• 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!

Why you’ll pay for Trump’s tax cut

Rogue Valley said:
Why you’ll pay for Trump’s tax cut

When Trump demands tax reform ... it's not for your benefit.
Click to expand...

Yep, but anyone with a brain and a calculator already knew that. You cannot cut taxes in a revenue neutral way (especially when you consider that taxation is revenue) - so, to pretend to can do so, you must add "future GDP growth" as the magical balancing factor.

But, as any congress critter already knows, you can also "grow the GDP" by simply borrowing the money that you add to it with more government spending. Proposing cutting taxation without equal cuts in government spending is simply saying that you will borrow the difference, spend it and say "the GDP went up, just like we said it would". ;)
 
fmw said:
This article criticized a bill that hasn't been written yet and hasn't even been outlined. It is way way too early for panic.
Click to expand...
Both Trump and the GOP members of Congress have been talking about tax "reform" openly. It's not a secret. Ryan said that he wants it passed by year-end.

The plans that they have been discussing cutting corporate and individual tax rates and making other changes to the tax code, exactly what the OP's article warned.

The Tax Foundation said cutting the corporate rate from 35% to 15% would cost trillions in revenue over ten years.
Imagine that Congress has assembled an extensive legislative package aimed at lowering taxes across the board. The bill would slash the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, with little effort to make up for the lost revenue by eliminating corporate tax preferences. In addition, the bill would substantially reduce individual income taxes, by doubling the standard deduction and preserving the personal exemption, which would take millions of middle-class households off the individual tax rolls. Between these changes and several others, the bill would lower federal revenue by $4 trillion.
Click to expand...
 
fmw said:
This article criticized a bill that hasn't been written yet and hasn't even been outlined. It is way way too early for panic.
Click to expand...

No, it did not

The article does not say one word about any bill.
 
It's a cornerstone of GOP politics to try to shift the tax burden down the income scale. This analysis is hardly surprising.
 
fmw said:
This article criticized a bill that hasn't been written yet and hasn't even been outlined. It is way way too early for panic.
Click to expand...

But that is the standard for the anti-Trump crowd. President Trump says something, they object immediately. Even if they agree with it.
 
MTAtech said:
Both Trump and the GOP members of Congress have been talking about tax "reform" openly. It's not a secret. Ryan said that he wants it passed by year-end.

The plans that they have been discussing cutting corporate and individual tax rates and making other changes to the tax code, exactly what the OP's article warned.

The Tax Foundation said cutting the corporate rate from 35% to 15% would cost trillions in revenue over ten years.
Click to expand...

And would certainly not pass reconciliation standards; as Ryan and McCarthy continue to whine about the filibuster, forgetting this tool used by McConnell during the last administration ...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, but anyone with a brain and a calculator already knew that. You cannot cut taxes in a revenue neutral way (especially when you consider that taxation is revenue) - so, to pretend to can do so, you must add "future GDP growth" as the magical balancing factor.

But, as any congress critter already knows, you can also "grow the GDP" by simply borrowing the money that you add to it with more government spending. Proposing cutting taxation without equal cuts in government spending is simply saying that you will borrow the difference, spend it and say "the GDP went up, just like we said it would". ;)
Click to expand...

Or you can get serious about fixing our trade balance so we don't export capital, and instead export goods and services on a level playing field. Bad trade deals cost America money.
 
Southern Dad said:
But that is the standard for the anti-Trump crowd. President Trump says something, they object immediately. Even if they agree with it.
Click to expand...

I certainly support the President neutering the GOP Do-Nothing Congress and trying to move this Nation forward working with Nancy and Chuck ...
 
chuckiechan said:
Or you can get serious about fixing our trade balance so we don't export capital, and instead export goods and services on a level playing field. Bad trade deals cost America money.
Click to expand...

Bad trade deals that started with Reagan and Bush-43 ...
 
chuckiechan said:
Or you can get serious about fixing our trade balance so we don't export capital, and instead export goods and services on a level playing field. Bad trade deals cost America money.
Click to expand...

Bananas and strawberries are wonderful fruits but also have nothing to do with federal income tax policy. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Bananas and strawberries are wonderful fruits but also have nothing to do with federal income tax policy. ;)
Click to expand...

You'd better crack the economic books, mister.

It has a lot to do with the final cost of a product that is exported.
 
chuckiechan said:
You'd better crack the economic books, mister.

It has a lot to do with the final cost of a product that is exported.
Click to expand...

Yep, and fruits are good for you too. The point, that you refuse to accept, is that this thread is about federal income tax policy. HAND
 
sangha said:
No, it did not

The article does not say one word about any bill.
Click to expand...

Sorry, It criticized a concept that could become a bill.
 
sangha said:
Do you think there is something wrong with an article criticizing a concept?
Click to expand...

Only if it is politically motivated.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Why you’ll pay for Trump’s tax cut

When Trump demands tax reform ... it's not for your benefit.
Click to expand...

Meh..

If there is one thing that seems to be consistent about Trump.. its that he consistently avoids introducing any detailed bill before congress.

The GOP is floundering.(and I am a republican). Healthcare reform? nope.
Immigration and building a wall? nope
Heck.. repealing the dreaded obamacare? Nope.

they need a win. but the problem is.. we have a leader that doesn't know how to lead. I think we are learning that the hard way. We have in Mr Trump a figurehead, a front man.. but not a true.. when the chips are down "leader".
Trump is going to wait for the GOP congress to come up with a bill.. a detailed bill and then if its popular..it will be his idea... if its not..well then its "fake news" and "more of the swamp"..and he will run from it tweeting as he goes.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Why you’ll pay for Trump’s tax cut

When Trump demands tax reform ... it's not for your benefit.
Click to expand...

Of course not.

The people who complain about the national debt claim that we can't afford much-needed social spending because it would be "borrowing from future generations". These same people will then turn around and support massive handouts to the rich paid for by, you guessed it, "borrowing from future generations".

Too bad they can't demonstrate the intellectual honesty necessary to have a coherent ideology.
 
Absentglare said:
Of course not.

The people who complain about the national debt claim that we can't afford much-needed social spending because it would be "borrowing from future generations". These same people will then turn around and support massive handouts to the rich paid for by, you guessed it, "borrowing from future generations".

Too bad they can't demonstrate the intellectual honesty necessary to have a coherent ideology.
Click to expand...

With the difference between the two being that infrastructure type spending multiplies its way through the economy and is vitally necessary with the first generation of modern roads coming of age.

While tax cuts for those who don't need them collect paper interest ...
 
NIMBY said:
With the difference between the two being that infrastructure type spending multiplies its way through the economy and is vitally necessary with the first generation of modern roads coming of age.

While tax cuts for those who don't need them collect paper interest ...
Click to expand...

bef8228b68a1d36955434f6b388f4897.jpg


We're supposed to believe that "The Heir" contributes so much more to the economy than "The Doctor" simply by parking their inherited wealth somewhere.
 
MTAtech said:
Both Trump and the GOP members of Congress have been talking about tax "reform" openly. It's not a secret. Ryan said that he wants it passed by year-end.

The plans that they have been discussing cutting corporate and individual tax rates and making other changes to the tax code, exactly what the OP's article warned.

The Tax Foundation said cutting the corporate rate from 35% to 15% would cost trillions in revenue over ten years.
Click to expand...

These people are neither smart enough nor diligent enough to actually write meaningful tax reform. There will be no tax reform. The term, in their world view, is simply a euphemism for tax cut.
 
Absentglare said:
Of course not.

The people who complain about the national debt claim that we can't afford much-needed social spending because it would be "borrowing from future generations". These same people will then turn around and support massive handouts to the rich paid for by, you guessed it, "borrowing from future generations".

Too bad they can't demonstrate the intellectual honesty necessary to have a coherent ideology.
Click to expand...

To begin, Trump is now using last names today after being teased with Chuck and Nancy.

With Rushbo, King, the Breitbart alt-right, Coulter, Ingraham, the Freedumb Cucksters and butthurt GOP leaders pissed at Trump with some calling for President Pence; :lamo

We need to be quite sober in supporting Trump when he becomes a wartime POTUS with NK, unlike the way GOPs played politics with Obama foreign policy.

This is how we win next year: run against the GOP congress, not Trump ...
 
Absentglare said:
bef8228b68a1d36955434f6b388f4897.jpg


We're supposed to believe that "The Heir" contributes so much more to the economy than "The Doctor" simply by parking their inherited wealth somewhere.
Click to expand...

Great stuff absentglare ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom