• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate Republicans pass $1.5 trillion tax bill

Lerxst said:
You epitomize the self centered, **** everybody else asshole right winger that has come to be the face of the right. Social security and Medicare are programs that help to care for the elderly and disabled. You may not give a **** about anyone but your own little world, and that's okay, makes you a dick, but whatever. Personally, I want to make sure those programs are there for the less fortunate among us. I don't view wealth hoarding as a "good" thing. Cut spending in areas that are bloated and not absolutely necessary. Don't **** with social security and medicare to toss the rich another unneeded tax break.

Get it?
Click to expand...

Wow, what a personal attack, I don't report personal attacks because I can take it especially from uneducated leftwing radicals. SS and Medicare are funded by payroll taxes and are self contributory so again you show you have no idea what taxes you pay and their purpose. To the best of my knowledge payroll taxes aren't being cut
 
jonny5 said:
Playing devils advocate, the liberal answer will be something about how deficits will cause them to pay more taxes in some hypothetical future. All of a sudden deficits matter.
Click to expand...

Actually, after complaining about the deficit under Obama for eight years, all of a sudden the deficit doesn't matter. Is the term supposed to be "fiscal conservative" of "fiscal liberal?"
 
Conservative said:
And exactly how do you know that? Any income earner is getting a tax cut according to the GOP Bill so what am I missing here? If you don't pay any FIT how do you expect a tax cut? What tax plan would benefit the entire country? Seems the naïve one is you.
Click to expand...

You are missing that the GOP is full of ****

They cut 6 trillion in taxes, but come up with 1.5 trillion in deficits. They have to come up with 4.5 trillion in revenue to do that. There are winners and losers here. The rich are winners. The rest of us are losers.

The new tax structure will hurt small business owners, for example.
 
Deuce said:
You are missing that the GOP is full of ****

They cut 6 trillion in taxes, but come up with 1.5 trillion in deficits. They have to come up with 4.5 trillion in revenue to do that. There are winners and losers here. The rich are winners. The rest of us are losers.

The new tax structure will hurt small business owners, for example.
Click to expand...

Where were you with the Obama projections that never happened? Now you are projecting great deficits because people are keeping more of what they earn? That is leftwing bs and typical liberalism. Again tell me how the rich have hurt you and your family by keeping more of what they earned? Absolutely stunning the class envy and jealousy
 
Conservative said:
The only person preventing you from joining the rich is you, your attitude, and your ideology
Click to expand...

Actually, I am far above the Middle Class. My household sits just under $200,000 annually (to increase in the next three years) and I have rental properties. My current status is the result of good life-altering decision making and education (through government funded G.I. Bill). Add that to an educated spouse who is a CPA (Controller) for an international company and a personal financial adviser, and what you get is a current tax-cut Bill that involves for more for me to take advantage of than you. I will increase what sits in my account in large chunks and buy more property with it (in which I will receive more revenue through tax-cuts I don't need), while you celebrate a few hundred dollars returned to you in the first year or two. And do you actually think new tax-cuts to compensate for that lack of government revenue will come from me or the wealthy that sit above?

I'm one of those people laughing, pal. This is not about my ideology. This is about the numbers and the history. The GOP and the wealthy have used you (and me) since the 1980s. And here you are celebrating a few dollars back in the first couple years as if it is more than a hand-out that doesn't disguise what is really happening.

I am going to guess since you are "Conservative" that you hate Bill Clinton. Guess what? I think he is somewhat **** too. But there is much to learn about how all of this plays out by looking at his economic policies. Neither Bush nor Obama agreed with his contractionary fiscal policy, but it was responsible and good for the country (and the Middle Class). Clinton raised taxes on the more wealthy and the corporations (people who do not need tax-cuts at all), reformed some social programs like Welfare to cut costs, and increased employment while reducing poverty numbers. If you wish to "join the rich," learn the game.
 
Last edited:
MSgt said:
Actually, I am far above the Middle Class. My household sits just under $200,000 annually and I have rental properties. My current status is the result of good life-altering decision making and education (through government funded G.I. Bill). Add that to an educated spouse who is a CPA (Controller) for an international company and a personal financial adviser, and what you get is a current tax-cut Bill that involves for more for me to take advantage of than you. I will increase what sits in my account in large chunks and buy more property with it, while you celebrate a few hundred dollars returned to you in the first year or two. And do you actually think new tax-cuts to compensate for that lack of government revenue will come from me or the wealthy that sit above?

I'm one of those people laughing, pal. This is not about my ideology. This is about the numbers and the history. The GOP and the wealthy have used you (and me) since the 1980s. And here you are celebrating a few dollars back in the first couple years as if it is more than a hand-out that doesn't disguise what is really happening.

I am going to guess since you are "Conservative" that you hate Bill Clinton. Guess what? I think he is somewhat **** too. But there is much to learn about how all of this plays out by looking at his economic policies. Neither Bush nor Obama agreed with his contractionary fiscal policy, but it was responsible and good for the country (and the Middle Class).
Click to expand...

There is absolutely nothing preventing you from refusing your tax cut by sending in that revenue to the federal govt. The argument continues to be moot, fact no tax cuts have to be paid for as they are not an expense to the federal govt. To me results matter, not rhetoric and in a consumer generated economy were consumer spending is much of our GDP putting more money into the hands of the consumer benefits economic activity.

I don't feel used, why do you? How does you keeping more of what you earn hurt others? I don't give a damn how much you make, how much you pay in taxes, why is that even an issue?
 
Conservative said:
There is absolutely nothing preventing you from refusing your tax cut by sending in that revenue to the federal govt.
Click to expand...

Why would I refuse? The federal government wouldn't take that anyway. Like Trump, I merely take advantage of the law (that he has helped make over the decades as a real estate tycoon). But I prefer to see actual tax reform that helps the American population en mass rather than this continued con.

I don't know where you sit economically, but many of the Middle Class will actually see their taxes increase up front. More people have had a chance to look at this Bill since it was rushed through ObamaCare style...

What’s beyond dispute is that the bill incorporates immense benefits for the wealthy, almost entirely at the expense of the middle- and working class; that’s the conclusion of conservative and progressive analysts alike, as well as government agencies such as the Congressional Budget Office. In the first year after enactment, almost every income stratum would get some tax cut; but by 2027, almost all the benefits would go to the top 1%, especially the top 0.1%. Some low-income households would see a tax increase.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
The argument continues to be moot, fact no tax cuts have to be paid for as they are not an expense to the federal govt.
Click to expand...

Did a Fox News commentator tell you this? Taxes pay debt. The government has borrowed and borrowed for the American people because year after year those who should pay taxes keep getting cuts. And now, a massive temporary tax-cut plan "for the Middle Class" involves enduring tax-cuts for the wealthy and the corporations again? This tax-cut is an expense and it will not be the wealthy who have to pay the bill later. This is a finite game.

But you are right about part of what you state. The argument is moot. This Bill is happening. When it is approved of in a single Bill from House and Senate, Trump will sign it into law. Then, my wife look to see what has created us more opportunity for enduring revenue while you look to see what square you check off on Quicken to get an extra $100 next year (or not!).
 
MSgt said:
I prefer to see actual tax reform that helps the American population en mass rather than this continued con.

I don't know where you sit economically, but many of the Middle Class will actually see their taxes increase up front. More people have had a chance to look at this Bill since it was rushed through ObamaCare style...



Conservative said:
The argument continues to be moot, fact no tax cuts have to be paid for as they are not an expense to the federal govt.[/quyte]

Did a Fox News commentator tell you this? Taxes pay debt. The government has borrowed and borrowed for the American people because year after year those who should pay taxes keep getting cuts. And now, a massive tax-cut plan "for the Middle Class" involves the wealthy and the corporations again? This tax-cut is an expense and it will not be the wealthy who have to pay the bill later. This is a finite game.

But you are right about part of what you state. The argument is moot. This Bill is happening. When it is approved of in a single Bill from House and Senate, Trump will sign it into law. Then, my wife look to see what has created us more opportunity for enduring revenue while you look to see what square you check off on Quicken to get an extra $100 next year (or not!).
Click to expand...

Sure you do which is why you want to raise taxes totally ignoring that the rich can never fund the liberal spending appetite and that you cannot give income tax cuts to people who don't pay income taxes

Taxes do indeed pay debt and there is a much better source of money coming from economic growth and activity. People with more spendable income spend it, save it, invest it, or pay down debt all making them less dependent on the federal govt. and every dollar that leaves the state for federal income taxes is one less dollar for that state
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
Sure you do which is why you want to raise taxes totally ignoring that the rich can never fund the liberal spending appetite and that you cannot give income tax cuts to people who don't pay income taxes
Click to expand...

First, a proper tax-cut for the Middle Class should not involve the rich at all. There is no need to raise taxes among the Middle Class or the poor, especially if the wealthy and corporations paid their fair share.

- Why are there tax-cuts for the corporations at all in this Bill for the "Middle Class?"
- Why are those tax-cuts for the corporations permanent while yours expire?
- Why is there actually a new tax on college tuition waivers in this tax-cut plan for the "Middle Class" and a new tax-cut for the wealthy who send their kids to private school?


Second, this is entirely out of the Fox news handbook of talking points. There is no reconciliation between the "liberal spending appetite" and the fact that Clinton balanced the federal budget while erasing the federal deficit.

I know this is Fox news because my very Conservative parents belch out the same nonsense and Fox News is all they watch. Switch the channel and learn. There is a knowledge of things that exist above the D and R jerseys.
 
Conservative said:
Where were you with the Obama projections that never happened? Now you are projecting great deficits because people are keeping more of what they earn? That is leftwing bs and typical liberalism. Again tell me how the rich have hurt you and your family by keeping more of what they earned? Absolutely stunning the class envy and jealousy
Click to expand...

What post did you read? Because it wasn't mine
 
MSgt said:
First, a proper tax-cut for the Middle Class should not involve the rich at all. There is no need to raise taxes among the Middle Class or the poor, especially if the wealthy and corporations paid their fair share.

- Why are there tax-cuts for the corporations at all in this Bill for the "Middle Class?"
- Why are those tax-cuts for the corporations permanent while yours expire?
- Why is there actually a new tax on college tuition waivers in this tax-cut plan for the "Middle Class" and a new tax-cut for the wealthy who send their kids to private school?


Second, this is entirely out of the Fox news handbook of talking points. There is no reconciliation between the "liberal spending appetite" and the fact that Clinton balanced the federal budget while erasing the federal deficit.

I know this is Fox news because my very Conservative parents belch out the same nonsense and Fox News is all they watch. Switch the channel and learn. There is a knowledge of things that exist above the D and R jerseys.
Click to expand...

Why do you have a problem with the rich keeping more of what they earn, i don't and couldn't care less. Class warfare and jealousy have no place in this country but the left keeps promoting it. This entire issue however keeps being diverted from, tax cuts are NOT expenses and don't have to be paid for, further every time there has been a FIT cut more federal revenue has been generated, how do you explain it?

Clinton never balanced the budget as Treasury shows without using SS and Medicare funds although he came close leaving SS and Medicare with IOU's. more leftwing talking points. Please tell me how Clinton increased the debt 1.4 trillion by balancing the budget? Obviously the debt is two parts, public and Inter-govt. holdings where yo and others only look at public debt not what was taken out of SS and Medicare to use to show a lower deficit. Think that those IOU's don't have to be funded?
 
JasperL said:
Well, it's true that you shouldn't expect people to do your homework for you and find YOUR unknown cites to unknown articles. I did see your link on the previous page to a NYT article. Pretty weak analysis, actually, but it doesn't conflict with Johnston's conclusions, his conclusions are just far better explained because he actually knows what he's talking about, and it doesn't appear the NYT writers really did. They missed the interesting part of the story entirely, which is how does one generate losses with OPM, but not have to recognize income when that OPM/debt is written off or down, which is the general rule.

But I can't guess your point, or divine which unknown link you'd like me to consider, sorry.
Click to expand...

Does't have anything to do with homework. It has to do with you being too lazy to read the thread and wanting me to repeat what I said because of that.
 
Conservative said:
Why do you have a problem with the rich keeping more of what they earn, i don't and couldn't care less.
Click to expand...

And they like it that way. It helps them to pamper themselves at your (and a little bit of mine) expense. But my wife (Kelzie - look her up) is wicked smart financially, so...

Conservative said:
Clinton never balanced the budget as Treasury shows without using SS and Medicare funds although he came close leaving SS and Medicare with IOU's. more leftwing talking points.
Click to expand...

Um, not exactly at all, but it doesn't matter. Did you even look at the link I gave you before? Here it is again from factcheck.org...

But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

FYI, 9/11 came next so Bush doesn't get to be criticized obtusely here.

Is factcheck.org part of Trump's exaggerated "fake news" garbage too now? Seriously, why are you even a member of this site? This is actually a hell of a site to learn from if you just drop the Party allegiance crap already. You defaulted to the Left as having a "liberal spending appetite," so I show you that this world view contradicts the recorded history. Then you go into the false argument that he "never did," which Treasury and the Congressional Budget Office clearly contradicts.

Why? This is your one and only life. A traditional "social Conservative" would never abide a man like Trump in the primaries. A "fiscal Conservative" would never abide a tax-cut plan that adds a trillion+ to the deficit at the Middle Class' expense. So...what makes you a Conservative now?
 
jonny5 said:
I dont see how its relevant. What is wrong with someone making 50 million a year saving 2 million? As opposed to someone else saving less. The taxes you pay are progressive, thus the savings are progressive as well. The more you pay the more you save.
Click to expand...

And they are selling you a bill of goods, widening the gap further between the rich and all others. It's been going on for years, since the '80s.

While rates for all American taxpayers have fallen to near 50-year lows, the wealthy have reaped the most savings from the changes because they derive a larger proportion of their income from investments.

Between 1985 and 2008, the wealthiest 400 Americans saw the percentage of their income paid in federal income taxes drop from 29 percent to 18 percent, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.
....
One outspoken critic has been Warren E. Buffett, a billionaire himself. Mr. Buffett stirred debate about the issue last year when he wrote an opinion article for The New York Times stating that the low rates for investment income had allowed him to pay only about 17 percent of his income in federal taxes, less than the effective rate paid by his secretary or any of the other 19 workers in his office.


For Wealthy, Tax Cuts Since 1980s Have Been Gain-Gain - The New York Times
 
jonny5 said:
Playing devils advocate, the liberal answer will be something about how deficits will cause them to pay more taxes in some hypothetical future. All of a sudden deficits matter.
Click to expand...

Deficits do matter. I was happy to see Clinton and Gore get the deficit back in the green. Then GW went on his war-mongering spending spree, and passed that onto Obama.
 
MaggieD said:
You do see that the Medicare enrollee is not effected by these possible cuts, right? The best it says is that there may be a 4% decrease in reimbursement that may cause more docs and hospitals to refuse Medicare patients. I’ve never felt this to be a strong argument. Medicare patients are the largest consumers of healthcare in this country, by leaps and bounds. Just more scare tactics, don’t you think?
Click to expand...

No. This administration has made their intentions clear. He is going after Medicaid and Medicare. To suggest otherwise is disengenous.
 
Top Cat said:
No. This administration has made their intentions clear. He is going after Medicaid and Medicare. To suggest otherwise is disengenous.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe the WH is trying to descimate Medicare for seniors. I’m interested in where you’re getting your information. But I will say this. Medicare is a complete mess. So is Medicaid. They desperately need a complete overhaul. And if any politician has the balls to tackle it, he should be congratulated,

Federal authorities boast of recovering $4.1 billion in 2011 from fraudulent activity, but again spent millions of dollars to recover it.

How much Medicare and Medicaid fraud is there? No one knows for sure. In 2010 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report claiming to have identified $48 billion in what it termed as “improper payments.” That’s nearly 10 percent of the $500 billion in outlays for that year. However, others, including U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, suggest that there is an estimated $60 to $90 billion in fraud in Medicare and a similar amount for Medicaid. Big money!
Click to expand...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/merril...is-costing-taxpayers-billions/2/#295a27f95c67

Think it’s worth “going after” Medicare and Medicaid for $180 billion dollars worth of fraud?

Medicare Part A is free. Medicare Part B costs just over $100 a month. Do you think that premium pays for itself? Laughable. Yet we all pay the same. Do you think it is reasonable to expect multi-millionaires to pay more than that $100 a month? A premium based on all income and all assets? I sure do. I’d applaud that kind of “going after.” You wouldn’t??

Do you think it would be a good idea to put a bounty on uncovering Medicare and Medicaid fraud? A percentage of savings on arrest and conviction of the scammers out there than bill Medicaid 900 dental procedures in one day? Do you think it’s possible that private business could do a better job of uncovering fraud with that kind of incentive as a reward? Do you think the Federal fraud investigators would work harder and smarter if THEY were incentivized based on what they uncover that results in conviction of these scammers? Do you think it makes sense to “go after” fraud more efficiently? I sure do.

Do you think it’s fair that someone with $3 million in cash money in the bank has gotten the Medicare Advantage plan free? All his meds covered for $4 each for life? It’s sure been nice for him. He brags about it daily. That’s because the Medicare Advantage plan doesn’t take assets into account. You like that? I sure don’t. You?

Medicare and Medicaid NEED “going after... “ not from the standpoint you infer. But most assuredly from the standpoints Ive outlined here.

In short, DT has given no indication he intends to destroy these programs for seniors and the poor. But there’s one helluvalot of “going after” that needs doing. If he’s tackling that? Kudos to him.
 
MSgt said:
And they like it that way. It helps them to pamper themselves at your (and a little bit of mine) expense. But my wife (Kelzie - look her up) is wicked smart financially, so...



Um, not exactly at all, but it doesn't matter. Did you even look at the link I gave you before? Here it is again from factcheck.org...



FYI, 9/11 came next so Bush doesn't get to be criticized obtusely here.

Is factcheck.org part of Trump's exaggerated "fake news" garbage too now? Seriously, why are you even a member of this site? This is actually a hell of a site to learn from if you just drop the Party allegiance crap already. You defaulted to the Left as having a "liberal spending appetite," so I show you that this world view contradicts the recorded history. Then you go into the false argument that he "never did," which Treasury and the Congressional Budget Office clearly contradicts.

Why? This is your one and only life. A traditional "social Conservative" would never abide a man like Trump in the primaries. A "fiscal Conservative" would never abide a tax-cut plan that adds a trillion+ to the deficit at the Middle Class' expense. So...what makes you a Conservative now?
Click to expand...

So, but you will never get it, I have no party allegiances as I grew up a conservative and remain a conservative. Apparently I understand the economy a lot better than you as I don't buy rhetoric, I buy results and how those results were generated. This thread is about tax cuts, not Clinton and the lies about his balanced budget as Treasury exposes that lie, not fact check, TREASURY. This is about the economy and what that tax cut will do to the American people and taxpayers. There are four components of GDP, figure them out and then figure out how tax cuts affect those components.

I am not a fan of Trump personally but I am a fan of change. The status quo is a mess and although you don't buy it, the results are better today because of forward thinking businesses that are reacting to a pro growth President. Trump tweets too much and I don't like what he says but I do like the results being generated and the pro growth, anti Obama policies being implemented. This PC BS has to stop
 
Media_Truth said:
Deficits do matter. I was happy to see Clinton and Gore get the deficit back in the green. Then GW went on his war-mongering spending spree, and passed that onto Obama.
Click to expand...

You keep buying the rhetoric, please show me where Clinton/Gore created surpluses? Treasury doesn't show it and apparently you don't understand that there are two parts of the deficit thus the debt. Stealing from SS and Medicare to make the public debt look better isn't creating a surplus

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
 
Media_Truth said:
Deficits do matter. I was happy to see Clinton and Gore get the deficit back in the green. Then GW went on his war-mongering spending spree, and passed that onto Obama.
Click to expand...

If by "Clinton and Gore" you mean "Republican congress", sure. Clinton didnt submit a single balanced budget request until his final year, and after GOP had forced a shut down, tax cuts, and spending controls. But you know all this.
 
Conservative said:
Wow, what a personal attack, I don't report personal attacks because I can take it especially from uneducated leftwing radicals. SS and Medicare are funded by payroll taxes and are self contributory so again you show you have no idea what taxes you pay and their purpose. To the best of my knowledge payroll taxes aren't being cut
Click to expand...

Hahaha you can report me all you want. The tax bill is written in such a way that it will reduce COLA raises to those who depend on it for their primary means of living. Republicans are redefining how SS COLA's are calculated, and not in a beneficial way. It will negatively affect millions of Americans.
 
MaggieD said:
I don’t believe the WH is trying to descimate Medicare for seniors.
Click to expand...

Yes of course he's not. Honestly he has said as much. But then, he rarely ever tells the truth so you may be right.


I’m interested in where you’re getting your information.
Click to expand...

I am a licensed insurance agent and I work with Medicare and Medicaid every single day. You are clearly misinformed.

Your Part A comment tells me you know little about Medicare.

But I will say this. Medicare is a complete mess.
Click to expand...

Do share. Why? And don't just say "Well there's fraud" Tell me why it's a mess.

So is Medicaid.
Click to expand...

Why?

And if any politician has the balls to tackle it, he should be congratulated,
Click to expand...

Cutting funding fixes what? So you will be applauding Obama for going after fraud then?



Think it’s worth “going after” Medicare and Medicaid for $180 billion dollars worth of fraud?
Click to expand...

Of course there's fraud. And you can thank the Obama Administration for aggressively going after it.

Medicare Part A is free.
Click to expand...

Like hell it is. Where are you getting your information? You clearly know nothing about Medicare. Go back and look at your pay stubs. You paid into Medicare as you worked. The taxes you paid went to pay for your Part A. It's not free.


Medicare Part B costs just over $100 a month. Do you think that premium pays for itself? Laughable. Yet we all pay the same
Click to expand...

Again, not true. You need to turn down RW radio and do some research.

https://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/part-b-costs/part-b-costs.html

Do you think it is reasonable to expect multi-millionaires to pay more than that $100 a month? A premium based on all income and all assets? I sure do. I’d applaud that kind of “going after.” You wouldn’t??
Click to expand...


Then you need to start clapping.

Do you think it would be a good idea to put a bounty on uncovering Medicare and Medicaid fraud? A percentage of savings on arrest and conviction of the scammers out there than bill Medicaid 900 dental procedures in one day?
Click to expand...

Obama already did that.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/medicares-bounty-hunters-turn-their-sights-to-fraud/



Do you think it’s fair that someone with $3 million in cash money in the bank has gotten the Medicare Advantage plan free?
Click to expand...

This is an entirely different question. Now you are talking about private insurance.

All his meds covered for $4 each for life? It’s sure been nice for him. He brags about it daily. That’s because the Medicare Advantage plan doesn’t take assets into account. You like that? I sure don’t. You?
Click to expand...

I know Part D like the back of my hand. There certainly no MA PD's or stand alone PDP's that provide all meds for $4. NONE. You again have bad information.

Medicare and Medicaid NEED “going after... “ not from the standpoint you infer. But most assuredly from the standpoints Ive outlined here.
Click to expand...

You need to do your homework and learn the facts about Medicare. Clearly you are getting your information from a bad source.

In short, DT has given no indication he intends to destroy these programs for seniors and the poor.
Click to expand...

You're not paying attention.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom