Trump Voters: Behold your success

[GhostlyJoe]

My income is embarrassingly low. about $60K.

The tax plan will increase my take home.

I really don't understand what all the hullabaloo is about.

You're taxes will be going up -- if not in 2018, then just a few years later. Educate yourself.

 

[maxparrish]

If you voted for Trump (or a Republican congressional member) and your household makes less than 70,000 dollars a year, I just want you to understand that you just voted to increase your taxes.

Or rather, in your name, your congress members just voted for it, and Trump will sign it. ...

In the timeless words of Mother Theresa regarding the journalistic link, "What a pile of incompetent, disingenuous, and lying ****". Okay, she didn't say that, but if she had, it would have been an understatement.

In this (first) post, I'm only going to point out the incompetence of the journalist who wrote the article - how a so called media "professional" is unable to present a due diligence case for the headlined hyperbolic drivel.

The author claims: "The tax bill Senate Republicans are championing would give large tax cuts to the rich while raising taxes on American families earning $10,000 to $75,000 over the next decade, according to a report released Thursday by the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’s official nonpartisan analysts." and provides the report link "proof": https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5040

Except, of course, that is disingenuous sensationalism. Raising taxes at the end of the 10 years to levels at or below current tax rates is still a net gain over the planning horizon. Raising taxes to at or below current rates in 2025 is also a net gain. In other words, seven to ten years of reduced tax rates more than offset any increased taxes rates for the remaining 3 to 0 years - and that is WITHOUT calculating the present value of added post-tax income now vs. slightly added taxes in 7 to 10 years.

Frankly, as usual, this is much ado about the negligible. Seven or eight years into the reform, those making 40 to 75 thousand a year are STILL paying less.

If the author had no witheld this FULL IMPACT, I might have considered it a worthwhile read.

It was not.

FOOTNOTE: If you go to the link, and here is what the tables report: (2019, 2025, 2027)

 

[GhostlyJoe]

This message was brought to us by the DNC headquarters. Thanks. Meanwhile, Social Security should be gutted and ripped apart. It was a ponzi scheme from the very beginning. I've been saying for a long time that Americans have been getting shielded from the costs of healthcare. While it's true that the GOP offered nothing at all, the Dems offered nothing but smoke and mirrors along with hundreds of billions of dollars in government handouts.

The Dems offered greater access to health care and higher education and protection from corporate overreach and price-gouging, plus protection of much-needed retirement services (SS and Medicare). Republicans are offering more pain to the large majority. Also, if you dunderheads try to gut SS, I better get every friggin cent back that I paid in.

 

[reinoe]

The Dems offered greater access to health care and higher education and protection from corporate overreach and price-gouging, plus protection of much-needed retirement services (SS and Medicare). Republicans are offering more pain to the large majority. Also, if you dunderheads try to gut SS, I better get every friggin cent back that I paid in.

NO, Dems offered massive government payouts to wealthy insurance companies. When the prices are hidden from the consumer, which they still are, then price gouging will continue. What protection? Did the Dems increase the tax rates for wealthy Americans to pay into S.S.? NO! They did not. If a person makes over approximately 300k then S.S. taxes are not taken on incomes above that amount. WHOOPS! I guess the Dems were too busy protection the 1% to do anything. Thank God the Republicans are at least trying. And getting your money back that you paid into S.S. will never happen because that's not how ponzi schemes work.

 

[Jack Hays]

7 differences Republicans must resolve between the House and the Senate proposals




The two tax bills have a lot in common — including dramatic cuts in corporate tax rates and the elimination of a number of personal tax deductions — but they also have crucial differences that must be reconciled before a final version can be sent to the president.

• By Jeff Stein, Kim Soffen, Reuben Fischer-Baum and Kevin Uhrmacher

 

[GhostlyJoe]

NO, Dems offered massive government payouts to wealthy insurance companies. When the prices are hidden from the consumer, which they still are, then price gouging will continue. What protection? Did the Dems increase the tax rates for wealthy Americans to pay into S.S.? NO! They did not. If a person makes over approximately 300k then S.S. taxes are not taken on incomes above that amount. WHOOPS! I guess the Dems were too busy protection the 1% to do anything. Thank God the Republicans are at least trying. And getting your money back that you paid into S.S. will never happen because that's not how ponzi schemes work.

If you want to pop the cap on payroll taxes, I'm with you. We also should end the capital gains discount, and enact a single-payer system. Good luck with the GOP on those ends. The Republicans are trying ... lol.

 

[Helix]

This message was brought to us by the DNC headquarters. Thanks. Meanwhile, Social Security should be gutted and ripped apart. It was a ponzi scheme from the very beginning. I've been saying for a long time that Americans have been getting shielded from the costs of healthcare. While it's true that the GOP offered nothing at all, the Dems offered nothing but smoke and mirrors along with hundreds of billions of dollars in government handouts.

i disagree with you so completely that there's no point in taking this to a second response.

 

[Jack Hays]

After a high-drama vote, here’s what the Senate tax bill means for schools, parents, students
Public education advocates warned that certain provisions could put pressure on state and local spending for public schools while giving parents incentives to send children to private schools.

• By Moriah Balingit and Nick Anderson
• 3 hours ago

Graphic: How tax reform could affect your bottom line

 

[Jack Hays]

‘This is class warfare’: Tax vote sparks brawl over populism that will carry into midterms
As Democrats attacked the legislation as a “scam” to benefit wealthy donors and corporations, Republicans, who promised years of wage and job growth once the bill becomes law, acknowledged that they face a difficult task convincing voters to have faith in a measure that received support from the GOP alone.

• By David Weigel, Robert Costa and Paul Kane
• 1 hour ago

 

[Jack Hays]

Trump says he’s open to higher corporate tax rate, hours after Senate met his demand
In remarks that could complicate sensitive final negotiations, President Trump suggested for the first time that he would consider significant changes to the emerging tax overhaul plan, including setting the corporate tax rate at 22 percent, higher than the red line he had drawn for weeks. He did not explain why he would now consider a different rate.

• By David J. Lynch and Damian Paletta
• 56 minutes ago

 

[Manc Skipper]

Would any of the Gopper claque care to explain this evaluation (from the ultracon Concord Coalition)

The plan as voted in, is a financial disaster for the near future.

 

[GDViking]

Most liberals are shills for lobbying groups. For example the homebuilders association has been pissing and moaning non-stop about how people with mortgages over $500k will lose the interest deductions over that amount. The average value of a home in the U.S. is about $310k. It's just liberals pissing and moaning about how the super wealthy are going to wind up paying more but claiming the bill will hurt the poor and middle class.

Remember it was Hillary who gave multiple closed door speeches to wealthy banks, not Trump. It was Hillary who got a slew of corporate endorsements and sponsorships, not Trump. Trump is fighting for the average American while most liberals are champions of the 1%

Holy **** that was the funniest thing I have read in ages.

Trump looking out for the little guy stop just stop my lungs are starting to hurt. I'm laughing so hard...

 

[Nickyjo]

As the man said, KISS, aka Keep It Simple Stupid:

Republicans just gave breaks to the wealthy, folks who have been raking in a disproportionate amount of the wealth we have created in the US the past several years. Doesn’t make them bad persons. That’s just what they tend to do. Democrats try to help those below. Doesn’t make them good persons. That’s just what they tend to do. Both sides develop theories that say what they do is best for everyone. Naturally. People aren’t fooled. That’s why most wealthy people vote republican and most less wealthy vote democrat, notwithstanding those limousine liberals and Reagan democrats who break this pattern.

Easy to figure this out.

 

[Jack Hays]

As the man said, KISS, aka Keep It Simple Stupid:

Republicans just gave breaks to the wealthy, folks who have been raking in a disproportionate amount of the wealth we have created in the US the past several years. Doesn’t make them bad persons. That’s just what they tend to do. Democrats try to help those below. Doesn’t make them good persons. That’s just what they tend to do. Both sides develop theories that say what they do is best for everyone. Naturally. People aren’t fooled. That’s why most wealthy people vote republican and most less wealthy vote democrat, notwithstanding those limousine liberals and Reagan democrats who break this pattern.

Easy to figure this out.

There is still much to work out, so I'll wait until we have a finished product before I come to a conclusion.
Approximately half of all US earners already pay no federal income tax, so any tax cut will focus on the upper half. Why? That's where the taxes are.

 

[Rich123]

If you voted for Trump (or a Republican congressional member) and your household makes less than 70,000 dollars a year, I just want you to understand that you just voted to increase your taxes.

Or rather, in your name, your congress members just voted for it, and Trump will sign it. I just want you to understand that your president candidate lied to you when he told you cared about you, he lied to you when he said he understood your problems, and he lied to you when he told you he wasn't part of the establishment. It's not a secret on this forum that I don't like Democrats, but the Trump tax cuts will cut trillions from Medicare/Medicaid (something you paid into but will see much, much less of now), it will make it exponentially harder for your children to get a good education and now unless you are personally very wealthy, your children will never get access to higher education, especially in good industries right now like science and technology. And within a decade or sooner, it will increase your taxes, just so that rich people can have theirs lowered.

Trump isn't a part of the media establishment, but the Republican party bow down and kiss the feet of their rich lords. In Trump's case though, he just stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars, at your expense, personally, so he doesn't even need donors to influence his decisions. Trump is a rich lord who wants to see you hovel before him without dignity. Everything for him and his friends, and nothing for you. That's what Trump represents, that's what Trump cares about.

Well don't expect this Independent Voter to argue with you, because you are right. There's an old expression, (Be careful what you ask for, because you just might get it.) Well Trumpian's you got it. You deserve it . But the rest of us don't . Thanks. And don't forget, your children and grandchildren thank you too.

 

[Rich123]

My income is embarrassingly low. about $60K.

The tax plan will increase my take home.

I really don't understand what all the hullabaloo is about.

Ya for a while! But there are time sensitive provisions in the bill.

 

[Rich123]

You have to use critical thinking skills to figure out why cutting taxes on the rich creates a huge revenue hole. A hole that is then filled with revenue from the middle class or paid for by reducing services and benefits to the Middle Class.

Critical thinking yes and equally important honest acceptance of an honest result of that critical thought process.

 

[Rich123]

What are you talking about, that's the national average.



Your take-home income will increase, right now. By 2019, it will go right back to what it was. In the 2020's, you will see a tax increase. Which will happen in order to ensure that multi-millionaires can have theirs lowered. You will literally be taking money out of your pocket and handing it to rich people.



It's explained in the OP. If you didn't understand it, read it again.

Yes read it again because the bill has to go to reconciliation in the house unless they decide to vote on it in it's current form. If enough of us pressure the house members enough we still might prevent final passage. That's if enough of you folks who are so stubbornly holding onto your erroneous notions look at this with an honest view for the truth. It's your futures and your children's future. All so that wealthy donors can prosper even more.

Don't believe that this will induce the the wealthy to employ more workers. They currently have work forces in low wage countries and they are getting rewarded for it. What would you do if you were a C.E.O.? Spend money on workers you don't need? Corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to their share holders to make a much money as possibly. How would C.E.O.s square the prospect of hiring people they don't need with their share holders?

Americans really have to go to Washington and fight this bill. Not only for ourselves but also for those who are totally innocent. They are going to pay because they won't have an educational system or social security system or medicare system. Because taking those away is what this is all about. It comes right out of their own mouths. Listen to Paul Ryan.

 

[Oreo]

My income is embarrassingly low. about $60K.

The tax plan will increase my take home.

I really don't understand what all the hullabaloo is about.

What they've done is give you something with the right hand that they'll take away with the left. They're capping your deductions and many will actually be paying more in taxes. Your tax break right now will amount to about 1% more in your takehome pay--probably enough to buy an extra gallon of milk a week.

It's really not a middle class tax break. Large corporations like big Pharma, oil and other large corporations that are doing quite well today will get the biggest tax cut. From 35% all the way down to 20%. They're pushing this as a job creator, but it's really not. Corporations move overseas to avoid our payroll and payroll taxes, not their tax liability. So when they get this tax break they'll probably use it to expand operations overseas or just fill their pockets with it.

These 6 charts pretty well explain this tax bill.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...harts-to-explain-the-republican-tax-plan.html

 

[CriticalThought]

Most liberals are shills for lobbying groups. For example the homebuilders association has been pissing and moaning non-stop about how people with mortgages over $500k will lose the interest deductions over that amount. The average value of a home in the U.S. is about $310k. It's just liberals pissing and moaning about how the super wealthy are going to wind up paying more but claiming the bill will hurt the poor and middle class.

Remember it was Hillary who gave multiple closed door speeches to wealthy banks, not Trump. It was Hillary who got a slew of corporate endorsements and sponsorships, not Trump. Trump is fighting for the average American while most liberals are champions of the 1%

I am going to give you a chance to prove you are not entirely ignorant by asking you one question to see if you can figure it out.

The current value of my home is about what you listed as the average value. How could losing interest deductions on houses over 500k actually LOWER the value of my house?

I will happily share the answer, but I am curious if you are capable of figuring it out.

 

[reinoe]

I am going to give you a chance to prove you are not entirely ignorant by asking you one question to see if you can figure it out.

The current value of my home is about what you listed as the average value. How could losing interest deductions on houses over 500k actually LOWER the value of my house?

I will happily share the answer, but I am curious if you are capable of figuring it out.

I'm not interested in your song n' dance. So we can squash that now. There are a multitude of variables that go into calculating the value of a home.

 

[reinoe]

i disagree with you so completely that there's no point in taking this to a second response.

I'm sorry that on a debate site you've decided not to debate. Good day to you.

 

[Hawkeye10]

If you voted for Trump (or a Republican congressional member) and your household makes less than 70,000 dollars a year, I just want you to understand that you just voted to increase your taxes.

Or rather, in your name, your congress members just voted for it, and Trump will sign it. I just want you to understand that your president candidate lied to you when he told you cared about you, he lied to you when he said he understood your problems, and he lied to you when he told you he wasn't part of the establishment. It's not a secret on this forum that I don't like Democrats, but the Trump tax cuts will cut trillions from Medicare/Medicaid (something you paid into but will see much, much less of now), it will make it exponentially harder for your children to get a good education and now unless you are personally very wealthy, your children will never get access to higher education, especially in good industries right now like science and technology. And within a decade or sooner, it will increase your taxes, just so that rich people can have theirs lowered.

Trump isn't a part of the media establishment, but the Republican party bow down and kiss the feet of their rich lords. In Trump's case though, he just stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars, at your expense, personally, so he doesn't even need donors to influence his decisions. Trump is a rich lord who wants to see you hovel before him without dignity. Everything for him and his friends, and nothing for you. That's what Trump represents, that's what Trump cares about.

So you look at these people, you give them this lecture and then you listen to them tell you "You are entitled to your opinion, but I like Trump", then what?

Do you begin to consider launching an investigation to see if you missed something important?

 

[Lafayette]

Trump isn't a part of the media establishment, but the Republican party bow down and kiss the feet of their rich lords.

Feet?!?

I was thinking of another part of the anatomy ...

 

[Lafayette]

QUO VADIS?

Trump isn't a part of the media establishment, but the Republican party bow down and kiss the feet of their rich lords. In Trump's case though, he just stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars, at your expense, personally, so he doesn't even need donors to influence his decisions. Trump is a rich lord who wants to see you hovel before him without dignity. Everything for him and his friends, and nothing for you. That's what Trump represents, that's what Trump cares about.

Where did this all come from? Where did the political-pedantry and avarice start? With Reckless Ronnie and a couple of "differences-of-opinion" that led to war-situations. We, as a nation, have a knack for the latter - it justifies a massive DoD budget that consumes more than half budgeted Discretionary Spending. (See here.)

It's been with us a long, long time. Since way before the beginning of the 19th century, and the start of the Industrial Age. Which was the moment at which truly gigantic Wealth was brought about by the Industrial Age.

Nothing has changed, except the "ages". We are leaving the Industrial Age (at a rate accelerated by the arrival of China as major exporter) for the Information Age. If we were a "smart people", we'd be thinking seriously about the consequences.

Because we are electing the wrong people to lead us through the Information Age thicket.

A "thicket". Whazzat?

It is the mess that profound economic changes brings upon a nation. For instance, the advent of the Industrial Age sparked massive movements of labor from Agriculture to Industry. Which was compensated by the fact that Industry developed and replaced horse-drawn devices with engine-mounted mechanisms to allow farmers to double, triple and quadruple their output.

People were obliged to learn new competencies, since farming-skills were hardly adaptable to an industrial manufacturing-line. My own mother slapped together glass-frames to make "Raybans" most of the latter part of the last century. Where has all that manual labor gone to? One guess.

WITHER GOEST THOU?

Total manufacturing jobs (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) are now down to just 12% of the population, down from about half the total working population. And how did that happen? Not particularly Chinese ingenuity - but the much lower pricing of their basic goods that western-nation consumers bought willy-nilly. China, now 30-years later, is having the same problem. It's middle-class has all the pots-'n-pans and refrigerators that it needs - and its middle-class (younger than ever) is looking willfully at other personal horizons.

The way forward for western-societies is clear, and some are more prepared for that evolution than others. Meaning this: our advance in "Ages" as mentioned above requires a much more developed work-force. Even manufacturing production-lines now employing robots heavily need smart people to assure continuous production processes.

Let's face the challenge, described by two bits of factual evidence:
*The US is a nation where the average college graduate has a $35K debt to repay because tertiary-educational costs are hallucinatory.
*The US is graduating only a wee-bit more that 50% of its high-school students with tertiary-level (vocational, 2- or 4-year) diplomas.
*The US has had for decades about 12/15% of its population incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold (which is a mean annual wage of $24K for a family of four).

The percentage of individuals with tertiary-level diplomas by country:

Not bad, the US. But not nearly good-enough either! And why?

Because though secondary-schooling percentages are improving, the post-secondary completion rate is not ... !