• 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!

The final GOP tax bill is complete. Here’s what is in it.

Moreover, when the country was in deep recession in the early Obama years, these same people resisted any kind of stimulus. Now, with 4% unemployment and steady economic growth, with the Fed raising interest rates, these same people think a stimulus for the rich is just what the doctor ordered.

Show me where "these same people" resisted ANY kind of stimulus. From what I recall, BUSH started with the stimulus.
 
Yes, our TAX PROBLEM is that not enough people are contributing. And that the process is too complex. And that the rates are too high. I dont see democrats wanting to fix any of that.

Doesn't really address the problem with a flat tax. But if the GOP wants to run on a platform of raising taxes on the middle class and below, with huge tax cuts for the top slivers, that's fine with me. Let them propose a "flat tax" and wait until they get the JCT distribution analysis! Should be exciting town halls after that!

As to complexity, the GOP just made it worse, really. They just added a 20% tax cut on "pass through" income versus wages and other ordinary income, which just means enormous effort starting in 2018 to recharacterize all ordinary income, somehow, into pass through income taxed at lower rates. In addition the "tax reform" bill left in place preferential rates for capital gains, which was already a massive source of complexity in the code.
 
Yes, our TAX PROBLEM is that not enough people are contributing. And that the process is too complex. And that the rates are too high. I dont see democrats wanting to fix any of that.

By that I take it to mean that poor people aren't paying enough taxes. The reason why poor people don't pay taxes is that there isn't very much taxes, based upon their income, to extract.

But the notion is absurd considering that you side wants to raise taxes on poor people while cutting them where the money is -- rich people.
 
Well thats 40bn a year then. And as you say, 500bn in savings for the taxpayer. Thats certainly better than nothing.
Not when it costs $1.5 trillion to get that $500 bil.
 
Show me where "these same people" resisted ANY kind of stimulus. From what I recall, BUSH started with the stimulus.
It's part of the historical record that Ryan, McConnell, et al resisted Obama's initiatives.
 
Doesn't really address the problem with a flat tax. But if the GOP wants to run on a platform of raising taxes on the middle class and below, with huge tax cuts for the top slivers, that's fine with me. Let them propose a "flat tax" and wait until they get the JCT distribution analysis! Should be exciting town halls after that!

As to complexity, the GOP just made it worse, really. They just added a 20% tax cut on "pass through" income versus wages and other ordinary income, which just means enormous effort starting in 2018 to recharacterize all ordinary income, somehow, into pass through income taxed at lower rates. In addition the "tax reform" bill left in place preferential rates for capital gains, which was already a massive source of complexity in the code.

Flat tax would indeed fix all of that. Lower rates, everyone pays, very simple. I never said the GOP would propose though. Ive been sayings Dems certainly wouldnt suggest any real reforms.
 
By that I take it to mean that poor people aren't paying enough taxes. The reason why poor people don't pay taxes is that there isn't very much taxes, based upon their income, to extract.

But the notion is absurd considering that you side wants to raise taxes on poor people while cutting them where the money is -- rich people.

Where the money is doesnt matter. All citizens should pay. Certainly the poor can afford to pay a single symbolic dollar. Especially when 40% of their spending goes to luxury.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/low-income-families-spend-40-of-their-money-on-luxuries-2017-06-28

But hey, even with a flat tax, the rich would be paying the greatest share of taxes. So someone making 10 million would pay lets say 1 million in tax at 10%. Someone make 100k would pay $10,000.
 
Last edited:
Flat tax would indeed fix all of that. Lower rates, everyone pays, very simple. I never said the GOP would propose though. Ive been sayings Dems certainly wouldnt suggest any real reforms.

Really? Everyone pays? We need to tax money NOT spent at a higher rate other wise we cripple consumer spending which is 3/4 of our GDP.

Oh and everyone pays FICA withholding and State sales taxes so that point is moot too.
 
Last edited:
Where the money is doesnt matter. All citizens should pay. Certainly the poor can afford to pay a single symbolic dollar. Especially when 40% of their spending goes to luxury.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/low-income-families-spend-40-of-their-money-on-luxuries-2017-06-28

But hey, even with a flat tax, the rich would be paying the greatest share of taxes. So someone making 10 million would pay lets say 1 million in tax at 10%. Someone make 100k would pay $10,000.

The idea that "all citizens should pay".. is absurd. A "symbolic dollar".. come on!?!?!
 
Letting something happen naturally isnt really a plan.

I like how you characterize this. Letting it happen. You know this is my forte. I don't have to say anything or have any plan, I just let people talk in my presence. I would have something to say to them though: "Why did you make me come here?"

I have a plan, since I'm a one man band, I'm a team player, but having a team to run for President is another matter. Since I have no plan and no idea what I am doing I'm going to take the Green Party Candidates let them be my VP and SOC. If you like the Green Party and you're not sure you trust them, well, then, trust me. After I've had all my Ideas torn up on the floor of the House, you can just have them, no, I'm kidding, The other thing I would want to do as President is gut the meat industry. I try to get Green Party to do this for me, but they say, "No, you must run yourself." You don't want your tax dollars going to murder the unborn, I don't want my tax dollars feeding murdered animals to my children, or anywhere else, all vegan.

Show me where "these same people" resisted ANY kind of stimulus. From what I recall, BUSH started with the stimulus.

Yes, he did the right thing and if he had not we would not have come out of it flat, but as soon as Obama had us projecting out of disaster, oh, no, no more. Instead of restoring what was broken, they had to play politics and the voters are so bright that they go for it again and again.
 
I like how you characterize this. Letting it happen. You know this is my forte. I don't have to say anything or have any plan, I just let people talk in my presence. I would have something to say to them though: "Why did you make me come here?"

I have a plan, since I'm a one man band, I'm a team player, but having a team to run for President is another matter. Since I have no plan and no idea what I am doing I'm going to take the Green Party Candidates let them be my VP and SOC. If you like the Green Party and you're not sure you trust them, well, then, trust me. After I've had all my Ideas torn up on the floor of the House, you can just have them, no, I'm kidding, The other thing I would want to do as President is gut the meat industry. I try to get Green Party to do this for me, but they say, "No, you must run yourself." You don't want your tax dollars going to murder the unborn, I don't want my tax dollars feeding murdered animals to my children, or anywhere else, all vegan.



Yes, he did the right thing and if he had not we would not have come out of it flat, but as soon as Obama had us projecting out of disaster, oh, no, no more. Instead of restoring what was broken, they had to play politics and the voters are so bright that they go for it again and again.

The **** are you going on about?
 
Youve convinced me.

No offense.. but nothing will convince you. You are pretty set in your ideology that is not based upon reality.

but you go ahead.. you make the case that my 96 year old grandmother whose income was so little that she didn't have to pay taxes at 96.. though she paid taxes her WHOLE working life... you make that case that she should have to pay a dollar.

Go ahead..lets hear your logic and rationale.
 
Offense taken. When you can be civil, lets talk again.

I am more than civil. You started with the snarky comments. Anyway its obvious that you don't want to explain why my 96 year old grandmother.. that has paid income taxes all of her working life, and now. in retirement her income is so low that she does not qualify to pay taxes... you don't want to give the logic and reasoning of why you want to make her pay a dollar in taxes.

. When you are willing to defend your premise.. lets talk again.
 
The **** are you going on about?

Oh, is that what I'm doing, going on about it?

Say I was to get a website and give them hell (me), although this might not be possible any more without Net Neutrality, this is what I am going on about. Just a little alternate reality you can download into,... your imagination, to compare with what else you have, and what do you know I might even get to be President out of it (my greatest nightmare, he's trying to hurt himself again, just have a monitor warn me and I'll shut up for awhile).

There's so many girls I've mistreated, they'd all be lined up with their sob story, "oh he made me feel...," but I don't worry, No, Donald Trump has lowered the bar for me.

I'm just trying to entertain y'all with my comedy.
 
I am more than civil. You started with the snarky comments. Anyway its obvious that you don't want to explain why my 96 year old grandmother.. that has paid income taxes all of her working life, and now. in retirement her income is so low that she does not qualify to pay taxes... you don't want to give the logic and reasoning of why you want to make her pay a dollar in taxes.

. When you are willing to defend your premise.. lets talk again.

I didnt even comment to you period until you said my ideas were absurd and used lots of exclamation marks. Maybe you want to start over with a civil rational thought.

The idea that "all citizens should pay".. is absurd. A "symbolic dollar".. come on!?!?!
 
Those arguments can all be applied to Medicare, and yet it enjoys wide popularity

No, Medicare is a government insurance program. It's the difference between "you have to pay taxes to have a police force" and "you have to pay Blackwater, TripleCanopy, or some other Private Militarized Company to protect your stuff, or else we're going to tax you extra".

Both are bad governance, but for different reasons - government coercion to force you to take part in government is part and parcel of what-government-is. The real debate is over the borders of where forced participation is appropriate or rightful, given the overriding of individual liberty. Government forcing you to send your money to large corporations is something alltogether different.

The mandate was new, of course, but that's the cost of solving the pre-existing condition problem

It's not, actually. We could have funded their care far cheaper than the ACA, which sought to rework the nature of the entire market. It's the difference between food stamps, and food price controls.
 
No, Medicare is a government insurance program. It's the difference between "you have to pay taxes to have a police force" and "you have to pay Blackwater, TripleCanopy, or some other Private Militarized Company to protect your stuff, or else we're going to tax you extra".

Both are bad governance, but for different reasons - government coercion to force you to take part in government is part and parcel of what-government-is. The real debate is over the borders of where forced participation is appropriate or rightful, given the overriding of individual liberty. Government forcing you to send your money to large corporations is something alltogether different.

It's not, actually. We could have funded their care far cheaper than the ACA, which sought to rework the nature of the entire market. It's the difference between food stamps, and food price controls.

I'd respond but I don't appreciate when people clip comments directly on point to what they raise in the next post.
 
I didnt even comment to you period until you said my ideas were absurd and used lots of exclamation marks. Maybe you want to start over with a civil rational thought.

Great.. I apologize.

so.. explain to me why its NOT absurd to make my 96 year old grandmother who currently pays no income tax..( because of her low income), fill out a bunch of tax forms and pay a "symbolic" tax of one dollar.

She has paid income taxes her whole working life. Please explain the value of making this 96 year old pay a dollar in tax during her retirement.
 
It's part of the historical record that Ryan, McConnell, et al resisted Obama's initiatives.

I wasn't at this site in 2009 but I remember conservatives routinely used the word "stimulus" and "tarp" interchangeably. since its impossible for him to believe "bush started the stimulus" I have to assume he's reading the word "tarp" where he and you write "stimulus". Its just impossible for a sentient being to not recall republicans obstructionism concerning the stimulus. and the funny thing is republicans voted against tarp also. so his "safe space" delusion isn't even true.

Oh and I'm sure he read "part of the historical record that Ryan, McConnell, et al resisted Obama's initiatives" as "you're absolutely correct Jonny".


Show me where "these same people" resisted ANY kind of stimulus. From what I recall, BUSH started with the stimulus.
 
It's not, actually. We could have funded their care far cheaper than the ACA, which sought to rework the nature of the entire market.

Well it's odd that with 10 years to devise something better and cheaper, the GOP came up bupkis with their AHCA and BCRA healthcare nightmares.
 
Well it's odd that with 10 years to devise something better and cheaper, the GOP came up bupkis with their AHCA and BCRA healthcare nightmares.
No, it's political malpractice; a strategic, self-inflicted wound.
 
No, it's political malpractice; a strategic, self-inflicted wound.

I disagree. There was nothing better in either GOP healthcare proposal. Their 'offerings' border on criminal negligence.
 
Back
Top Bottom