Posts: 2087
Threads: 65
Joined: August 30, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 2, 2017 at 10:46 pm
Not only is it an attack on the middle and lower class with trickle-down warfare (with cuts incoming to Medicaid, Social Security, and other social safety nets) it's also a trojan horse to allow Churches endorse candidates (which is also in the bill)
So what do I think? I think it's a terrible decision, but that shouldn't be surprising coming from Republicans.
The whole tone of Church teaching in regard to woman is, to the last degree, contemptuous and degrading. - Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Posts: 2461
Threads: 16
Joined: November 12, 2013
Reputation:
17
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 2, 2017 at 11:42 pm
(December 2, 2017 at 9:25 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: (December 2, 2017 at 8:49 pm)wallym Wrote: Short term, we're getting a few thousand a year from this.
Your income is between 100-200k$?
If you made over 200k$, you'd get back nearly 10$k from this fiscally irresponsible abortion!
Yes, I also will be getting some nice blood money.
Humorously enough, the 50-100$k bracket that only whites dominated in support for Trump?
They're getting nothing from the GOP tax plan. Sorry guys, I really tried to stop y'all from stabbing yourselves in the collective balls but a certain group just wouldn't let up. Have a merry Trumpmas and be sure to kick the shit out of the nearest Trump voter cause that's the only holiday pay-out you're getting if you make less than 100k$ per year.
Seems unlikely that most 50-100k households are losing enough deductions to make up for doubling the standard deduction and a 3% decrease in the rate. From what I've read, some folks in high tax states aren't making out well. Maybe childless single filers who own homes? But for the most part, it seems positive for most. I thought I saw the NYT say 84% or something in that 50-100k get a tax cut.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017...ncome.html
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 3:11 am
Well.... i guess when the economy collapses i guess it would be it's final crash i suppose because it wont be coming back.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 2308
Threads: 23
Joined: January 18, 2017
Reputation:
35
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 6:46 am
All that you get when you cut taxes for the wealthy and deregulate is a boom/bust cycle like the roaring 20's and the great depression.
Supply side economics is crap. In order for it to work, the average person has to have enough income to buy what the manufacturers make.
As it is, the rich don't reinvest their extra cash in the economy anyway.
Cutting Social Security and government programs effects me directly. I had planned on moving out on my own soon and going through
vocational rehabilitation eventually.
If a crap ton of money is cut, I can see the latter, and maybe the former greatly decreasing or disappearing.
I get an SSI check that I depend on. I'm fairly certain I can't work enough to support myself if I get little or no help.
I can see this being worse than the Bush years.
Posts: 8280
Threads: 47
Joined: September 12, 2015
Reputation:
42
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 6:54 am
(December 2, 2017 at 10:46 pm)Cecelia Wrote: Not only is it an attack on the middle and lower class with trickle-down warfare (with cuts incoming to Medicaid, Social Security, and other social safety nets) it's also a trojan horse to allow Churches endorse candidates (which is also in the bill)
So what do I think? I think it's a terrible decision, but that shouldn't be surprising coming from Republicans.
Is there not a provision to allow US citizens to take a law to court if they think it unconstitutional? Because allowing churches to endorse candidates is so blatantly violating secular principles that even Ireland in the darkest days of Rome rule camed down hard on it.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Posts: 2308
Threads: 23
Joined: January 18, 2017
Reputation:
35
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 6:57 am
(December 3, 2017 at 6:54 am)Wololo Wrote: (December 2, 2017 at 10:46 pm)Cecelia Wrote: Not only is it an attack on the middle and lower class with trickle-down warfare (with cuts incoming to Medicaid, Social Security, and other social safety nets) it's also a trojan horse to allow Churches endorse candidates (which is also in the bill)
So what do I think? I think it's a terrible decision, but that shouldn't be surprising coming from Republicans.
Is there not a provision to allow US citizens to take a law to court if they think it unconstitutional? Because allowing churches to endorse candidates is so blatantly violating secular principles that even Ireland in the darkest days of Rome rule camed down hard on it.
My understanding is they always could endorse candidates, at risk of losing their tax exempt status.
Posts: 46994
Threads: 545
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
108
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 7:19 am
(December 2, 2017 at 10:46 pm)Cecelia Wrote: Not only is it an attack on the middle and lower class with trickle-down warfare (with cuts incoming to Medicaid, Social Security, and other social safety nets) it's also a trojan horse to allow Churches endorse candidates (which is also in the bill)
So what do I think? I think it's a terrible decision, but that shouldn't be surprising coming from Republicans.
Trickle-down economics (n): That action involving a wealthy person 1) pissing down the back of your neck while 2) trying to convince you that it's raining soup.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 31087
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 11:58 am
(December 2, 2017 at 11:42 pm)wallym Wrote: Seems unlikely that most 50-100k households are losing enough deductions to make up for doubling the standard deduction and a 3% decrease in the rate. From what I've read, some folks in high tax states aren't making out well. Maybe childless single filers who own homes? But for the most part, it seems positive for most. I thought I saw the NYT say 84% or something in that 50-100k get a tax cut.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017...ncome.html
I'm in the 50-100K group in terms of taxable income.
I have been using a spreadsheet I developed to predict my annual tax liability based on projected income, which has correctly predicted my tax liability within a small margin of error for better than a decade. Plugging in the new tax brackets and removing the lost deductions, I did the math based on what's in the Senate bill. If the changes in deductions and brackets were applied to my 2017 projected income, I will pay $3500 more in Federal taxes.
This represents a 27% tax increase. I'm a single parent homeowner. The loss of almost $300/month in income means a lot of belt-tightening.
As stated before, the "doubling of the standard deduction" is a scam considering it's largely offset for single and married childless filers by elimination of the personal exemption, and it's entirely eliminated for people with children. (a married couple with one child loses $12,150 in personal exemptions, a married couple with three children loses $20,250 in personal exemptions).
Now, some of those people will have some of that made whole by the increase in the child tax credit - assuming it survives committee - but that credit is phased incrementally by income, and people like me are ineligible.
The whole thing is fucking smoke and mirrors. Fuck this tax cut, fuck the GOP, and fuck all the fucking fuckers who fucking fell for it.
Posts: 2461
Threads: 16
Joined: November 12, 2013
Reputation:
17
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 12:33 pm
(December 3, 2017 at 11:58 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: (December 2, 2017 at 11:42 pm)wallym Wrote: Seems unlikely that most 50-100k households are losing enough deductions to make up for doubling the standard deduction and a 3% decrease in the rate. From what I've read, some folks in high tax states aren't making out well. Maybe childless single filers who own homes? But for the most part, it seems positive for most. I thought I saw the NYT say 84% or something in that 50-100k get a tax cut.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017...ncome.html
I'm in the 50-100K group in terms of taxable income.
I have been using a spreadsheet I developed to predict my annual tax liability based on projected income, which has correctly predicted my tax liability within a small margin of error for better than a decade. Plugging in the new tax brackets and removing the lost deductions, I did the math based on what's in the Senate bill. If the changes in deductions and brackets were applied to my 2017 projected income, I will pay $3500 more in Federal taxes.
This represents a 27% tax increase. I'm a single parent homeowner. The loss of almost $300/month in income means a lot of belt-tightening.
As stated before, the "doubling of the standard deduction" is a scam considering it's largely offset for single and married childless filers by elimination of the personal exemption, and it's entirely eliminated for people with children. (a married couple with one child loses $12,150 in personal exemptions, a married couple with three children loses $20,250 in personal exemptions).
Now, some of those people will have some of that made whole by the increase in the child tax credit - assuming it survives committee - but that credit is phased incrementally by income, and people like me are ineligible.
The whole thing is fucking smoke and mirrors. Fuck this tax cut, fuck the GOP, and fuck all the fucking fuckers who fucking fell for it.
What do you think the NYT was looking at when they came up with their numbers?
Posts: 31087
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Tax cuts passed in Senate
December 3, 2017 at 12:40 pm
(This post was last modified: December 3, 2017 at 12:43 pm by Jackalope.)
(December 3, 2017 at 12:33 pm)wallym Wrote: (December 3, 2017 at 11:58 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I'm in the 50-100K group in terms of taxable income.
I have been using a spreadsheet I developed to predict my annual tax liability based on projected income, which has correctly predicted my tax liability within a small margin of error for better than a decade. Plugging in the new tax brackets and removing the lost deductions, I did the math based on what's in the Senate bill. If the changes in deductions and brackets were applied to my 2017 projected income, I will pay $3500 more in Federal taxes.
This represents a 27% tax increase. I'm a single parent homeowner. The loss of almost $300/month in income means a lot of belt-tightening.
As stated before, the "doubling of the standard deduction" is a scam considering it's largely offset for single and married childless filers by elimination of the personal exemption, and it's entirely eliminated for people with children. (a married couple with one child loses $12,150 in personal exemptions, a married couple with three children loses $20,250 in personal exemptions).
Now, some of those people will have some of that made whole by the increase in the child tax credit - assuming it survives committee - but that credit is phased incrementally by income, and people like me are ineligible.
The whole thing is fucking smoke and mirrors. Fuck this tax cut, fuck the GOP, and fuck all the fucking fuckers who fucking fell for it.
What do you think the NYT was looking at when they came up with their numbers?
Why are you deflecting?
I'm not addressing anything in the NYT report. I'm asserting what's in the Senate bill, and that as a middle-class parent, I am facing a 27% federal tax increase, and furthermore, I'm implying that such is unjust. I'm further implying that the GOP is peddling bullshit when they claim a doubling of the standard deduction is meaningful in a positive way for many families with children.
Even if you believe the report that some percentage are not getting a cut - at least some of those people are getting screwed hard without lube.
|
