course is true. Oh, and we'll get rid of the individual mandate as if health care premiums aren't high enough. Thanks GOP. I thought closing tax loopholes was a good thing? Or was that just other people's loopholes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: I thought closing tax loopholes was a good thing? Or was that just other people's loopholes? All the GOP ever talks about is how they want to cut taxes for everybody. Especially the middle class. This plan doesn't do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 6 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: All the GOP ever talks about is how they want to cut taxes for everybody. Especially the middle class. This plan doesn't do that. You don't want to pay your fair share? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: You don't want to pay your fair share? More than happy to. Just don't cut social programs that benefit the poor. I prefer my money is used there. Not to help balance the GOP tax plan (that will cut funding to these programs) so it falls under the reconciliation rules. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 9 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: More than happy to. Just don't cut social programs that benefit the poor. I prefer my money is used there. Not to help balance the GOP tax plan (that will cut funding to these programs) so it falls under the reconciliation rules. Under the current tax structure the top 1% of earners pay almost 50% of all federal taxes, the top 20% of earners pay roughly 85% of all federal taxes, and the bottom 45% of all earners pay less than 0% (they receive money from the federal government in excess of taxes paid on wage earnings as a "refund" of their returns. That isn't equitable, and the insistence that those shouldering nearly the entire federal burden aren't deserving of a tax cut, while at the same time insisting that social spending be sustained at current levels indicates that you actually aren't willing to pay your fair share for the expenditures you desire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 20 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Under the current tax structure the top 1% of earners pay almost 50% of all federal taxes, the top 20% of earners pay roughly 85% of all federal taxes, and the bottom 45% of all earners pay less than 0% (they receive money from the federal government in excess of taxes paid on wage earnings as a "refund" of their returns. That isn't equitable, and the insistence that those shouldering nearly the entire federal burden aren't deserving of a tax cut, while at the same time insisting that social spending be sustained at current levels indicates that you actually aren't willing to pay your fair share for the expenditures you desire. I can't argue with you on that point as obviously we have a different viewpoint about how much the rich should pay in taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 17, 2017 Author Share Posted November 17, 2017 The plan, cut taxes and start screaming how the deficit is out of control so now "entitlement reform" has to happen. Middle Class gets screwed. GOP, best politicians money can buy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 15 hours ago, Doc Brown said: I can't argue with you on that point as obviously we have a different viewpoint about how much the rich should pay in taxes. As I said, the top 1% already pay roughly 50% of all taxes collected. The top 20% pay about 85% of taxes. 45% get a free ride. It isn't in any way equitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 and the working class deeply resents the free ride often doing better than they do financially Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 17, 2017 Author Share Posted November 17, 2017 GOP tax plan, already facing a Senate battle, also isn’t popular with many voters While House Republicans have approved their proposal to overhaul the U.S. tax code, internal conflicts in the Senate makes passage of that chamber’s plan less assured. Meanwhile, the party’s argument that tax reforms will benefit the middle class is on a collision course with nonpartisan analyses and voters’ perceptions of the proposals. 18 hours ago, B-Man said: Politico headline: "Senate bill would increase middle class taxes" Politico fine print: ". . . when it expires in 2025." THE MEDIA SUCKS Ya, how dare the media tell the truth! That's why the right wing hates the media, they hate the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 16 hours ago, Doc Brown said: I can't argue with you on that point as obviously we have a different viewpoint about how much the rich should pay in taxes. Please define "rich". I'm glad they're doing away with the alternative minimum tax. However, taking away some of the SALT deductions will have the effect of putting the AMT on thousand more of my countrymen. I couldn't be happier . Welcome to my world. The AMT and the ACA surtax are an abomination and all citizens should be incensed at any politician that sees them as a source of revenue for their own seat of power. Wyden is a case in point. He's never met a tax he hasn't loved. It's not his money, it's ours. If dropping the individual mandate means 16 million people will drop their worthless and expensive policies, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 17, 2017 Author Share Posted November 17, 2017 Did Putin help write this tax bill? The Post reports: Former defense secretaries Leon E. Panetta, Chuck Hagel and Ash Carter told senior congressional leaders in a letter Wednesday that because the tax plan is expected to increase the debt, passing it will probably mean future cuts to Pentagon budgets “for training, maintenance, force structure, flight missions, procurement and other key programs.” “The result is the growing danger of a ‘hollowed out’ military force that lacks the ability to sustain the intensive deployment requirements of our global defense mission,” the secretaries wrote. They cited two recent accidents involving U.S. Navy destroyers that led to the deaths of 17 sailors as evidence that cuts in military spending can lead to a “lack of adequate training.” The trio blasts “a broken budget process in Congress” for leaving the Pentagon with “a lack of certainty as to what budget resources will be provided for defense and other national security requirements in the next year.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Repeal the payroll tax. Make people write checks to the IRS quarterly for what they "owe" Big Brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 17, 2017 Author Share Posted November 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, Nanker said: Repeal the payroll tax. Make people write checks to the IRS quarterly for what they "owe" Big Brother. Yes! Then we can have the middle class get angry and demand greater enforcement of tax collection and hunting down of off shore accounts so that the middle class can get a tax cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Nanker said: Please define "rich". I'm glad they're doing away with the alternative minimum tax. However, taking away some of the SALT deductions will have the effect of putting the AMT on thousand more of my countrymen. I couldn't be happier . Welcome to my world. The AMT and the ACA surtax are an abomination and all citizens should be incensed at any politician that sees them as a source of revenue for their own seat of power. Ehhhhh....sort of. In all honesty I need to bring myself up to speed, but the AMT effectively eliminates using state & local taxes a deduction. They may be stating they'r e eliminating the AMT, but this feels like a push towards a standard system for all closer to the AMT. Edited November 17, 2017 by Kevbeau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 2 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: As I said, the top 1% already pay roughly 50% of all taxes collected. The top 20% pay about 85% of taxes. 45% get a free ride. It isn't in any way equitable. All taxes collected? You mean INCOME taxes, which are just under half of ALL Federal taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts