Tax Reform 2017


#41

No. When I post on forums I spend time crafting a post off-line. Copy my text and paste it into Google. See what comes up. Nothing will.


#42

Hint: Original content doesn’t include numbers for referencing

As a side note this tax bill isn’t about Trump who you cleary hate reflected in your nifty moniker.

And you are right, the tax bill is poor at best.

The first thing is that all deductions should be eliminated across the board.

Government should not be subsidizing the real estate sector (mortgage interest), the states tax laws (state, local tax deductions) etc.

And yes business taxes should be restructured from the worldwide system currently used to the Territorial system which is used in the rest of the world.


#43

No it’s not, the republicans even admit that some middle class will see taxes go up!

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59d26b86e4b06791bb1225b2


#44

“Middle-class tax hike.”
Even before the tax bills were drafted as legislation, Senate Democrat cries of “middle-class tax hikes” earned a brutal “four pinocchio” condemnation from the Washington Post fact-checker.
Yet this talking point has expanded to the point that a plurality of Americans polled now believe their taxes will rise.
Powered by Nonsense. A Tax Policy Center analysis of the Senate bill reveals that three-quarters of all families would get a tax cut.
Just 12 percent would see a tax increase and they are concentrated among the rich. The average middle-income family would receive a tax cut of approximately $850 per year through 2025.
At that point, Congress would have to vote to extend most of the family tax cuts. This vote would probably be a formality, as a similar vote five years ago to extend the Bush tax cuts for middle-class families passed the Senate 89–8.
There is no appetite in Congress to steeply raise middle-class taxes. Even in the worst-case scenario, where the cuts fully expire, the typical middle-income family would receive a cumulative $7,000 tax cut in the early years, followed by a (roughly) $100 annual tax increase later.
How do critics portray this as a middle-class tax hike? By simply ignoring the $7,000 tax cut in the early years, assuming a full expiration after 2025, and then implying that the later tax hike is much larger. That is flat-out dishonest.

Did you read beyond the left wing fake news???


#45

The whole reason the Senate bill includes a tax cut sunset clause is to comply with “reconciliation” rules, as required to pass budget-related legislation with a simple majority. If Democrats truly wanted to give middle-income families permanent stability and certainty on tax rates, they could play ball and not filibuster tax reform. They could provide the votes to make the new middle class tax cuts permanent.

Hence the expiration in 2027. Caused by the DEMOCRATS and their agenda to oppose any legislation by the right.


#46

I hesitate to post this and I mean no disrespect toward anyone’s religion. I honor everyone’s First Amendment Right to practice their religion.

I hadn’t been to church in many years outside of weddings and funerals. I grew up in a religious household and I ended up agreeing to disagree with my family, when I decided I was at a minimum agnostic if not an atheist.

Recently I ended up in a church for a ceremony for a family member. I was there under my own recognizance and I could have left at any time. I had forgotten about the fetish with lambs, blood and shepherds. I know this is all allegory, but in my mind it was pretty sick: talk of “washing in blood” and similar suggestions.

This is relevant because I understand the Senate version of this bill will now allow 501 c-3 and c-4s to lead political discussions from the pulpit. Churches already enjoy local, state and federal tax relief under the idea that their non-profit status is a benefit to the community and separation from politics.

I am really disappointed that churches, under this bill, while maintaining non-profit status, would be able to to preach politics.


#47

That’s kind of like letting football players who play for the NFL ,a non profit make political statements like thy do today isn’t it.


#48

I think that recognized labor unions have enjoyed this benefit for a long time along with a mandatory collection plate as well…


#49

Watch it, the alt right who have bitched for years that leftist organizations have done so will be just fine with churches doing so. And you probably haven’t cared that the unions have gotten away with this. Hypocritical partisan bullshit at its best.


#50

A consumption tax would turn the tables for sure .
A working class citizen will spend almost everything they earn just to survive and will be taxed at close to 100% of their income !
A wealthy will spend a much smaller percentage of their income to survive and will be better served with a consumption tax !
It is a percentage of income with the special interest lobbied loop holes built into the tax code the wealthy manage to pay a fraction of what they owe .


#51

But I thought the alt rights argument is that the top 10% pay 70% of all taxes and the bottom 47% pay none, snicker.


#52

Why is it that it’s wonderful to tax the most productive citizens in the country yet give a pass to the least productive.

We all make choices in life. Choose wisely and you are rewarded. Chose poorly and the government subsidizes your poor choices.

Everyone uses government everyone should pay for it.


#53

All consumption or VAT type taxes around the world have exceptions for food, school clothing, transportation etc. Their are ways to fix that problem…


#54

Churches have been (or at least recently) getting political. It depends on the priests or what not. If a sermon gets political, I’ll just leave. Also, why would it bother you at all, when you dont attend regularly anyway?

You know your food were once a moving, breathing animal, yet you eat it. “I know this is all just food”, unless youre a vegan.

Churches retain their tax exemptions bc otherwises, there would be no church. With the dwindling attending population, as the young get bombarded with atheism and satanism and even worse, environmentalism and dont attend.

You started off by saying “I honor everyone’s First Amendment” yet want to infringe upon their right to discuss political matters (more like pandering, if its from a church) by wanting to government to tax them? Try again.


#55

I think you didn’t get this mornings alt right talking points memo, lmao.


#56

Correct, but not their politics at the same time on my dime.


#57

After all the top 10% only pay 70% of Federal Income taxes, perhaps 90% would be more to your liking.


#58

You shouldn’t peddle fake news, makes the TIC angry.

Even republicans admit that that’s not true. :wink:

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_59d26b86e4b06791bb1225b2


#59

That’s a pretty neat thing to not quote as the Tax bill isn’t law yet as it hasn’t been reconciled between the house and the senate.

But then again you know everything from mac and cheese to indicting a ham sandwich.

Another delicate challenge for Republicans: Reconciling House and Senate tax bills

Careful as it’s from the WaPo and may be more fake news.


#60

That’s probably not going to happen.