what if we provided a significant corporate tax benefit for companies that raised wages in some additional way over time for all employees? Cut corporate taxes but try to structure those reductions to increase specific economic stimuli?
Holes, issues, unanimous acclaim?
> what if we provided a significant corporate tax benefit for companies that raised
> wages in some additional way over time for all employees? Cut corporate taxes but
> try to structure those reductions to increase specific economic stimuli?
> Holes, issues, unanimous acclaim?
Probably makes an already complicated tax system more complicated and the Republican goal is to try and streamline things.
hahaha. Yea. That's what they claim anyway.
What time did this vote take place?
>> when they expire and
> become hikes
Only if the Dems are in control by then.
@Scots No. All the Republicans need to do, and all they obviously want to do because it's the only way this crapty plan they put together actually gets paid for, is allow the cuts to expire in 2027 instead of renewing them. Then you and I get to eat some nice thick tax hikes while the corporate rate cuts stay permanent. Read up.
And again, this is assuming the standard deduction doubling actually covers whatever tax bracket you're placed in. For a lot of people, the cuts aren't cuts at all right at the start, and it gets even worse for them in 2027. And until these corporate cuts actually result in more jobs, something history shows (Reaganomics) is most likely to NOT happen, all of this imagined economic growth that's supposed to also be chipping in and helping us take some chunks out of the debt is just that, imagined.
I'm really begging you guys to educate yourselves on this stuff. Please. VASTLY, shareholders and corporate interests will benefit from this legislation and the majority of the country will be worse for it.
Well, I mean, there's no reason to educate yourselves anymore I suppose, it's over. Now you get to see for yourselves.
i think collins of Maine got 10k deduction of state and local taxes in, not sure what Murkowski, Flake and others senators were able to wrangle. I think the fetus college fund and homo sapiens definitions are out, not sure what else cause no open discussion.
Not sure what bill detail will come out of joint conference committee, i think it will have to be more transparent, you got committee,
senate and house votes to go.
sounds like mcconnell was giving goodies away to get to 51 votes, like to see what those were.
> the healthcare costs
> have forced me to add another day and a half and my wife is looking for another part
you looking at every friggin tax shelter you can afford? I suspect there will be a surge in retirement savings to offset loss of various deductions but got gotta have the dough to do it. we been maxing IRA contributions last few years.
unfortunately i dont think healthcare costs are deductible anymore too, another disincentive for folks to protect all of us for their unaffordable medical expenses. if you cant pay, the rest of us do. #thankstrump, good job replacing ACA.
> Feeb wrote:
>> the healthcare costs
>> have forced me to add another day and a half and my wife is looking for another
At this point that response is pretty much assumed. Premiums up this year and will climb again after mandate is dropped.
Truman too young to know him
Ike war hero, a kindly man!
JFK very hip
Nixon excellent on foreign policy, ok on domestic, paranoia wrecked it
Ford clumsy nice man football player, placeholder
Carter nice man, ineffective micromanager
Reagan best ive seen, worked with Tip, forced soviet capitulation, very healthy,economy, but tilted toward top end, trickle down doesnt work though
Bush nice man, read my lips
Clinton weasel, not sure why economy did so well, bad at foreign, got lucky
Bush 2 great guy, not as smart as needed, bad advisor choices
Obama loved him, thoughtful, tried to fix stuff
sure we can do that, make 50 you pay 10, 300 pay 30. You in?
> I'd just stop buying everything but beer.
> Might as well call it Beertax.
Beertax and Tacotax. Fudge the rest.
Wondering if the trump base is just happy to get a piece of the tax reduction pie, and don't care how the pot was split. AMT, passthrough, and other provisions specifically for wealthier citizens aren't something that gets their attention.
Would have been nice to make sure folks under 150K or so family income got more benefit since we are all going to deal with the debt caused by this.
> Wondering if the trump base is just happy to get a piece of the tax reduction pie,
> and don't care how the pot was split. AMT, passthrough, and other provisions specifically
> for wealthier citizens aren't something that gets their attention.
> Would have been nice to make sure folks under 150K or so family income got more benefit
> since we are all going to deal with the debt caused by this.
I just wish Republicans would stop pretending tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations drive the economy. If these tax cuts helped the poor and middle class I would be much more supportive. Since their income is so much lower than the wealthy a much higher percentage of their income is spent on necessities (groceries, rent etc.). You let them keep more of their own money their local economy should start to see a boost in sales (helping the small businesses politicians crow about) while also helping to stabilize people who are struggling to pay their rent. If these people are able to make their rent payments easier then they aren't going to end up in a government funded shelter system (thus saving the government money).
The benefits from cutting the taxes of the not well off are real, tangible and can be observed relatively quickly. You can't say any of that about the tax cuts Republicans pushed through.
Who's read the bill? Anybody? Nobody?
Not even the fools who voted yes for it?
Oh, then what are you excited about? Are you a big fan of mystery? Do you get stoked at the idea of your elected officials voting for a bill they are completely oblivious to? Maybe just a big fan of corrupt and disorganized government?
These are rhetorical, not directed at you @Dustin. Just anyone in general who thinks this is somehow a positive.Dustin wrote:
> Super excited to see more money in my paycheck, as promised.
But this question is for you.
Everyone in America would be happy with more money in their paycheck. At what cost would you draw the line? Is everything on the table for you, as long as it saves you money personally?
> Who's read the bill? Anybody? Nobody?
> Not even the fools who voted yes for it?
> Oh, then what are you excited about? Are you a big fan of mystery? Do you get stoked
> at the idea of your elected officials voting for a bill they are completely oblivious
> to? Maybe just a big fan of corrupt and disorganized government?
> These are rhetorical, not directed at you @Dustin. Just anyone in general who thinks
> this is somehow a positive.
I googled "how does the tax plan affect me" or something like that. It showed my income bracket paying less taxes by $xxxx per year. I like that. Maybe it was bullcrap, I don't know. I know that I certainly don't have the time, desire or knowledge to read the entire thing and comprehend it all. I'm guessing most people don't, even those internet tax experts claiming it's bad.
> Dustin wrote:
>> Super excited to see more money in my paycheck, as promised.
> But this question is for you.
> Everyone in America would be happy with more money in their paycheck. At what cost
> would you draw the line? Is everything on the table for you, as long as it saves
> you money personally?
That's an extremely ambiguous question. I'm not really sure what you mean as the question would have to be a lot more specific. Obviously there's a line drawn many places.
> I googled "how does the tax plan affect me" or something like that. It showed my
> income bracket paying less taxes by $xxxx per year. I like that. Maybe it was bullcrap,
> I don't know. I know that I certainly don't have the time, desire or knowledge to
> read the entire thing and comprehend it all. I'm guessing most people don't, even
> those internet tax experts claiming it's bad.
Or the people signing it into law. Just like the butt-holes who signed the ACA into law.
That doesn't bother the crap out of you? This psycho cycle of blind-drunk-drive bullcrap? You're just going to buy what the politicians are selling you and ignore the people who are actually employed in the field and let the lobbyists write us into the poor house to make the rich richer?
That sounds so insane to me.
I would imagine changes go into effect 2019 tax year? So people can plan accordingly.
It is bad that most of the pot of tax benefits go to larger, richer entities, but everybody likes candy, yes?
It's going to be like I got my $600, why should I care if others got $6000, $60000?
Long term economic and deficit consequences are not something most Americans think about much.
People get actual paychecks weekly? How quaint!
> ...it just occurred to me how stupid this financial system is in basis. The government
> prints money, circulates it, companies dole it out to people based on some arbitrary
> valuation of the labor they produce, which the government effectively takes some
> of that labor valuation, which means nothing to them, to use the labor you've produced
> to pay towards its astronomical loans for the goods and services they render unto
> Maybe we SHOULD bring on the Star Trek socialism already. This is kinda fudgeed.
That's not how it works at all.