If I’m saving money, why would I care if someone else is saving more? Especially if that someone else and I are not on equal footing - meaning the someone else is providing more to the common good than I am.
Tax Plan pushed through - What does it mean?
- Thread starter ticket2ride04
- Start date
It's not much of an argument when you make statements you can't back up and I point that out, but you keep doing you.
But I did back them up. You just choose to believe your own opinions over empirical data.
Looks like a deal has been struck. It hasn't been officially written, but some details have leaked out.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/364699-negotiators-strike-deal-in-principle-on-tax-bill
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/364699-negotiators-strike-deal-in-principle-on-tax-bill
Should we report to the fallout shelters now? Is this the end of time?
Maybe. We'll have to wait until the final bill comes out. If it stays similar to the senate plan then there will actually be a net positive according to analysis from the treasury department. I haven't really paid close attention to the senate bill since I knew there would be changes made, but a saw a link to the projections this morning and took a look at it. The 1.5 trillion everyone keeps talking about is offset by projected GDP growth. Of course this is over a 10 year period and there is no way to guarantee growth, but I thought that was interesting.
I read the same report from the treasury department. I'm going to freeze dry several hundred pounds of food tonight just in case.
Pelosi and the other Dems said this would be Armageddon if it goes thru so no way would they lie. I'm getting prepared.
To be fair, a treasury department report is always going to be partisan, so it will show the best case scenario, but I think it's interesting to look at. It appears tax brackets and rates are going to change in the final version so the analysis doesn't really mean too much.
I get that and completely understand. I take any prediction by them or the CBO, no matter who's in office, with a grain of salt. I figure if I get the couple $1000 the Reps promise plus the $2500 the Dems promised I would save on healthcare I can have a nice Christmas.
On a somewhat related note, the fed is raising rates and raised their forecast for growth next year. Figured I would just stick this in here instead of creating another thread since no one besides @Louigi and @UNC71-00 will care about it.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...while-sticking-to-three-hike-outlook-for-2018
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...while-sticking-to-three-hike-outlook-for-2018
I don't care cause I'm all in on bitcoin and will launder my gains.
Lougi is too mad about social security tax to worry about the rest of the code.
Lougi is too mad about social security tax to worry about the rest of the code.
Yep, I don't care much for forced funding of a ponzi scheme at the end of a gun.
As for tax plan, it looks better than current so that is a bonus.
Unfortunately, it looks like will be paying for more under this plan unless I reclassify my business. Even then, I'm not totally sure it will help. Waiting for the final details, but it's not looking too promising.
I do my friend. I really do. And I have been for a while. I was looking forward to getting a little break and using those funds to take home more money, re-invest in my business, and maybe hire another employee or two.
Ain’t that the truth. Between this tax plan and net neutrality, it’s been a rough few days for small business.
I think the only way people who oppose Net Neutrality will ever understand just how helpful and necessary it is, is to have it taken away and then realize exactly what they had. I'm not even sure what average person believes they're being denied with having Net Neutrality in place. I guess people want to pay for their internet like they pay for their cable TV. Pay extra for these sites, and pay even more for THAT stuff! As it is now, you get it all for one, flat fee! Perish the thought!
Personally, I can’t wait to pay $100 a month for Netflix.
This whole thing is beyond bizarre.
We're all very accustomed to getting all of the Internet for the same price. I'm eager to find out what is being hindered with this being the case.
What is this internet thingy you men speak of? I know what the Pony Express is, I only live about 20 miles from it.
Ever watch The Young Riders? The bald deaf guy was my fave.
The people freaking out about net neutrality is kind of amusing to me. Especially since the regulations being repealed are only a few years old. I think everyone is going to survive living under the stone age internet regulations we had in place during 2014.
Ya, like everything people are taking it to the extreme. I guess technically ISPs can charge whatever they want for access to certain sites or streaming services, but that doesn't mean they will. If they start charging $100/month extra to stream netflix or whatever, then sure we may need to revisit the legislation.
I was fine with it the way it was, but I'm all about deregulation and the government getting its nose out of every aspect of life, so I wasn't devastated by the decision.
All these ISP's were basically agreeing to net neutrality before it was even a thing. They could have charged $100/month extra before these regulations were in place but didn't. They are not all of a sudden going to have power that they didn't have before. If you weren't worried about it a few years ago, why act like the world is going to implode now? And LOL at the idea that everyone had the same access to the internet before today. They were already controlling access by giving people the option to pay more for faster speeds, throttling speeds if you suck up too much bandwidth, having to pay more just because you use it more than others, etc.
People are probably overreacting. But there are only what, 3 or 4 major ISP providers in the country and many people only have access to one of those. And how often has the experience with ATT, Verizon, or Comcast been an enjoyable one? They are known for terrible customer service.
If this goes bad, it will be very hard to reverse course.
A lot has changed in a few years. Cord cutting is way up. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc have a huge chunk of the market now. At some point, one of the big ISP providers is going to decide they should charge Netflix more to access their network.
Completely agree on the less than enjoyable experiences dealing with ISPs. The bolded part is what needs to be fixed though. If the regulators didn't promote monopolies by only allowing one provider in certain areas, the problem would fix itself through normal market actions.
I'm not sure about that. If the status quo is disrupted too much, it might create a backlash. We'll have to wait and see.
I'm anxious to find out how awesome it's going to be now that the ISP's spent an assload of money to get it reversed.
You also have regional players as well as cellphone companies that give you access to the internet as well. Google has been looking into getting in the game as well. People have more options, but it's not as good of a sound bite when you include other options.
And Netflix will laugh in their face. They have over 100 million subscribers and growing. They are the ones with the power, not the ISP.
It's going to be interesting to see how federal regulators act regarding businesses creating de facto monopolies under the Trump administration. The AT&T deal being blocked has wide reaching implications. The question is did they do it because of political reasons or is this the way they plan to operate now?
The problem now is that the barrier to entry for an upstart ISP will be virtually impossible. Someone will have to innovate bigly. Locally in DC, Cox is going after certain counties and focusing on winning business services. They are saturating small markets and providing superior service and price. But the product still lags quite a bit behind Verizon.
It’s possible but I’m not holding my breath.
Yeah, but what if Comcast buys Verizon’s broadband Network? They would own a huge block of the broadband users in the country.
That's true, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to be putting into place regulations just in case sometime down the road two business might decide that they want to merge. That just seems unnecessary. In theory the chances of that happening are almost zero because of laws in place governing mergers and acquisitions. Of course, the government hasn't shown that they are willing to enforce those laws very much.
Similar threads
