• 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!

This Tax Bill Is a Trillion-Dollar Blunder

Absolutely! Only 23% of Americans want this Billionaire-favoring tax plan. Write your Congressman and Senators, and tell them that if they vote for this, they will lose your vote.

Is any Democrat going to vote for it? Is any Republican not? Am I going to buck my Democratic Senators if they vote for it? I'd hate to think this of them.

What is insane is thinking the government needs more of my hard earned money.
If you want the government to keep more of your money then you can send you tax break back to them.

They will be more than happy to take it. The same goes for everyone else that is complaining about paying less in taxes.

You are 100% free to send it straight back to the government. My thoughts you will never do is and neither will anyone else that is whining about it.

Everybody has to pay evenly.

I don't buy the argument that the rich should pay their fair share, they're paying more than their fair share and we have to ask them because of this debt crisis, to pay more more than their fair share.

At any rate they'll be paying less of this soon when the bill passes, let's hope like stupid lemmings that they spend it wisely and benevolently; mercifully.

What are you going to do with your tax break loot? Hmmn? Go run around town with it in your fist like a baboon?
 
The party of "fiscal responsibilty" has been complaining bitterly about the oppressive debt weighing down the country for eight years now seeks to add A TRILLION DOLLARS to the debt to give to corporations.

But the Trickle Down Fairy, Tricklebell, will see to it that the tax cut will pay for itself.
 
Is any Democrat going to vote for it? Is any Republican not? Am I going to buck my Democratic Senators if they vote for it? I'd hate to think this of them.



Everybody has to pay evenly.

I don't buy the argument that the rich should pay their fair share, they're paying more than their fair share and we have to ask them because of this debt crisis, to pay more more than their fair share.

At any rate they'll be paying less of this soon when the bill passes, let's hope like stupid lemmings that they spend it wisely and benevolently; mercifully.

What are you going to do with your tax break loot? Hmmn? Go run around town with it in your fist like a baboon?

Can you actually address the argument or not.
I personally don't care what they do with it. It isntheir money.

That is the cool thing about living in a free society.

However if you are against paying less taxes and think the government should have more of your money you are 100% free to do so.

However like everyone else you won't.
 
But the Trickle Down Fairy, Tricklebell, will see to it that the tax cut will pay for itself.

There is no such thing as trickle down that is the fairy tricklebell nonsense the left came up with.
 
This Tax Bill Is a Trillion-Dollar Blunder


Congress and President Trump put politics ahead of smart reform.....


The GOP tax 'reform' package will do significant long-term harm to most Americans and their descendants. It will not pay for itself, instead increasing an already massive deficit. Many Americans [rightfully] believe that funding sorely needed infrastructure repair and replacement should have been the initial Congressional bipartisan endeavor. The GOP however, is ramming through a horrible tax package first for a specific reason. After passage, the GOP will then disingenuously bemoan the fact that the deficit is increasing [an unavoidable consequence of their tax legislation] and demand deep cuts in America's safety-net programs -- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. While the rich get wealthier, everyone else gets the dregs with emaciated safety-net programs when the economy bottoms out from the deep recession that the GOP 'revenue-negative' tax legislation virtually guarantees. There is an underlying rationale why the Republican House/Senate leadership changes their reconciliation tax package on a daily basis. They do not want their legislation scored [by the CBO and independent economic analysis] before a quick floor vote. They do not want to provide the public/media any checks and balance. Such a tactic speaks volumes of the lengths the GOP will travel to pass their pro-wealth agenda in this specific order.

Related: Republicans Despise the Working Class - The New York Times

We have an aristocracy to subsidize with socialism.
 
Not sure what your beef is. Deficits don't matter, remember.

So you agree that Ryan can pound sand next year if he tries to cut Medicare because of the deficit? Becasue you are right VP Dick Cheney famously said that "Reagan proved deficits don't matter".
 
There is no such thing as trickle down that is the fairy tricklebell nonsense the left came up with.

LOL! The left came up with trickle down? Did Tricklebell tell you that?
 
Donald Trump does not understand that the United States is no longer where it was politically during the 1980's, and that he is not Ronald Reagan. Reagan's voodoo economic scam does not work any more.

My hope is that there is an immediate backlash against this, leading to the Democrat domination of the United States, and substantial tax increases for the well to do.

There is not evidence that Reagan's voodoo economic scheme worked then.....
 
They only matter to the party that is not in power.

No, they are going to start to matter next year..... the Republicans will tout deficits and say they need to cut spending. They will be out of political clout to do much of anything, however, but look foolish. Every major study told us the tax cut was going to cause deficits. Throw in a war or stock market correction next year and the Cons will have conned themselves out of power in Washington.
 
Can you actually address the argument or not.
I personally don't care what they do with it. It isntheir money.

That is the cool thing about living in a free society.

However if you are against paying less taxes and think the government should have more of your money you are 100% free to do so.

However like everyone else you won't.

This is not what your Lord says; "Who's image and who's inscription, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's."

It certainly is the people's money, who built your roads and sewers, who provides for the common defense, keeps law and order and regulates industry so we can swim in our Great Lakes etc?

No, instead of addressing the argument, I'll use my space to make a bunch of other comments.

If I'm paying extra, and somebody else takes their break in greed, this does not balance my Nation.
 
They are already paying pretty much all of the income tax collected.
The top 20% of earners pay pretty much 80% of the income tax.

The reason they say this is the myth of the "their fair share" BS that get thrown around by liberals.

If people knew facts their view would change.

Citizens for Tax Justice, a research group that's been studying tax issues from its offices in Washington since 1979, provides the information we need. When all taxes (not just income taxes) are taken into account, the lowest 20% of earners (who average about $12,400 per year), paid 16.0% of their income to taxes in 2009; and the next 20% (about $25,000/year), paid 20.5% in taxes. So if we only examine these first two steps, the tax system looks like it is going to be progressive.

And it keeps looking progressive as we move further up the ladder: the middle 20% (about $33,400/year) give 25.3% of their income to various forms of taxation, and the next 20% (about $66,000/year) pay 28.5%. So taxes are progressive for the bottom 80%. But if we break the top 20% down into smaller chunks, we find that progressivity starts to slow down, then it stops, and then it slips backwards for the top 1%.

Specifically, the next 10% (about $100,000/year) pay 30.2% of their income as taxes; the next 5% ($141,000/year) dole out 31.2% of their earnings for taxes; and the next 4% ($245,000/year) pay 31.6% to taxes. You'll note that the progressivity is slowing down. As for the top 1% -- those who take in $1.3 million per year on average -- they pay 30.8% of their income to taxes, which is a little less than what the 9% just below them pay, and only a tiny bit more than what the segment between the 80th and 90th percentile pays.

What I've just explained with words can be seen more clearly in Figure 6.

Share_of_income_paid_as_tax.gif

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power
 
There is not evidence that Reagan's voodoo economic scheme worked then.....

Voodoo economics did not work economically, but it did work politically. Now it does not work politically either.
 
Voodoo economics did not work economically, but it did work politically. Now it does not work politically either.

Thanks for the clarification.... though to clarify to you, "voodoo" economics did not work politically either. The notion that cutting taxes led to robust economic growth in the 1980's did work politically, even though it wasn't the tax cuts that fueled growth.
 
This Tax Bill Is a Trillion-Dollar Blunder


Congress and President Trump put politics ahead of smart reform.....


The GOP tax 'reform' package will do significant long-term harm to most Americans and their descendants. It will not pay for itself, instead increasing an already massive deficit. Many Americans [rightfully] believe that funding sorely needed infrastructure repair and replacement should have been the initial Congressional bipartisan endeavor. The GOP however, is ramming through a horrible tax package first for a specific reason. After passage, the GOP will then disingenuously bemoan the fact that the deficit is increasing [an unavoidable consequence of their tax legislation] and demand deep cuts in America's safety-net programs -- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. While the rich get wealthier, everyone else gets the dregs with emaciated safety-net programs when the economy bottoms out from the deep recession that the GOP 'revenue-negative' tax legislation virtually guarantees. There is an underlying rationale why the Republican House/Senate leadership changes their reconciliation tax package on a daily basis. They do not want their legislation scored [by the CBO and independent economic analysis] before a quick floor vote. They do not want to provide the public/media any checks and balance. Such a tactic speaks volumes of the lengths the GOP will travel to pass their pro-wealth agenda in this specific order.

Related: Republicans Despise the Working Class - The New York Times


I cannot refute anything in there but note the bold. First I recall the same GOP types in here were advocating infrastructure some time ago. Further Canada has doubled down on infrastructure spending (if I am tracking properly there are three new airports and a a few ice breakers) as well as many European countries have expanded debt based infrastructure spending.

A long ago prime minister of Canada, John George Diefenbaker once said "never cut taxes unless the people are complaining", and I have never heard complaints about a high tax rate in the US, in fact the right complained, whined and warned the debt was too much!
 
I cannot refute anything in there but note the bold. First I recall the same GOP types in here were advocating infrastructure some time ago. Further Canada has doubled down on infrastructure spending (if I am tracking properly there are three new airports and a a few ice breakers) as well as many European countries have expanded debt based infrastructure spending.

A long ago prime minister of Canada, John George Diefenbaker once said "never cut taxes unless the people are complaining", and I have never heard complaints about a high tax rate in the US, in fact the right complained, whined and warned the debt was too much!

That is so true but the GOP has never missed a chance to cut taxes on their wealthy donors none the less. That is the reason for all the cuts greedy rich people that use their money to elect patsies that they then blackmail into more tax cuts for them. At least half of our debt is the result of those tax cuts to greedy individuals that are never satisfied with how much they have in the bank. Money is speech alright and so is blackmail.

4e758472732a0c4e7dae1dafdf5b83cb--infographics-charts.jpg
 
Without the ability to see into the future, you are just shoveling gas. You title should be "Democrats say Tax Bill A Trillion Dollar Blunder". Unless Klaatu from Klaatuvill in the future wrote that, you all gotta have some proof that you are in fact able to see in the future.

We can look at the future, by looking at the past. Trickle-down doesn't work. Reagan started the big deficit spending. G Bush continued it, but not as bad. Clinton and Gore got rid of the deficit completely! Bush and Cheney caused the biggest deficit since WWII, and handed off their mess to Obama/Biden. After cleaning up the Bush/Cheney problems, Obama started reducing the deficit substantially, but he could have done better his last year or two. The Afghan War is a huge deficit pig.

us_deficit_history.png

Reagan and GW tax cuts only served to raise the deficit. GW was the biggest fool. He lowered taxes and increased spending substantially. Duh!
 
Not sure what your beef is. Deficits don't matter, remember.

Oh look, another conservative ( or conservative like poster) tries to pretend “deficits don’t matter” is some kind of democratic narrative and that it magically justifies the flaming lying hypocrisy of republicans concerning deficits. Serious question fletch, why is your obedience to conservative narratives more important than your integrity?


Awesome.... :applaud

We can bundle this mistake with the many trillions the democrats added over the past 8 years and go down in a blaze of glory.

That’s the thing RN, democrats didn’t “add trillions”. The “trillions” were baked in when bush destroyed the economy. The collapse in revenue accounted for most of the “trillions” you hold President Obama and democrats accountable for. I’m sure you know these facts already so let me ask you too, why is your obedience to conservative narratives more important than your integrity?

And a bonus question. With the tax cut, will you still avoid hiring Americans?
 
Thanks for the clarification.... though to clarify to you, "voodoo" economics did not work politically either. The notion that cutting taxes led to robust economic growth in the 1980's did work politically, even though it wasn't the tax cuts that fueled growth.

When I say that voodoo economics worked politically I mean that it did not hurt the Republicans. The top tax rate declined from 70% to 27%. The national debt tripled. Fewer jobs were created every year than under President Carter. Reagan's policies weakened the labor movement. Nevertheless, Reagan was reelected in a landslide. George H.W. Bush was elected president in 1988.

The Reagan presidency really was transitional, as the Obama presidency was not. The Republicans have both houses of Congress, and most state legislatures. The President and most governors are Republican.

Ronald Reagan was a dream come true for America's plutocracy. They got much richer. Reagan hurt the economic interests of the white working class. White blue collar workers seemed to get masochistic pleasure out of the pain, and shouted, "USA! USA!"
 
When I say that voodoo economics worked politically I mean that it did not hurt the Republicans. The top tax rate declined from 70% to 27%. The national debt tripled. Fewer jobs were created every year than under President Carter. Reagan's policies weakened the labor movement. Nevertheless, Reagan was reelected in a landslide. George H.W. Bush was elected president in 1988.

The Reagan presidency really was transitional, as the Obama presidency was not. The Republicans have both houses of Congress, and most state legislatures. The President and most governors are Republican.

Ronald Reagan was a dream come true for America's plutocracy. They got much richer. Reagan hurt the economic interests of the white working class. White blue collar workers seemed to get masochistic pleasure out of the pain, and shouted, "USA! USA!"

You are wrong on your comparisons, as to cause and effect. Keep in mind, policies often take several years to be seen. The national debt more than doubled during president Reagan's time, but it took a long time for him to get inflation under control, and he left this nation better than he received it in. A large part of the debt increase was paying that high inflation on government bonds.

One of the best indicators of an administration is prime interest rates. The sweet spot seems to be around 6% annual. Much higher or lower is a disaster.
 
You are wrong on your comparisons, as to cause and effect. Keep in mind, policies often take several years to be seen. The national debt more than doubled during president Reagan's time, but it took a long time for him to get inflation under control, and he left this nation better than he received it in. A large part of the debt increase was paying that high inflation on government bonds.

One of the best indicators of an administration is prime interest rates. The sweet spot seems to be around 6% annual. Much higher or lower is a disaster.

The effect of this tax bill will be a little growth for the midterms and then hopefully we'll have Democrats to blame for the slowdown so we can re-elect Donald Trump for the crash at the end of his Term or into yours (this time) don't you want the 2024?
 
The effect of this tax bill will be a little growth for the midterms and then hopefully we'll have Democrats to blame for the slowdown so we can re-elect Donald Trump for the crash at the end of his Term or into yours (this time) don't you want the 2024?

You aren't making sense. Why would there be a crash?
 
You aren't making sense. Why would there be a crash?

There would be a crash, because all this money that you just gave people gets put into some bubble, or invested in high return so not available to the lending pool that the Government has to draw on, their investment extracting more money for the economy.

Hopefully, your pleasant view can prove true, but I only know how well off we would be if the two Senators had voted no, but I have a problem with my Party if they think we need large government like it says right on the DNC website.

I just think being fiscally responsible is far more productive than any tax cut and this one destroys all the steady growth Trump's business connections was so nicely leading.
 
There would be a crash, because all this money that you just gave people gets put into some bubble, or invested in high return so not available to the lending pool that the Government has to draw on, their investment extracting more money for the economy.

Hopefully, your pleasant view can prove true, but I only know how well off we would be if the two Senators had voted no, but I have a problem with my Party if they think we need large government like it says right on the DNC website.

I just think being fiscally responsible is far more productive than any tax cut and this one destroys all the steady growth Trump's business connections was so nicely leading.

LOL...

Bubbles are usually the product of irresponsibility, like the housing market crash, where democrats refused to make changes.
 
LOL...

Bubbles are usually the product of irresponsibility, like the housing market crash, where democrats refused to make changes.

Yes, we have irresponsibility to begin with, not paying our bills while giving tax break, when they so shouted about the deficit under Obama.

You're right, the Democrats did have a year and a half to pass something Bush would sign, but I say it was Bush's job to make Congress do something about it.

Perhaps the Democrats made the crisis just before the election?

I don't know who was guilty over there, do you?

Do you know that they "refused to make changes" or are you just wielding wild accusations an propaganda?

I don't care about the crisis anyway, it was all only bankers out of work and they paid us back with interest, so if they ever needed a hand again, I would surely lend it to them.
 
Back
Top Bottom