ADVERTISEMENT

Tax Plan pushed through - What does it mean?

Top 20% already pays 86% of the income taxes. Top 10% pays 45%. That is a higher share compared to their income than most other industrialized countries. Is enough EVER enough for you liberals?

imrs.php

I’m a fiscal conservative. And I believe any bill that adds 1.4 trillion to the deficit is contrary to those principles. Slashing taxes for top earners while spending at the same rate doesn’t make any sense. So next time, think before you open your big mouth.
 
I always think before I open my mouth, you should try it. As has been pointed out to you many times, but which you are obviously too thick to comprehend, cutting taxes doesn't spend a penny.

Baseline budgeting, useless departments, top heavy adminstration....that's spending that can be cut.

And that wasn' the question I asked anyway. Can you read?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Louigi
Top 20% already pays 86% of the income taxes. Top 10% pays 45%. That is a higher share compared to their income than most other industrialized countries. Is enough EVER enough for you liberals?

imrs.php

They don't give two shits about fairness. They can do basic math and realize that there are a lot more people in the bottom 90% than in the top 10%, and thus much more votes. Therefore if they can pit the 90% against the 10% and claim to advocate for the 90% - they'll get more votes.
 
I’m a fiscal conservative. And I believe any bill that adds 1.4 trillion to the deficit is contrary to those principles. Slashing taxes for top earners while spending at the same rate doesn’t make any sense. So next time, think before you open your big mouth.

Sure. So let's stop spending at the same rate then. Let's slash 1.4T to make up for it. We can start with the big boys: Social Security, Unemployment, and Medicare, and then move onto Defense and other areas that could be trimmed a little as well.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Louigi
Sure. So let's stop spending at the same rate then. Let's slash 1.4T to make up for it. We can start with the big boys: Social Security, Unemployment, and Medicare, and then move onto Defense and other areas that could be trimmed a little as well.

If I read it correctly the $1.4T increase is possible over a 10 year period. If they can't find $1.4T over a 10 year period there is really a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heelicious
I guess that one's that look at the entire bill and see a ton of other tax breaks for the wealthy.

CC
I suspect then the ones you are looking at are from liberal thinktanks . On that note, who gives a rats ass if high earners get a tax break if everyone else gets them too?
 
I always think before I open my mouth, you should try it. As has been pointed out to you many times, but which you are obviously too thick to comprehend, cutting taxes doesn't spend a penny.

Baseline budgeting, useless departments, top heavy adminstration....that's spending that can be cut.

And that wasn' the question I asked anyway. Can you read?

Don’t do the usual ‘can you read?’ crap. You asked me one thing which was and I quote, “is it ever enough for you liberals?”

In any case I am aware we spend too much. I am in favor of cutting certain things. But the government also needs a certain amount of revenue that it needs to essentially function. If you cut taxes too much, then basic institutions will cease to operate properly. And I realize the situation isn’t cut and dry, but cutting spending on programs many people rely on while appearing to give the wealthy a huge tax cut isn’t exactly a strategy that will win with most people.
 
Sure. So let's stop spending at the same rate then. Let's slash 1.4T to make up for it. We can start with the big boys: Social Security, Unemployment, and Medicare, and then move onto Defense and other areas that could be trimmed a little as well.


Here’s the big problem. In every piece of that pie, some industry, class or area of the United States depends on it for their livelihood. Medical care is something that most people don’t want to part with, many western states depend on military bases for their economy, for some, social security is basically what they live on.

The point is, we have to take a good hard at ourselves, and make a concerted effort to get our debt and deficit under control. Our debt as a percentage of our GDP is already too high.
 
Here’s the big problem. In every piece of that pie, some industry, class or area of the United States depends on it for their livelihood.

Yes, and people depend on their paychecks for their livelihood, so taking a larger and larger chunk of that to distribute elsewhere screws those people.

I just ethically have a problem with telling some guy that he needs to fund 10 other people's retirement, health care, and unemployment - just because he earns a lot of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
Yes, and people depend on their paychecks for their livelihood, so taking a larger and larger chunk of that to distribute elsewhere screws those people.

I just ethically have a problem with telling some guy that he needs to fund 10 other people's retirement, health care, and unemployment - just because he earns a lot of money.

I have never subscribed to the idea that taxing the shit out of the rich is the great, progressive economic policy some think it is. However, I do subscribe to the idea that some basic social safety nets are necessary. House prices continue to rise, wages are not keeping up with cost of living and I think that needs to be addressed.
 
Wouldn't a good way to address that be to take away less wages via tax, which as you say are already too low?

I think the answer is to increase them. Someone who’s making minimum wage isn’t getting taxed that much anyway. Certain sectors need a wage bump. If these corporations are getting a huge cut in their taxes, why not use it to enrich their employees?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heelicious
The top 10% pay 45% of all income taxes levied, the top 20% pay over 90%. The bottom 50% of wage earners don't pay a dime in income taxes. Sounds like the wealthy are paying their share and more to me. And I'm one of the poor people but I certainly have to pay taxes every year. The fact that 50% don't pay any income taxes at all is a major issue.

Couple that with the fact that the government can't control their profligate spending and you have a deficit which now equals our GDP. That's a recipe for disaster.
 
Those making minimum wage should maybe try and get some training or education to better themselves. No way should a McDonald's, Burger King, etc. worker make $15-20 per hour. Can you imagine what the burgers would cost? How about bust your ass and show up and become a manager.
 
Lol cute that you guys would point out the percentage of income taxes paid by the top earners without mentioning the fact that income inequality is far and away worse here than the other countries in that comparison. Of course our top earners pay a higher percentage of total reciepts. Because they are taking an unsustainable level of all new earning. Considering the fact that over 90% of all new wealth goes to the top 1%, they should be paying a helluva lot more.

I'm honestly confused how anyone could be in denial of the fact that our government is bought and paid for by this same 1%. The tax plan was already structured for their benefit, and each successive plan will always push it further in that direction. Until we overturn citizens united and get money out of politics anyways.

I'm sure these same conservatives defended bush's tax cuts when they came out. Probably spouted the same garbage about trickle down reagonomics and plenty of other bullshit. All while the financial industry made off with hundreds billions of dollars and our economy went in to the shitter. This is the exact same thing, all over again. This is what wealth redistribution actually looks like.
 
Lol cute that you guys would point out the percentage of income taxes paid by the top earners without mentioning the fact that income inequality is far and away worse here than the other countries in that comparison. Of course our top earners pay a higher percentage of total reciepts. Because they are taking an unsustainable level of all new earning. Considering the fact that over 90% of all new wealth goes to the top 1%, they should be paying a helluva lot more.

I'm honestly confused how anyone could be in denial of the fact that our government is bought and paid for by this same 1%. The tax plan was already structured for their benefit, and each successive plan will always push it further in that direction. Until we overturn citizens united and get money out of politics anyways.

I'm sure these same conservatives defended bush's tax cuts when they came out. Probably spouted the same garbage about trickle down reagonomics and plenty of other bullshit. All while the financial industry made off with hundreds billions of dollars and our economy went in to the shitter. This is the exact same thing, all over again. This is what wealth redistribution actually looks like.
I disagree with everything you posed 100% . It is pure liberal class warfare identity politics that is tired, old and predictable. Liberals bitch about the 1% then vote for 1% ers like John Kerry, The Clinton's, Rockerfeller's, etc. The ignore the destructiveness of the Community reinvestment act and how it was the true spark of the 2008 real estate collapse, not GWB and taxes.Bitch about citizens united but and give a pass to Union monetary political support. Again, predictable...
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
I suspect then the ones you are looking at are from liberal thinktanks . On that note, who gives a rats ass if high earners get a tax break if everyone else gets them too?

No, even conservative analysis has a hard time making this look fair. Can you just be honest? Are you OK with the richest 10% getting a huge break and the poorest 10% getting screwed?

CC
 
H
No, even conservative analysis has a hard time making this look fair. Can you just be honest? Are you OK with the richest 10% getting a huge break and the poorest 10% getting screwed?

CC
How many poor people do you know that itemize? I bet none, their standard deduction will be doubled!
 
I disagree with everything you posed 100% . It is pure liberal class warfare identity politics that is tired, old and predictable. Liberals bitch about the 1% then vote for 1% ers like John Kerry, The Clinton's, Rockerfeller's, etc. The ignore the destructiveness of the Community reinvestment act and how it was the true spark of the 2008 real estate collapse, not GWB and taxes.Bitch about citizens united but and give a pass to Union monetary political support. Again, predictable...

Your ability to disagree with facts is pretty astounding.

It isn't "liberal class warfare" that over 90% of all new wealth goes to the top 1%. That's a fact. People like you aren't even capable of sophisticated debate. Its just the same tired tribal straw man bullshit with you over and over again.

If 90% of the new wealth, and a similar percentage of total income goes to the top 1% and they are only paying 60% (for example) of the taxes then they are underpaying. That's not exactly rocket science. Ironically, the flat tax supported by so many conservatives would mean that the top 1% must pay the same proportion of total income taxes as the proportion of total income earned by the top 1%. Which is my entire point.

Please. The 2008 collapse was caused by the reckless behavior of the financial sector and the ridiculous lack of regulation over that industry. This is the kind of shit that happens when these top earners are allowed to do whatever they want. They screw everyone else over. Throw in some giant tax breaks for those same earners, and a few wars on the credit card... and you get a recession.

A private company contributing limitless sums of money into super PACs to advance it's interests, is not even remotely similar to an organized group of laborers pooling their political contributions together.

That being said, I support publicly funded elections. So once again your "liberal" caricature misses the mark.
 
Here are my thoughts; I need someone to tell me if this plan let’s me keep more of my earnings or less. Then I will declare if it’s good or not.
Depends on how you file your taxes. If you don't normally itemize you should get a tax cut. If you itemize it depends on your income level and what you would normally deduct.
 
I disagree with everything you posed 100% . It is pure liberal class warfare identity politics that is tired, old and predictable. Liberals bitch about the 1% then vote for 1% ers like John Kerry, The Clinton's, Rockerfeller's, etc. The ignore the destructiveness of the Community reinvestment act and how it was the true spark of the 2008 real estate collapse, not GWB and taxes.Bitch about citizens united but and give a pass to Union monetary political support. Again, predictable...
Rockerfeller's?
 
I just found out that if this bill passes, I can no longer deduct business supplies on my tax return. Being self-employed just got harder.

#MAGA
 
I just found out that if this bill passes, I can no longer deduct business supplies on my tax return. Being self-employed just got harder.

#MAGA

Help me out here - do we want businesses to get tax breaks (aka being able to deduct supplies) or do we want to stick it to businesses so we can help out the workin' man (or unworkin' man as it may be)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
Help me out here - do we want businesses to get tax breaks (aka being able to deduct supplies) or do we want to stick it to businesses so we can help out the workin' man (or unworkin' man as it may be)?
I'm just sharing how it affects people like me. This bill isn't about what "we" want. "We" aren't being consulted about it.
 
You should be happy. You'll be contributing more to the greater good.
And, I'm not being deceived by the liberal identity class warfare schemes either. The GOP is All-For-One-And-One-For-All! Big Government working for all of us. Thank you, GOP.
 
No, even conservative analysis has a hard time making this look fair. Can you just be honest? Are you OK with the richest 10% getting a huge break and the poorest 10% getting screwed?

CC
How much less than nothing can the poor pay? The bottom 50% have no net income tax liability. Hard to get a cut from zero. Logic dictates that you actually have to pay something in order to get a reduction in the amount you pay. And those that pay the most stand to get a lager reduction
 
So the corporate rate will drop to around 20% in the new bill. The House has shrunk the brackets from 7 to 4 with the top earners still paying 39.6%. The Senate has left the 7 brackets and cut the top bracket to 38.5%. The House proposes $1600 per child deduction and the Senate proposes $2000. The Standard deduction proposed for joint filers for the Senate is $24000 and the House is $24400.

I can definitely see the rich getting the better end of the deal.
 
So the corporate rate will drop to around 20% in the new bill. The House has shrunk the brackets from 7 to 4 with the top earners still paying 39.6%. The Senate has left the 7 brackets and cut the top bracket to 38.5%. The House proposes $1600 per child deduction and the Senate proposes $2000. The Standard deduction proposed for joint filers for the Senate is $24000 and the House is $24400.

I can definitely see the rich getting the better end of the deal.
The rich getting the better end mostly stems from the possible deductions or lack thereof. Needless to say, the taxes you pay are very dependent on an individual's situation. One side is always going to be able to claim they are getting screwed as long as we keep a tax code that is full of deductions and progressive taxation.
 
The rich getting the better end mostly stems from the possible deductions or lack thereof. Needless to say, the taxes you pay are very dependent on an individual's situation. One side is always going to be able to claim they are getting screwed as long as we keep a tax code that is full of deductions and progressive taxation.
I'd go along with a flat tax.
 
How much less than nothing can the poor pay? The bottom 50% have no net income tax liability. Hard to get a cut from zero. Logic dictates that you actually have to pay something in order to get a reduction in the amount you pay. And those that pay the most stand to get a lager reduction
I've shared this before. My sister in law was working at just above minimal wage(her choice, she could have taken a better job) She did not pay a penny in for taxes. But at tax time every year, she managed a tremendous return. Sometimes between 6-8k.
I also employees a man who refused pay raises just to keep the free money coming at the end of the year.
Until the free ride is stopped, we will continue to have issues. That bottom 50% everyone speaks about gets benefits the upper half doesnt have. People are penalized for success.

I t also amazes me that someone would complain that this gets shoved thru, when Obama care was handled in a more aggressive manor. Personally, I hate government as well as politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
I've shared this before. My sister in law was working at just above minimal wage(her choice, she could have taken a better job) She did not pay a penny in for taxes. But at tax time every year, she managed a tremendous return. Sometimes between 6-8k.
I also employees a man who refused pay raises just to keep the free money coming at the end of the year.
Until the free ride is stopped, we will continue to have issues. That bottom 50% everyone speaks about gets benefits the upper half doesnt have. People are penalized for success.

I t also amazes me that someone would complain that this gets shoved thru, when Obama care was handled in a more aggressive manor. Personally, I hate government as well as politics.
How dare you bring up how Obamacare was passed! It is amazing that many in the lower 50% actually MAKE money come tax time. That just isn't right. At best they should break even.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT