Senate to vote soon on tax bill

Senate to vote soon on tax bill (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Marini -> Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 7:07:05 PM)
House MUST re-vote tomorrow. Awaiting Senate to vote tonight. They must be in a hurry to run home for a couple of weeks. Listening to the news is making me nervous. It looks like it is going to pass. It looks like the rich are going to get richer, and the middle class will be screwed. Thoughts, on the tax bill?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 7:35:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini House MUST re-vote tomorrow. Awaiting Senate to vote tonight. They must be in a hurry to run home for a couple of weeks. Listening to the news is making me nervous. It looks like it is going to pass. It looks like the rich are going to get richer, and the middle class will be screwed. Thoughts, on the tax bill? The rich are going to get richer, tax bill or not. It's what they do. It's how they got rich in the first place (more often than not). The Middle Class is still going to get richer. CPA's might not get richer. CPA's might realize a cut in pay.

servantforuse -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 7:59:34 PM)
The middle class will benefit greatly when this bill is passed.

Marini -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 8:20:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The middle class will benefit greatly when this bill is passed. hummmmm, I hope so.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 8:26:43 PM)
I know very little about taxes and such. I know I pay a ton in taxes, every quarter. People I trust tell me this will be good for the middle class "for a few years". As it was explained to me, that's why the personal income taxes are under a sunset clause (they expire in a specified amount of time), unlike the corporate taxes; so that, after a while, we can see if this system is beneficial or not and it can be adjusted from there. Of course, to me, that sounds like the congress critters saying: "We're leaving the door open for someone else to shove it up your ass, later"

servantforuse -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 8:33:07 PM)
I'm not so much worried about the income tax part of this bill. It is designed to help small businesses (who create the jobs ) and large corporations. 4% and maybe 5% GDP might be on the horizon

DaddySatyr -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 8:45:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I'm not so much worried about the income tax part of this bill. It is designed to help small businesses (who create the jobs ) and large corporations. 4% and maybe 5% GDP might be on the horizon 5% scares me, a little bit. Everything I'm told is that unless the fedres "plays ball", 5% almost guarantees inflation. Peace, Michael

MrRodgers -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 9:18:27 PM)
Growth, not so sure and how much...if any. Those with more disposable income do not necessarily go on shopping sprees and too much of what people buy, isn't even made in America and will not spur American job growth except for maybe...a few more low level temps. This bill will in no way inspire corp. America to repatriate [sic] untaxed, offshore profits. Even when they have cash and a very few have almost $1 trillion in cash now. So why would corp. Amer. change anything ? Why not just bank the money, buy comp. stock back raising the price and management bonuses. Or declare huge bonuses as a sort of commission for selling this loser to congress. This is not a tax cut, this just pushes more taxes into the future. This is anything but conservative for that reason alone. One does not cut taxes until thy cut spending. Of course the wretched stink of partisanship permeates the air in Wash., as Jones will not be sworn in until Jan. and cannot vote on this.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 10:00:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Of course the wretched stink of partisanship permeates the air in Wash., as Jones will not be sworn in until Jan. and cannot vote on this. I just saw a thing where Abalama State Law requires write-in ballots to be hand counted if they outnumber the margin of victory. Jones won by 20K and the write-ins number 22K. In other words: they haven't finished counting the ballots, yet.

MrRodgers -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 10:07:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Of course the wretched stink of partisanship permeates the air in Wash., as Jones will not be sworn in until Jan. and cannot vote on this. I just saw a thing where Abalama State Law requires write-in ballots to be hand counted if they outnumber the margin of victory. Jones won by 20K and the write-ins number 22K. In other words: they haven't finished counting the ballots, yet. Yes, it will be Alabama that will delay this and of course, the holidays. Still, the average is 15 days. The senate repubs have an 'out' here. There have been 11 special elections since World War II that match Jones’ situation. A speedy placement happened twice. It took one day to seat William Proxmire, D-Wis., in 1957, and two days for John Durkin, D-N.H., in 1975. The longest delay was 41 days for Quentin Burdick, D-N.D., in 1960. On average, the wait was 15 days. Even if Alabama certified Jones that fast, it would still fall on Dec. 27.

Wayward5oul -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 10:13:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Of course the wretched stink of partisanship permeates the air in Wash., as Jones will not be sworn in until Jan. and cannot vote on this. I just saw a thing where Abalama State Law requires write-in ballots to be hand counted if they outnumber the margin of victory. Jones won by 20K and the write-ins number 22K. In other words: they haven't finished counting the ballots, yet. Yes, it will be Alabama that will delay this and of course, the holidays. Still, the average is 15 days. The senate repubs have an 'out' here. There have been 11 special elections since World War II that match Jones’ situation. A speedy placement happened twice. It took one day to seat William Proxmire, D-Wis., in 1957, and two days for John Durkin, D-N.H., in 1975. The longest delay was 41 days for Quentin Burdick, D-N.D., in 1960. On average, the wait was 15 days. Even if Alabama certified Jones that fast, it would still fall on Dec. 27. The election will be certified sometime between Dec 26 and Jan 6. Also, Moore has yet to concede. He is still asking for donations to his "election integrity" fund to fund a recount.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 10:16:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul The election will be certified sometime between Dec 26 and Jan 6. Also, Moore has yet to concede. He is still asking for donations to his "election integrity" fund to fund a recount. Recounts aside (that's fair), I don't know why the word "concede" even comes up in elections. You win or you lose. If you don't "concede", it's not like you get to be inaugurated, anyway. That's always confused me. I remember people bitching about Shrillary, not conceding on election night. I was like: "So? That doesn't mean she won"

servantforuse -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/19/2017 11:57:01 PM)
The corporate tax rate is now 35%. It will soon be 21%. How is that not a tax cut ?

stef -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 12:12:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The middle class will benefit greatly when this bill is passed. hummmmm, I hope so. I'm sure it'll work as well as trickle-down economics or the war on drugs has. And don't worry bout that extra trillion or so tacked on to the deficit. Nothing t see there.

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 12:47:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The middle class will benefit greatly when this bill is passed. That is a very irresponsible and uninformed statement to make. The middle class lose their exemptions ($16k+ for a family of four), and probably will no longer be able to itemize. If the family was used to a little under 24k in itemized deductions, they will lose bigly. (i.e. They will be getting standard deduction roughly equal to what they were itemizing before and they will lose 16k+ in exemptions) A family that WILL be able to itemize will lose bigly as well, unless they are wayyyy over the $24k line. The expanded child tax credit (Now up to $2k per child, and income up to $200k) will help, offset about half of this loss, until the child turns 17. The original House plan, which I was excited about (see other thread), narrowed the rates to three, and let people put an extra $15k of income in a 12% bracket (rather than 25%), which further offset the other loses. The final plan keeps the brackets, and only drops the rates a few percentage points.

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 12:50:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I'm not so much worried about the income tax part of this bill. It is designed to help small businesses (who create the jobs ) and large corporations. 4% and maybe 5% GDP might be on the horizon Small businesses ONLY create jobs, if their is a greater demand for their goods or services. (NOT because the owner got a tax break on his/her taxes). Sigh... The biggest myth of the supply-siders.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 5:17:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Of course, to me, that sounds like the congress critters saying: "We're leaving the door open for someone else to shove it up your ass, later" That's an assumption I've always made with Congress and the (Insert President's name here) Administration.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 5:20:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers This is not a tax cut, this just pushes more taxes into the future. This is anything but conservative for that reason alone. One does not cut taxes until thy cut spending. Bullshit. As I responded before when you made this claim, that would guarantee we never cut taxes. Period.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 5:30:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: Marini quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The middle class will benefit greatly when this bill is passed. hummmmm, I hope so. I'm sure it'll work as well as trickle-down economics or the war on drugs has. And don't worry bout that extra trillion or so tacked on to the deficit. Nothing t see there. The CBO stated this would increase the Federal deficit by $1.5T over 10 years. While that may or may not be true, I'll accept it as true for now. Let's look at the bigger picture.... https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52370 quote: Growing Deficits Through 2027 Are Projected to Drive Up Federal Debt In CBO’s baseline projections, budget deficits remain below 3.0 percent of GDP through 2019. But subsequently, continued growth in spending—particularly for Social Security, Medicare, and net interest—would outstrip growth in revenues, resulting in larger deficits and increasing debt. By 2027, the deficit would reach 5.0 percent of GDP—$1.4 trillion. Do you see or hear anyone talking about actually doing anything about spending to reduce the current deficits? The CBO is projecting the deficit for 2027 to be $1.4T. How is it that $1.5T deficit increases over 10 years is horrible, but a $1.4T increase in one year isn't?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Senate to vote soon on tax bill (12/20/2017 5:35:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I'm not so much worried about the income tax part of this bill. It is designed to help small businesses (who create the jobs ) and large corporations. 4% and maybe 5% GDP might be on the horizon Small businesses ONLY create jobs, if their is a greater demand for their goods or services. (NOT because the owner got a tax break on his/her taxes). Sigh... The biggest myth of the supply-siders. Thank God businesses don't look at making investments to drive down the costs of production so their cost of goods goes down and they can charge less. Wouldn't want businesses to compete for larger market share to drive up demand for their product line. [8\|]

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1494141