It's called putting politics before economics. The past two administrations did it too. Though Trump's corporate tax cut was the most egregious example.Eastern Oregon Bear said:
I still don't understand why cutting taxes when the government is spending far more than it's taking in was a good idea.
Stimulus check ?
5,966 Views |
59 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by Anarchistbear
Lol you are the most deluded knuckleheads imaginable...calpoly said:Especially when the Obama economy was humming along!Eastern Oregon Bear said:
I still don't understand why cutting taxes when the government is spending far more than it's taking in was a good idea.
I have plenty. I just want YOU to have nothing.GBear4Life said:Because you have nothing.Professor Harold Hill said:I can't wait to re appropriate your belongings to the state.GBear4Life said:Only a commie can have so much hate in their heart!Professor Harold Hill said:I'm thrilled that you get nothing. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.LMK5 said:
The qualifications for these kinds of payments is never fair. I have 3 kids in college and will likely get nothing. I'm ok with that because lots of other people need it more than I do. However, if you are on a low fixed income but are a millionaire you will get a stimulus check. That's what I hate about these programs--they never take a person'ts full financial picture into account. They assume everyone has no assets.
More lies AND hate. And you packed both into 10 words. Impressive!Professor Henry Higgins said:I have plenty. I just want YOU to have nothing.GBear4Life said:Because you have nothing.Professor Harold Hill said:I can't wait to re appropriate your belongings to the state.GBear4Life said:Only a commie can have so much hate in their heart!Professor Harold Hill said:I'm thrilled that you get nothing. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.LMK5 said:
The qualifications for these kinds of payments is never fair. I have 3 kids in college and will likely get nothing. I'm ok with that because lots of other people need it more than I do. However, if you are on a low fixed income but are a millionaire you will get a stimulus check. That's what I hate about these programs--they never take a person'ts full financial picture into account. They assume everyone has no assets.
The party kicks out anybody who can't be concise, which is why Cal8285 and SFCityBear were kicked out.GBear4Life said:More lies AND hate. And you packed both into 10 words. Impressive!Professor Henry Higgins said:I have plenty. I just want YOU to have nothing.GBear4Life said:Because you have nothing.Professor Harold Hill said:I can't wait to re appropriate your belongings to the state.GBear4Life said:Only a commie can have so much hate in their heart!Professor Harold Hill said:I'm thrilled that you get nothing. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.LMK5 said:
The qualifications for these kinds of payments is never fair. I have 3 kids in college and will likely get nothing. I'm ok with that because lots of other people need it more than I do. However, if you are on a low fixed income but are a millionaire you will get a stimulus check. That's what I hate about these programs--they never take a person'ts full financial picture into account. They assume everyone has no assets.
bearlyamazing said:
Not everyone comes out ahead but most do. And the "tax cuts for the rich and not for the poor and middle class" is democratic rubbish. Again, just because you say it's so doesn't make it true. Facts and numbers don't lie. Every tax bracket went down. And every income limit in each tax bracket went up significantly, meaning not just did your tax bracket go down but the amount of taxes you're paying income on below your tax bracket decreased significantly, as well. There are very few scenarios where lost write-offs exceed the decreased taxes. If you don't believe me, run your own scenarios in all the tax brackets.
I didn't need to do very much to tell you how much more I pay. All I needed to do was look at my returns. That was easy enough to do so I did it. I did not have significant variations in income or (potential) deductions between the years so this makes the comparison in my case pretty simple.
Without giving away my tax bracket I will tell you that I paid about 10% more (slight more actually) in federal taxes now than I did before this awesome tax cut. That is now true in 2019 as well.
You can drink the Kool Aid all day which tells you that almost everyone got a cut. That is probably true. A friend who is a tax preparer said most people came out ahead. He also said that some people didn't. Like me.
What really GALLS me is that I am paying more federal taxes now than I did before. I GUARANTEE you that everyone making over $10/20/100M per year in income is paying less.
Meanwhile, I have listen to uninformed people like you sitting behind your keyboard championing this theft. I thought Republicans wanted less taxes, but the reality is they just want less taxes for THEMSELVES and by THEMSELVES I don't mean "All Republicans" I mean THE ELITE. I will never understand why anyone making less than $10M per year would vote for these profiteers who make a sound living on the backs of the American lower and middle classes.
Now they just voted themselves ANOTHER $2T out of the Treasury - and with Democrat support to boot. I am beyond disgusted.
But I thought you guys lamented tax cuts? Most people got cuts but you didn't so the president sucks?
Eliminate all federal income taxes, double the payroll tax (or some other % increase), and implement a wealth tax above a certain threshold. Restrict or disincentive dummies spawning. Fully funded childcare from 3 months to grade school. Mommies (and Daddies), get your a s s to work. Households where one parent chooses not to work (or report income), whether they use the public fully funded childcare or not, pays a surtax. Fully funded Health care from birth to death. Two kids maximum.
No fully guaranteed college student loans. You are not entitled to go to have a $50k/yr private school 500 miles from your home to study Lesbian Dance Theory funded by taxpayers. If you're poor and are not a good candidate for a loan, you go to the local state school. Sorry not sorry. Will weed out useless or unqualified students, save them from crippling debt and save the public from trillions in waste and getting bent over by universities. Let universities stand on its own without sucking FAFSA bone dry. I venture a guess 3/4 of universities would go under if they didn't have access to federal guaranteed money.
No guaranteeing 90% of mortgages. Force banks to sit on their assets and lend wisely, curb rampant speculation. Eliminate "appraisers" who enable rapid asset inflation. Appraiser seeing the contract price prior to the appraisal is hilarious. Any property priced higher than comps by definition should buyer to make up the difference in cash. That will stop lots of deals and price gouging from occurring.
Eliminate all federal income taxes, double the payroll tax (or some other % increase), and implement a wealth tax above a certain threshold. Restrict or disincentive dummies spawning. Fully funded childcare from 3 months to grade school. Mommies (and Daddies), get your a s s to work. Households where one parent chooses not to work (or report income), whether they use the public fully funded childcare or not, pays a surtax. Fully funded Health care from birth to death. Two kids maximum.
No fully guaranteed college student loans. You are not entitled to go to have a $50k/yr private school 500 miles from your home to study Lesbian Dance Theory funded by taxpayers. If you're poor and are not a good candidate for a loan, you go to the local state school. Sorry not sorry. Will weed out useless or unqualified students, save them from crippling debt and save the public from trillions in waste and getting bent over by universities. Let universities stand on its own without sucking FAFSA bone dry. I venture a guess 3/4 of universities would go under if they didn't have access to federal guaranteed money.
No guaranteeing 90% of mortgages. Force banks to sit on their assets and lend wisely, curb rampant speculation. Eliminate "appraisers" who enable rapid asset inflation. Appraiser seeing the contract price prior to the appraisal is hilarious. Any property priced higher than comps by definition should buyer to make up the difference in cash. That will stop lots of deals and price gouging from occurring.
GBear4Life said:
But I thought you guys lamented tax cuts? Most people got cuts but you didn't so the president sucks?
Eliminate all federal income taxes, double the payroll tax (or some other % increase), and implement a wealth tax above a certain threshold. I'm flexible on what that is.
The Republicans wanted tax cuts for their cronies. They threw a small bone to the working class to appease them and lots of low and middle income people lapped it up not realizing (or not caring) what a HUGE giveaway it was to the rich. I am not upset my taxes went up. I am upset my taxes went up to pay for cuts for billionaires.
Payroll taxes are regressive. That is not how to solve this problem.
How about the wealthy realize they can't possible spend all of that money anyway and reflect for a moment on what happened in France 250 years ago?
"Pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered."
Yes just like sales tax (which I don't like). The poor and lower middle class' effective tax rate will still be zero or negative. You mitigate a full regression by a "wealth" tax, which could be incremental and progressive.dimitrig said:GBear4Life said:
But I thought you guys lamented tax cuts? Most people got cuts but you didn't so the president sucks?
Eliminate all federal income taxes, double the payroll tax (or some other % increase), and implement a wealth tax above a certain threshold. I'm flexible on what that is.
The Republicans wanted tax cuts for their cronies. They threw a small bone to the working class to appease them and lots of low and middle income people lapped it up not realizing (or not caring) what a HUGE giveaway it was to the rich. I am not upset my taxes went up. I am upset my taxes went up to pay for cuts for billionaires.
Payroll taxes are regressive. That is not how to solve this problem.
How about the wealthy realize they can't possible spend all of that money anyway and reflect for a moment on what happened in France 250 years ago?
"Pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered."
Don't forget that the stimulus included a provision to help wealthy real estate developers. It had been negotiated out is the 2017 tax bill but squeezed into this one for some reason. I can't imagine why.
Also great to see that the President included a signing statement to make it crystal clear he didn't want any oversight on fraud he might commit, as if there were any risk of meaningful oversight with Republicans in control of the senate.
As for the stimulus, I would much prefer we had reacted appropriately a few months ago. It wasn't long ago that Trump thought $2.5b was more than he needed to defeat CV but congress forced $8B on him. Of course, as far as we can see, none of it was out to good use because the guy who tells us he has a great brain for public health didn't want to test people because it would "make the numbers" go up and thought CV would just go away like a miracle.
Once Humpty Dumpty falls down you cannot put him back together again. $2T is not nearly enough to get the economy back and because of how poorly we reacted early on to the pandemic, we are in for a bumpy ride. That's without factoring in how much of the $2T will be lots on fire by the recipients of corporate welfare who will use it to augment their equity.
If there isn't another multi trillion dollar request at the end of the summer, I will be quite surprised.
Also great to see that the President included a signing statement to make it crystal clear he didn't want any oversight on fraud he might commit, as if there were any risk of meaningful oversight with Republicans in control of the senate.
As for the stimulus, I would much prefer we had reacted appropriately a few months ago. It wasn't long ago that Trump thought $2.5b was more than he needed to defeat CV but congress forced $8B on him. Of course, as far as we can see, none of it was out to good use because the guy who tells us he has a great brain for public health didn't want to test people because it would "make the numbers" go up and thought CV would just go away like a miracle.
Once Humpty Dumpty falls down you cannot put him back together again. $2T is not nearly enough to get the economy back and because of how poorly we reacted early on to the pandemic, we are in for a bumpy ride. That's without factoring in how much of the $2T will be lots on fire by the recipients of corporate welfare who will use it to augment their equity.
If there isn't another multi trillion dollar request at the end of the summer, I will be quite surprised.
You're just talking out your ass. Do the math. I told you how to do the math. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Run samples for every tax class, especially those who aren't "the rich." Your class warfare rhetoric is nonsensical.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
I didn't need to do any math. I just looked at my tax returns. Literally. I am not even in the top 10% in terms of net worth in this country and my taxes went up. Sorry that does not agree with your world view.bearlyamazing said:
You're just talking out your ass. Do the math. I told you how to do the math. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Run samples for every tax class, especially those who aren't "the rich." Your class warfare rhetoric is nonsensical.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
As for Bloomberg, yes, let's look at Bloomberg. He bought himself into the Presidential discussion. Did he succeed? No. However, he came damn close - managed to get on the stage with the real contenders. It is not really about Bloomberg getting himself elected but about Bloomberg getting the guy he supports elected. That's a lot easier. Bloomberg just let his ego be his undoing. Let's not kid ourselves about who REALLY has influence and who does not.
By the way, how is that Trump economy doing right now? I think he just needed to inject $2T into the best economy ever!
That last question right there clearly shows you're not grounded in reality. Talk about ridiculous rhetorical games. Not even worth arguing about it's so foolish.dimitrig said:I didn't need to do any math. I just looked at my tax returns. Literally. I am not even in the top 10% in terms of net worth in this country and my taxes went up. Sorry that does not agree with your world view.bearlyamazing said:
You're just talking out your ass. Do the math. I told you how to do the math. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Run samples for every tax class, especially those who aren't "the rich." Your class warfare rhetoric is nonsensical.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
As for Bloomberg, yes, let's look at Bloomberg. He bought himself into the Presidential discussion. Did he succeed? No. However, he came damn close - managed to get on the stage with the real contenders. It is not really about Bloomberg getting himself elected but about Bloomberg getting the guy he supports elected. That's a lot easier. Bloomberg just let his ego be his undoing. Let's not kid ourselves about who REALLY has influence and who does not.
By the way, how is that Trump economy doing right now? I think he just needed to inject $2T into the best economy ever!
bearlyamazing said:That last question right there clearly shows you're not grounded in reality. Talk about ridiculous rhetorical games. Not even worth arguing about it's so foolish.dimitrig said:I didn't need to do any math. I just looked at my tax returns. Literally. I am not even in the top 10% in terms of net worth in this country and my taxes went up. Sorry that does not agree with your world view.bearlyamazing said:
You're just talking out your ass. Do the math. I told you how to do the math. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Run samples for every tax class, especially those who aren't "the rich." Your class warfare rhetoric is nonsensical.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
As for Bloomberg, yes, let's look at Bloomberg. He bought himself into the Presidential discussion. Did he succeed? No. However, he came damn close - managed to get on the stage with the real contenders. It is not really about Bloomberg getting himself elected but about Bloomberg getting the guy he supports elected. That's a lot easier. Bloomberg just let his ego be his undoing. Let's not kid ourselves about who REALLY has influence and who does not.
By the way, how is that Trump economy doing right now? I think he just needed to inject $2T into the best economy ever!
Nice dodge!
Don't kid yourself. bearlyamazing doesn't belong to any elite class. He just roots for people who would walk right over him without looking if he was bleeding to death on the street.dimitrig said:bearlyamazing said:
Not everyone comes out ahead but most do. And the "tax cuts for the rich and not for the poor and middle class" is democratic rubbish. Again, just because you say it's so doesn't make it true. Facts and numbers don't lie. Every tax bracket went down. And every income limit in each tax bracket went up significantly, meaning not just did your tax bracket go down but the amount of taxes you're paying income on below your tax bracket decreased significantly, as well. There are very few scenarios where lost write-offs exceed the decreased taxes. If you don't believe me, run your own scenarios in all the tax brackets.
I didn't need to do very much to tell you how much more I pay. All I needed to do was look at my returns. That was easy enough to do so I did it. I did not have significant variations in income or (potential) deductions between the years so this makes the comparison in my case pretty simple.
Without giving away my tax bracket I will tell you that I paid about 10% more (slight more actually) in federal taxes now than I did before this awesome tax cut. That is now true in 2019 as well.
You can drink the Kool Aid all day which tells you that almost everyone got a cut. That is probably true. A friend who is a tax preparer said most people came out ahead. He also said that some people didn't. Like me.
What really GALLS me is that I am paying more federal taxes now than I did before. I GUARANTEE you that everyone making over $10/20/100M per year in income is paying less.
Meanwhile, I have listen to uninformed people like you sitting behind your keyboard championing this theft. I thought Republicans wanted less taxes, but the reality is they just want less taxes for THEMSELVES and by THEMSELVES I don't mean "All Republicans" I mean THE ELITE. I will never understand why anyone making less than $10M per year would vote for these profiteers who make a sound living on the backs of the American lower and middle classes.
Now they just voted themselves ANOTHER $2T out of the Treasury - and with Democrat support to boot. I am beyond disgusted.
Professor Harold Hill said:Don't kid yourself. bearlyamazing doesn't belong to any elite class. He just roots for people who would walk right over him without looking if he was bleeding to death on the street.dimitrig said:bearlyamazing said:
Not everyone comes out ahead but most do. And the "tax cuts for the rich and not for the poor and middle class" is democratic rubbish. Again, just because you say it's so doesn't make it true. Facts and numbers don't lie. Every tax bracket went down. And every income limit in each tax bracket went up significantly, meaning not just did your tax bracket go down but the amount of taxes you're paying income on below your tax bracket decreased significantly, as well. There are very few scenarios where lost write-offs exceed the decreased taxes. If you don't believe me, run your own scenarios in all the tax brackets.
I didn't need to do very much to tell you how much more I pay. All I needed to do was look at my returns. That was easy enough to do so I did it. I did not have significant variations in income or (potential) deductions between the years so this makes the comparison in my case pretty simple.
Without giving away my tax bracket I will tell you that I paid about 10% more (slight more actually) in federal taxes now than I did before this awesome tax cut. That is now true in 2019 as well.
You can drink the Kool Aid all day which tells you that almost everyone got a cut. That is probably true. A friend who is a tax preparer said most people came out ahead. He also said that some people didn't. Like me.
What really GALLS me is that I am paying more federal taxes now than I did before. I GUARANTEE you that everyone making over $10/20/100M per year in income is paying less.
Meanwhile, I have listen to uninformed people like you sitting behind your keyboard championing this theft. I thought Republicans wanted less taxes, but the reality is they just want less taxes for THEMSELVES and by THEMSELVES I don't mean "All Republicans" I mean THE ELITE. I will never understand why anyone making less than $10M per year would vote for these profiteers who make a sound living on the backs of the American lower and middle classes.
Now they just voted themselves ANOTHER $2T out of the Treasury - and with Democrat support to boot. I am beyond disgusted.
Bearly, the math is not quite as simplistic as comparing the tax brackets. For many on this board, the 2017 TCJA resulted in higher federal taxes because the deduction for state and local taxes was capped. It mainly occurred among upper middle and moderately high income taxpayers in high-state-and-local tax states along the coasts.
Middle earners got on average a $800 tax cut, about $30 per paycheck. But that's peanuts compared to the billions the corporations and the uber wealthy got. According to Congress, effective corporate tax rates went down from 23% to 12%; individuals' effective tax rates went down by less than half of one percent on average. Why are you rooting for corporations, instead of working Americans? If your parents raised the allowance for you and your older brother by a $1 in aggregate, then told you to split it 99 cents to your brother and 1 cent to you, would you be crowing that you got a raise? The corporations didn't use the money to create more jobs. Mostly it's gone to buy back their own stock. They do what's profitable to them, not what is good for the country.
And how is the corporate tax cut being paid for? It's not. Your parents just put it on the credit card, which was already almost maxed out. I'm sure if Trump is reelected and the R's maintain their majority in the Senate, they will be asking for cuts to social security, medicare, pandemic planning, etc. Never mind the $900 billion bloated defense budget and farm and fossil fuel subsidies. And the credit card debt doesn't expire when your parents pass away. Someone has to pay for it, with interest. Do you think your older brother is going to say, OK, I'll pick up 99% of that bill?
The TCJA was utter stupidity designed only to get someone reelected and pay back his cronies for their $upport. It had nothing to do with good policy. At all.
FuzzyWuzzy said:Professor Harold Hill said:Don't kid yourself. bearlyamazing doesn't belong to any elite class. He just roots for people who would walk right over him without looking if he was bleeding to death on the street.dimitrig said:bearlyamazing said:
Not everyone comes out ahead but most do. And the "tax cuts for the rich and not for the poor and middle class" is democratic rubbish. Again, just because you say it's so doesn't make it true. Facts and numbers don't lie. Every tax bracket went down. And every income limit in each tax bracket went up significantly, meaning not just did your tax bracket go down but the amount of taxes you're paying income on below your tax bracket decreased significantly, as well. There are very few scenarios where lost write-offs exceed the decreased taxes. If you don't believe me, run your own scenarios in all the tax brackets.
I didn't need to do very much to tell you how much more I pay. All I needed to do was look at my returns. That was easy enough to do so I did it. I did not have significant variations in income or (potential) deductions between the years so this makes the comparison in my case pretty simple.
Without giving away my tax bracket I will tell you that I paid about 10% more (slight more actually) in federal taxes now than I did before this awesome tax cut. That is now true in 2019 as well.
You can drink the Kool Aid all day which tells you that almost everyone got a cut. That is probably true. A friend who is a tax preparer said most people came out ahead. He also said that some people didn't. Like me.
What really GALLS me is that I am paying more federal taxes now than I did before. I GUARANTEE you that everyone making over $10/20/100M per year in income is paying less.
Meanwhile, I have listen to uninformed people like you sitting behind your keyboard championing this theft. I thought Republicans wanted less taxes, but the reality is they just want less taxes for THEMSELVES and by THEMSELVES I don't mean "All Republicans" I mean THE ELITE. I will never understand why anyone making less than $10M per year would vote for these profiteers who make a sound living on the backs of the American lower and middle classes.
Now they just voted themselves ANOTHER $2T out of the Treasury - and with Democrat support to boot. I am beyond disgusted.
Bearly, the math is not quite as simplistic as comparing the tax brackets. For many on this board, the 2017 TCJA resulted in higher federal taxes because the deduction for state and local taxes was capped. It mainly occurred among upper middle and moderately high income taxpayers in high-state-and-local tax states along the coasts.
Middle earners got on average a $800 tax cut, about $30 per paycheck. But that's peanuts compared to the billions the corporations and the uber wealthy got. According to Congress, effective corporate tax rates went down from 23% to 12%; individuals' effective tax rates went down by less than half of one percent on average. Why are you rooting for corporations, instead of working Americans? If your parents raised the allowance for you and your older brother by a $1 in aggregate, then told you to split it 99 cents to your brother and 1 cent to you, would you be crowing that you got a raise? The corporations didn't use the money to create more jobs. Mostly it's gone to buy back their own stock. They do what's profitable to them, not what is good for the country.
And how is the corporate tax cut being paid for? It's not. Your parents just put it on the credit card, which was already almost maxed out. I'm sure if Trump is reelected and the R's maintain their majority in the Senate, they will be asking for cuts to social security, medicare, pandemic planning, etc. Never mind the $900 billion bloated defense budget and farm and fossil fuel subsidies. And the credit card debt doesn't expire when your parents pass away. Someone has to pay for it, with interest. Do you think your older brother is going to say, OK, I'll pick up 99% of that bill?
The TCJA was utter stupidity designed only to get someone reelected and pay back his cronies for their $upport. It had nothing to do with good policy. At all.
This is so messed up.. while billionaires throw pennies to the common man and get tax write offs. The political and economic system is broken for the masses.
"All types of knowledge, ultimately mean self-knowledge."
dimitrig, I think you are getting caught up in emotion and ignoring some useful information. You mentioned that "I am not even in the top 10% in terms of net worth in this country and my taxes went up." I will assume, from your statement, that you are quite close to that 10% mark, as are the majority of posters here. That makes you firmly upper middle class, or "mass affluent." Congratulations, I hope to get there myself some day.dimitrig said:I didn't need to do any math. I just looked at my tax returns. Literally. I am not even in the top 10% in terms of net worth in this country and my taxes went up. Sorry that does not agree with your world view.bearlyamazing said:
You're just talking out your ass. Do the math. I told you how to do the math. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Run samples for every tax class, especially those who aren't "the rich." Your class warfare rhetoric is nonsensical.
The dominant majority benefited from the tax cuts. 2k to a working class family means a lot.
There aren't a lot of truly rich people out there to buy votes from. Sure, you can get more donations from rich people but where did that get Bloomberg? One delegate from Guam? It doesn't win you an election. The middle class wins you elections.
Socialists will never admit more capital for business owners and the people in this country who spend money and drive the economy leads to the sustained growth we need to be the most prosperous nation in the world.
How do you think businesses expand and hire and invest in R&D? How do you think unemployment rates got to record lows?
The idea that fat cats just line their pockets and the economy sees little to none of that money is just laughable ignorance.
The Obama economy was just rolling along? LMFAO. That's comedy gold.
As for Bloomberg, yes, let's look at Bloomberg. He bought himself into the Presidential discussion. Did he succeed? No. However, he came damn close - managed to get on the stage with the real contenders. It is not really about Bloomberg getting himself elected but about Bloomberg getting the guy he supports elected. That's a lot easier. Bloomberg just let his ego be his undoing. Let's not kid ourselves about who REALLY has influence and who does not.
By the way, how is that Trump economy doing right now? I think he just needed to inject $2T into the best economy ever!
Most people think people with money don't pay taxes, but it's not true. There's lots of data on this. From the Tax Foundation: "The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (38.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.9 percent)." Here's all the data: Federal Tax Data
Trust me, when the AOCs, the Sanders, and the Pelosis of this world talk about wealth redistribution, they are not going to put you on the receiving end of that exercise. You will be a contributor. Are you ok with that, because it sounds like you feel you should be on the receiving end. You (and I) are not one of the "working people" they advocate for. Far from it. Do you agree?
What would you expect from a federal government completely run by the Democrats? You think you'll gain some type of revenge on those with more than you? Well, we have a preview right here in California. We're living in a Democratic governmental laboratory of sorts. Let's see, we have among the highest homeless rates in the nation; among the highest tax rates; among the highest vehicle registration and insurance costs; among the highest income tax rates; among the highest housing costs; some of the worst roads; the highest gas prices; and one of the highest poverty rates. An exemplary, safe haven for the working man we certainly are NOT. This stellar record has been accomplished even though we have resources and advantages that are the envy of every other state. We're not exactly Mississippi, right?
So, are you ready for California's blueprint of success to be expanded, God forbid, to the federal level? A reasonable person would expect very similar results to be had. You think you'll feel vindicated by federal tax policy that mirrors California's, accompanied by the rest of our ills? I'm thinking you won't be. Be careful what you wish for. The Democrats have always promised social justice and their own version of equality, but never delivered. Just take a look at all those urban centers they've governed for years. I say no thanks. Be careful what you wish for.
LMK5 said:
Most people think people with money don't pay taxes, but it's not true. There's lots of data on this. From the Tax Foundation: "The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (38.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.9 percent)." Here's all the data: Federal Tax Data
I don't know how you qualify "most people" but perhaps when "most people" think about income taxes they include other payroll taxes like social security and Medicare. If you include those, the numbers would shift. Also, the top 1% earn more income than the bottom 90% so is it really any surprise they pay more in income taxes in a system built on progressive rates?
I think the real crime is that our system includes numerous loopholes that can be exploited to prevent the progressive system from operating as people would hope. For example, the recent stimulus bill included a tax break for wealthy real estate developers. LMK5 - you mentioned that you aren't yet wealthy but hope to be some day. Does it make you happy that wealthy real estate developers received a massive tax break while you did not?
Unit2, I agree that SS and Medicare are important taxes also. Do you have data that includes these items that modifies the published data? Also, no, I'm not surprised that the top 1% pay far more in taxes, but I bet that most people who have a special hatred for the "rich" would be quite surprised that they do, including many on this board. The way the subject gets discussed, the common belief seems to be that the top earners don't pay any taxes. At least that's what it sounds like to me.Unit2Sucks said:LMK5 said:
Most people think people with money don't pay taxes, but it's not true. There's lots of data on this. From the Tax Foundation: "The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (38.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.9 percent)." Here's all the data: Federal Tax Data
I don't know how you qualify "most people" but perhaps when "most people" think about income taxes they include other payroll taxes like social security and Medicare. If you include those, the numbers would shift. Also, the top 1% earn more income than the bottom 90% so is it really any surprise they pay more in income taxes in a system built on progressive rates?
I think the real crime is that our system includes numerous loopholes that can be exploited to prevent the progressive system from operating as people would hope. For example, the recent stimulus bill included a tax break for wealthy real estate developers. LMK5 - you mentioned that you aren't yet wealthy but hope to be some day. Does it make you happy that wealthy real estate developers received a massive tax break while you did not?
In every society, the well connected, aka rich, always gain advantages. This is especially true, by the way, in countries that have systems that explicitly try to keep everybody at the same level. Go to any communist, so-called egalitarian society, and you'll see that the people who espouse communist doctrine the loudest--the Party members--live lives of privilege that would make George Soros blush. Read a book about China, Cuba, or North Korea and you'll quickly see what I mean.
Does it make me happy that someone benefited wrongly from the stimulus bill? No. Does it surprise me? No. That's the stuff that catches your eye. What catches my eye is that every retired person who shows Social Security as their only income while harboring seven-figure investment accounts will get a full stimulus share, instead of all these restaurant workers getting a double payout. That's what really bothers me. If you care for the working man, shouldn't that bother you also?
LMK5 said:
Does it make me happy that someone benefited wrongly from the stimulus bill? No. Does it surprise me? No. That's the stuff that catches your eye. What catches my eye is that every retired person who shows Social Security as their only income while harboring six-figure investment accounts will get a full stimulus share, instead of all these restaurant workers getting a double payout. That's what really bothers me. If you care for the working man, shouldn't that bother you also?
I don't have the same exact data regarding social security and Medicare but can tell you that most taxpayers pay more in payroll taxes than income taxes.
Here is a link: https://taxfoundation.org/payroll-income-tax-burden/
As for the stimulus, yes it's extremely unfortunate that the individual stimulus was executed the way it was. I think it was done in part for expedience but obviously the end result was both under-inclusive and over-inclusive.
Maybe the next stimulus bill will be better. Unfortunately it appears we will need one because this nightmare isn't going to magically disappear one day.
Our tax system isn't progressive, it's flat to regressive.
All taxes, bottom 50% pays 25.6%
Top 400 pays 23%
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/opinion/sunday/wealth-income-tax-rate.html
All taxes, bottom 50% pays 25.6%
Top 400 pays 23%
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/opinion/sunday/wealth-income-tax-rate.html
I think it would take an enormously detailed, comprehensive study to determine whether or not our system is progressive. That's because there are a lot of implicit taxes involved.Anarchistbear said:
Our tax system isn't progressive, it's flat to regressive.
All taxes, bottom 50% pays 25.6%
Top 400 pays 23%
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/opinion/sunday/wealth-income-tax-rate.html
First, corporations essentially collect taxes, not pay them. The burden of those taxes ultimately falls on three parties -- customers (through higher prices), employees (through lower wages) and owners (through lower returns). From what I dimly recall from my long-ago econ class the apportionment of that burden depends the elasticity of the supply and demand curves for a particular commodity. It would take someone a whole lot smarter than me to figure all that out.
Second, politicians love to impose hidden taxes to at least partially pay for the programs they pass. Medicare and Medicaid are prime examples. Because these programs generally pay below cost, private insurance ends up paying more. This is the 'cost shifting' you've probably read about. To me, it's just the same as a tax. Again, I don't know how you figure these into the equation.
Then you've go to take account of all the other taxes - sales, gasoline, property, etc.
My point is, it's pretty easy to draw a conclusion on partial information and both sides of the political spectrum seem prone to doing that.
BTW, the cited study ignores the Earned Income Tax Credit, which refunds payroll taxes. It's a 'refundable' credit, so if you qualify you get the money regardless of whether you pay income taxes or not. That doesn't make sense to me (excluding it from the study, not the EITC itself) and it would certainly impact the results of the study.
It's regressive for the middle class.Anarchistbear said:
Our tax system isn't progressive, it's flat to regressive.
All taxes, bottom 50% pays 25.6%
Top 400 pays 23%
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/opinion/sunday/wealth-income-tax-rate.html
Much of the poor don't pay any taxes.
I've been saying it -- the poor and rich are heavily subsidized, the middle class eats sh*t.
As the article points out they do pay taxes. I agree it is regressive for anyone who has an income as opposed to distributions.
Featured Stories
See All
Bear Insider Video: Cal WR Jacob De Jesus
by Jim McGill
Cal Earns Gritty Win At Virginia
by Cal Athletics
The Rodcast: Our Offense Needs Help
by Rod Benson
Bear Insider Video: Cal QB Dominic Ingrassia
by Jim McGill