• 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!

I hate the GOP tax plan

Tbey said they were going to pay for this by closing corporate loop holes. So far all I have seen is taking away deductions from the middle-class.

This whole thing is just another tump scam, take the money and run...
 
GDViking said:
Tbey said they were going to pay for this by closing corporate loop holes. So far all I have seen is taking away deductions from the middle-class.

This whole thing is just another tump scam, take the money and run...
Click to expand...

Expand your sources then. Among many other thing, the plan also

for individuals and couples

-reduces the tax bracket rates for all brackets
-increases the caps on the brackets
-indexes brackets to CPI
-increases standard deduction
-increases child tax credit and phaseout cap

for business

-limits deductions on interest expenses for business
-eliminates manufacturing deduction, entertainment, and many other expense deductions
 
WCH said:
The top rate stays the same and there could be an even higher rate later.
Click to expand...
The Knicks COULD win the NBA championship. I wouldn't bet on it.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
Hari Seldon said:
Yea screws me over. Double the standard which is still less than my itemized and remove the personal exemption which in my case id 16k for the 4 of us. I'm fortunate I only have 3 years left on my mtge. Around here 10-20k in R/E taxes is normal along with 5 to 15k in income taxes never mind mortgage interest and contributions. Will definitely encourage plenty to move to lower taxed states especially empty nesters like myself. Will be fought by most Dems and plenty of Repukes in CA, NY, NJ. Will hurt property values in plenty of places. The home builders are livid. Usually the cons have no ideas like with healthcare. Now they show they have bad ideas as well.
Click to expand...

I win in the short term at least. I ran the numbers from last year through the proposed changes and will save $2,219, but I live in a moderately taxed state, have no mortgage and no dependents. Be a different story if I was single. Almost all of the change comes from the 12% bracket, both the 3% savings and the extra 15ish thousand taxed at the 12% vs 25%. Overall deductions went up slightly under the trump plan for me.

What concerns me is going to be the further ballooning of the debt because I don't believe the jobs, if any, created will remotely come close to offsetting the cut. That and the massive wealth concentration won't be good for anyone.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Here is a story about some misinformation being pushed about the GOP tax plan.
Hopefully the incorrect tweets have been deleted.

Senate Democrats falsely claim GOP tax plan will raise taxes for most working-class families

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/11/02/senate-democrats-falsely-claim-gop-tax-plan-will-raise-taxes-for-most-working-class-families/?utm_term=.cebbb8e5241c

In their haste to condemn the GOP tax plan, Democrats have spread far and wide the false claim that families making less than $86,100 on average will face a hefty tax hike. Actually, it’s the opposite. Most families in that income range would get a tax cut. Any Democrat who spread this claim should delete their tweets and make clear they were in error.

View attachment 67224558
Click to expand...
That report is suspect because it refers to "avg tax cut" within a quintile of income. Just because the "average" of that quintile receives a tax-cut doesn't mean that all members of the quintile receive a tax-cut. The very wealthy in the top 25% quintile get huge tax-cuts, while everyone else gets a tax-raise. The average is a tax-cut. It's like when Bill Gates walks into a bar with 40 people. The "average" person in the bar is a billionaire, even though there is only one billionaire in the bar.
 
CriticalThought said:
No matter how you slice it, this would be an overwhelming win for the wealthiest Americans and would do little to spur economic growth or increase wages. This is the biggest con of our lifetimes and the sad part is they will likely get away with it. If you told me a few years ago that the student loan interest deduction and the adoption credit would be cut to pay for tax cuts for corporations that are already making record profits, I would have said you were crazy. The final straw is increasing the child tax credit a paultry $600 per child. Why did they even bother?

I doubt I would pay any taxes under their current proposal but it is looking like I could lose up to a third of the value of my home when the change the mortgage interest deduction.

I feel like I am going to be paying out of my own pocket just so corporations and wealthy families can keep more of their money.
Click to expand...

Really? :roll:
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Almost every small convenience store owner on the planet owes his or her business - and his or her job - to poor people. What about that is so hard for you to understand?
Click to expand...



Other way around. The job isn't there because of the poor person, but because someone decided to open up a bodega.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Almost every small convenience store owner on the planet owes his or her business - and his or her job - to poor people. What about that is so hard for you to understand?
Click to expand...

Owes? Owes how? I sell you a trinket at a price we agree to, to our mutual benefit. You leave with it. How do I now owe you?

Every dollar made by said owner is EARNED, what about that is so hard for you to understand? Nobody owes you ****
 
CriticalThought said:
What about doing away with the AMT?

Do you know what a dummy corporation is and how it could benefit wealthy people through lower corporate rates and "pass through" rates?

Why are people making between 400k and one million effectively going to enjoy most of the benefits of the new tax brackets?

Did you know they just adjusted the inflation formula for the tax brackets?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that with this proposal the pass through top rate is going to be 5% higher than the corporate rate, so without further details, your complaint seems preemptive.
 
CriticalThought said:
No matter how you slice it, this would be an overwhelming win for the wealthiest Americans and would do little to spur economic growth or increase wages. This is the biggest con of our lifetimes and the sad part is they will likely get away with it. If you told me a few years ago that the student loan interest deduction and the adoption credit would be cut to pay for tax cuts for corporations that are already making record profits, I would have said you were crazy. The final straw is increasing the child tax credit a paultry $600 per child. Why did they even bother?

I doubt I would pay any taxes under their current proposal but it is looking like I could lose up to a third of the value of my home when the change the mortgage interest deduction.

I feel like I am going to be paying out of my own pocket just so corporations and wealthy families can keep more of their money.
Click to expand...

given the wealthiest americans pay the biggest share of the income tax and all the death tax, any other plan is just another scheme to soak the rich more
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Almost every small convenience store owner on the planet owes his or her business - and his or her job - to poor people. What about that is so hard for you to understand?
Click to expand...

this might be the most stupid comment in this thread. what a silly bit of populist idiocy
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Other way around. The job isn't there because of the poor person, but because someone decided to open up a bodega.
Click to expand...
The point is that people don't start businesses out of the goodness of their hearts to provide employment. They start them under the expectation that their is demand for what they sell. Unless they are a sole proprietor, they require employees to perform some function. Thus, demand is the driver of employment.
 
MTAtech said:
The point is that people don't start businesses out of the goodness of their hearts to provide employment. They start them under the expectation that their is demand for what they sell. Unless they are a sole proprietor, they require employees to perform some function. Thus, demand is the driver of employment.
Click to expand...



You made the statement that every bodega owner owes his business to poor people.


I disagree. They require employees but market waged determine what those employee makes.
 
countryboy said:
Even The Washington Compost has debunked this nonsense. In reality, the GOP caved to you and your ilk by not cutting taxes on the rich. Nice try though, and, congratulations.
Click to expand...
Do you know how I know that the above is untrue? Common sense. Had the GOP actually formed a tax plan that cut taxes on the average American and raised taxes on the rich, they wouldn't have had to meet in secret, in the dead of night and cut out Democratic participation. If it was a plan as good as you say, the wouldn't be trying to pass it with reconciliation so they don't need Democratic votes.

The reality is that this plan is a windfall for the rich and it throws a few crumbs to some segments. I will concede that there is a big tax-cut for any poor person who happens to inherit more than $5.9 million or a couple inheriting $11 million.

In a few days, the tax experts at the Tax Policy Center, the Tax Foundation and then the CBO, will weigh in on the plan and we will know for sure.

EDIT:
The Tax Policy Center already has something:
2. The proposal showers benefits on the wealthiest tax papers, the wrong approach for policy.
Several features would provide substantial tax cuts for the very rich. The corporate tax rate would be reduced to 20 percent from 35 percent. Most of this cut would accrue to high-income household because they hold the bulk of the stock. Tax rates on income from pass-through businesses – such as partnerships, S-corps, and sole proprietorships – would fall. This income also skews to the top -- about 70 percent of partnership income accrues to the top 1 percent. The threshold for the top personal income tax bracket of 39.6 percent would rise from $470,000 to $1,000,000 (for joint filers), which is an additional tax cut of at least $23,000 for those earning $1 million or more. The alternative minimum tax would be repealed and the estate tax (which applies to only the wealthiest 5,000 decedents each year) would eventually disappear as well.

...
3. Many low- and middle- income households will not receive much, if any, benefit from the TCJA, and some will face higher taxes.
The TCJA roughly doubles the standard deduction, increases the child tax credit to $1,600, and introduces a new tax credit for taxpayers and non-child dependents, but it also eliminates personal exemptions and raises the lowest marginal income tax rate to 12 percent. Together, these actions produce a mixture of effects on low- and middle-income households. I expect that some will see tax increases, some will have their tax situation unchanged, and some will see tax cuts.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MTAtech said:
Do you know how I know that the above is untrue? Common sense. Had the GOP actually formed a tax plan that cut taxes on the average American and raised taxes on the rich, they wouldn't have had to meet in secret, in the dead of night and cut out Democratic participation. If it was a plan as good as you say, the wouldn't be trying to pass it with reconciliation so they don't need Democratic votes.

The reality is that this plan is a windfall for the rich and it throws a few crumbs to some segments. I will concede that there is a big tax-cut for any poor person who happens to inherit more than $5.9 million or a couple inheriting $11 million.

In a few days, the tax experts at the Tax Policy Center, the Tax Foundation and then the CBO, will weigh in on the plan and we will know for sure.
Click to expand...

And of course, they might have had hearings. Of course they also didn't have hearings on the repeal and replace health plan. That would involve the other side being able to question and call witnesses.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Other way around. The job isn't there because of the poor person, but because someone decided to open up a bodega.
Click to expand...
That's false in general, not to mention it's a tiny fraction of the big picture anyway.

First, jobs do not exist strictly as a result of someone deciding to open up shop. If they did, we'd all open up shop and unemployment would be zero forever more.

A business cannot provide jobs without money, which is typically going to come from consumers (ultimately), and will only result from running a business in the black. No consumer spending, no business.

And when they ultra-wealthy get by far the most income gains, it's bad for everyone.
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2014/high-income-spending-economic-recovery/home.htm

Most people who even contemplate opening a business, do so because they have *some measure* of financial security, either in terms of a big nest egg, or marketable skills such that if their venture fails, they can reasonably expect to return to the work force at a high enough salary to be worth the risk. All of these things result from an overall healthy economy, and ideally one that is diverse in who is getting gains and who the market relies on.
 
Mach said:
That's false in general, not to mention it's a tiny fraction of the big picture anyway.

First, jobs do not exist strictly as a result of someone deciding to open up shop. If they did, we'd all open up shop and unemployment would be zero forever more.

A business cannot provide jobs without money, which is typically going to come from consumers (ultimately), and will only result from running a business in the black. No consumer spending, no business.

And when they ultra-wealthy get by far the most income gains, it's bad for everyone.
https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2014/high-income-spending-economic-recovery/home.htm

Most people who even contemplate opening a business, do so because they have *some measure* of financial security, either in terms of a big nest egg, or marketable skills such that if their venture fails, they can reasonably expect to return to the work force at a high enough salary to be worth the risk. All of these things result from an overall healthy economy, and ideally one that is diverse in who is getting gains and who the market relies on.
Click to expand...




if not one decides to open the bodega, there is no job. you can try to complicate it all you want. simple fact, no bodega, no job.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
if not one decides to open the bodega, there is no job. you can try to complicate it all you want. simple fact, no bodega, no job.
Click to expand...
The economy is not simple Rev, how can you not know this?
But this discussion is pretty simple, not sure why you think it's complicated.
Opening up a restaurant on an island with a population of 1.
There are no people, the "job" is 100% irrelevant.
There are no consumers either, the business itself, is irrelevant.

You think that's complicated? I know many right-wingers don't do nuance, but come on.

No other people, no job.
People can't afford to buy the services? No job.

Acting like the complexity of the economy can be boiled down to brain-dead libertarian-esque talking points, is as dumb as they come.
 
joG said:
Corporations do not "keep more of yheir money" in the sense that natural persons do. They invest, pay dividends, higher wages, employ more people or build reserves to guard against potential loss etc. In the final analysis the only lats use of funds is with natural persons.
Click to expand...

none of that happens directly because of tax cuts, if any of that happens it's because of increased demand, which tax cuts benefit indirectly at best.
 
TurtleDude said:
given the wealthiest americans pay the biggest share of the income tax and all the death tax, any other plan is just another scheme to soak the rich more
Click to expand...

With the current levels of income inequality in this country, you could tax the bottom 40% at twice the rate as the top 1% and the top 1% would still carry a bigger share of income tax. There is no logical or coherent "proportion" argument that could be made on tax policy.
 
CriticalThought said:
With the current levels of income inequality in this country, you could tax the bottom 40% at twice the rate as the top 1% and the top 1% would still carry a bigger share of income tax. There is no logical or coherent "proportion" argument that could be made on tax policy.
Click to expand...

until the middle class and poor get proper feedback as to the cost of government, they will continue to vote for politicians who promise them more and more government that others have to pay for
 
TurtleDude said:
until the middle class and poor get proper feedback as to the cost of government, they will continue to vote for politicians who promise them more and more government that others have to pay for
Click to expand...

It will never happen but the only way to get this country back on the right track would be to put in a constitutional amendment that says if you receive more in benefits then what you pay in you have no vote. It would drastically limit the ability of politicians to effectively bribe the populace into voting for them through handouts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom