• 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!

GOP poised to win the PR war

Moderate Right said:
.....
Click to expand...

It increases the bloody deficit by 1.5 trillion dollars

And I swear if the republicans advocate cutting social security, medicare and Medicaid in response to the hole in the budget, the first thing that I will say to that is “no way in hell.”

Repeal those tax cuts first.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
It increases the bloody deficit by 1.5 trillion dollars

And I swear if the republicans advocate cutting social security, medicare and Medicaid in response to the hole in the budget, the first thing that I will say to that is “no way in hell.”

Repeal those tax cuts first.
Click to expand...

When did the left start caring about the debt? I didn't hear the left getting all over Obama about the debt. Spending needs to be cut. Even Democrats agree that entitlement programs are on a course for insolvency.
 
Moderate Right said:
When did the left start caring about the debt? I didn't hear the left getting all over Obama about the debt. Spending needs to be cut. Even Democrats agree that entitlement programs are on a course for insolvency.
Click to expand...

The only welfare programs are the ones benefiting corporations.

This bill goes againist the fundamental values of law and justice. It is an attack on the progressive accomplishments of The 20th century.

Conservatives who voted for that abomination have no right to talk about the deficit, they are hypocrites of the highest order.
 
SirGareth said:
Lets see trump owns a lot of high end real estate whose deduct-ability for both taxes and interest has been all but eliminated for his tax return. Meanwhile the Clintons and Obama go on selling influence for a million bucks a speech as Trump takes no salary at all.

Do you think the Trumps will steal the White House furniture in 7 years as the Clintons did ?
Click to expand...

Um....no...you missed the announcement on the Corker kickback apparently. Real estate tycoons are gonna make out like bandits on this deal.
 
CriticalThought said:
I think the Dems blew it. They did their Chicken Little routine on the tax bill but they lost the message. The GOP has branded this bill as a "tax cut for the middle class" and on the end of the day, more than 80 percent of Americans will see a tax cut their first year....
Click to expand...
Support for this bill fell off a cliff over the past month. It's now down to 33%, whereas over 55% oppose the bill.

People won't see a big tax cut in their paychecks next year. This will be like the temporary Obama payroll tax cut -- remember that? No, you probably don't, because the amount was so small that people didn't notice it.

The GOP has lost that war. They sided with their donors against their voters, and may well pay the price for it.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, which is why the demorats may not fare well in 2018 yet may, in fact, win in 2020 when the reality of reduced revenue and no major economic boom results (especially if a trade war with China is attempted). The "mandated" cuts in spending (due to revenue reduction) take effect the year after (2019) so all is well for the 2018 election cycle.
Click to expand...

Funny how they structure it that way, isn't it?;)
 
bubbabgone said:
Deficits can be reduced by revenue increases, provided spending doesn't outpace revenue.
Debt has historically increased without much regard to revenue ... deficits follow.
I think you may have become accustomed to terrible economic growth that has kept revenue lower than it would have been with a better economy.
Among other things, this tax bill is intended to remedy that. If it does, it would be seen as wise and necessary.

From what you said, I have to ask, do you think cash belongs to the Government rather than the people sitting on those hordes, whether large and small?
Click to expand...

It belongs to the holders. I don't think we disagree there. Where we seem to disagree is with the idea that giving them more money via tax policy is going to make them start spending that cash, thus stimulating the economy, creating jobs, whatever. I see no evidence for that. It defies common sense. They wouldn't be sitting on hordes of cash if there were smart investments to be made, and if profits could be increased by more hiring, hiring would already be happening.

I'm not talking low-level service sector (the burger-flipper stereotype), but real jobs that can sustain people.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Left = tax and spend.

Right = borrow and spend.

Quiz : Which results in more debt?

Now, what was your assertion, err, question again?
Click to expand...

Which resulted in a majority in both the House and Senate and now the POTUS? The demorats foisted PPACA upon us and paid a heavy political price. If the republicant tax law changes mess things up then a political price will be exacted in return.

The republicant bet is that a theoretical increased share of the public debt will pale as against a real increase in take home pay to convince voters to replace republicants for demorats. After doubling the national debt under Obama and keeping 98.6% of the "Bush" tax rates it is a bit much to suddenly declare a genuine concern for federal spending outpacing federal revenue.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Funny how they structure it that way, isn't it?;)
Click to expand...

Incumbents are very good at remaining so no matter what happens - it takes a major FUBAR, like PPACA, to shake things up. The demorats are counting on this tax "reform" being the republicant FUBAR of a generation. We shall see which is a greater factor to the voters - the (slight?) increase in the national debt or the (slight?) increase in their take home pay.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Incumbents are very good at remaining so no matter what happens - it takes a major FUBAR, like PPACA, to shake things up. The demorats are counting on this tax "reform" being the republicant FUBAR of a generation. We shall see which is a greater factor to the voters - the (slight?) increase in the national debt or the (slight?) increase in their take home pay.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Check this out:
https://www.cbpp.org/blog/tax-bills-cost-could-hit-22-trillion-over-next-decade

Nifty graph in there as to what this will do if none of the tax increases or tax cut sunsets are allowed to happen, which is (imo) much more likely than them being allowed to happen.

My guesstimate - total cost 2.5 to 3 trillion. Will growth add enough revenue to offset that? I give heavy odds betting against it.

This bill gives me a very short term boost of (looks like) 3.5-6K per year. Hard to figure for me because my income the last few years has been a little unpredictable, plus the online tools and calculators give different results probably because the bill has been in such flux.

I would rather have true, balanced reform that netted me nothing.
 
Last edited:
These congress critters don't look at re-elections that far in the future (otherwise PPACA would have never happened). PPACA used phased in nonsense and the tax "reform" uses phased out nonsense. When the "Bush" federal income tax rates "expired" they were first extended and then mostly (98.6%?) "locked in" with slight rate increases for the top 1.4%. That was a mere 4 (5?) years ago so calling anything that congress has the power to change fixed or locked in is pure speculation.
 
The GOP will lose their war on Puerto Rico, in this tax skam, in next year's Florida elections ...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Incumbents are very good at remaining so no matter what happens - it takes a major FUBAR, like PPACA, to shake things up. The demorats are counting on this tax "reform" being the republicant FUBAR of a generation. We shall see which is a greater factor to the voters - the (slight?) increase in the national debt or the (slight?) increase in their take home pay.
Click to expand...

Democrats didn't need this gift from your repukkkes to wake up the electorate ...
 
<alt>doxygen said:
. They are fat and happy, many with money they never did a lick of work for.
Click to expand...

In some cases you are correct. But much more often than not, the kids were given a business to run, and they worked hard for it just like their parents did. The people you speak of are a much smaller subset of those who have intergenerational wealth. Believe me, I know some of both.
 
NIMBY said:
Why do GOPlunderers deny their brand ?
Click to expand...

Why do demorat supporters brand others? Perhaps when folks like the demorat tax plan then they will become the majority party in congress and maybe regain the White House.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Why do demorat supporters brand others? Perhaps when folks like the demorat tax plan then they will become the majority party in congress and maybe regain the White House.
Click to expand...

Who are demorats, ttwtt78640 ???
 
NIMBY said:
Who are demorats, ttwtt78640 ???
Click to expand...

I use the term republicants when referencing the major party for a bigger federal government and demorats when referencing the major party for a huge federal government. The two major parties are not as far apart as many would lead you to believe - no matter which one is temporarily in the majority federal spending and power increase.
 
gdgyva said:
Obama had an approx 650 billion deficit in his last year as president

Did either side come after medicare or social security?

no....Why not?

Now....why do you think this will be any different?
Click to expand...



https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/tax-bill-2017/card/1510696375

The Republican tax bill would force $25 billion in immediate cuts to Medicare, according to the Congressional Budget Office, a move that could be stopped only with a bipartisan vote.

Those are the consequences under the pay-as-you-go law that Congress passed in 2010. That law requires tax cuts and certain spending increases to be paired with offsetting provisions. If not, the law forces automatic spending cuts. On top of Medicare, there will be another $85 billion to $90 billion in spending cuts in fiscal year 2018, according to CBO.
Click to expand...


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/29/upshot/paygo-medicare-cuts-tax-bill.html
The cuts would be automatic, the consequence of a 2010 law that Congress passed to keep itself from increasing the deficit too much.

The biggest program affected would be Medicare, the health insurance program for older people and the disabled. But the law allows Medicare to take only a relatively small cut: 4 percent. Other programs have no such protection. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the deficit increase from the tax bill would be large enough — $1.5 trillion over 10 years — that spending for the unprotected programs would be reduced to zero next year and nearly zero over the next nine years.
Click to expand...
 
Rogue Valley said:
I know I won't forget who authored this tax giveaway to the wealthy.
Click to expand...

As if someone who thinks people keeping their own money is a "giveaway" was ever going to vote Republican anyway . . .
 
Just look at the poll numbers.

All the GOP is winning is the race to the bottom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom