Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's be frank and set political correctness aside for a moment.
The sad reality is that 5% of Americans -- the vast majority of whom are elderly -- account for 95% of the health care costs in America. Our country is spending an enormous percentage of its wealth (taxpayer money and debt) to keep people alive in their 70s, 80s, and 90s. Limiting health care to only the elderly that can afford higher premiums will dramatically reduce costs, enabling Congress to reduce taxes (or debt). Once you understand this, the Republican proposal makes much more sense.
Yes, you sum up the GOP health care plan perfectly which is for people who are not members of the donor class to just die quickly if they get sick.
Oil Subsidies: Writing Off Drilling Expenses: A century ago, drilling for oil was risky business. The century-old tax break remains a gusher. Oil companies can expense 70 percent of their drilling costs and depreciate the rest. Annual cost to taxpayers: $700 million to $3.5 billion The Depletion Allowance:
In 1926, Congress introduced the "excess of percentage over cost depletion deferral," a.k.a. the depletion allowance. Since 1975, only small companies may claim it, but the price tag is still big. Under the allowance, an oil producer may deduct 15 percent (originally 27.5 percent) of any gross income from a well. And unlike normal depreciation, this deduction may be claimed indefinitely. Annual cost to taxpayers: $612 million to $1.1 billion Domestic Manufacturing Deduction: In 2004, ostensibly to prevent jobs from being shipped overseas, Congress extended a tax break for stateside manufacturers to cover the oil industry. Never mind that most US oil jobs are nearly outsourcing-proof, since a well in Alaska or a refinery in Louisiana can't be sent to China. Annual cost to taxpayers: $574 million Triumph of the Drill: How Big Oil Clings to Billions in Government Giveaways | Mother Jones
Maybe you missed the memo, Republicans control the Executive branch and Congress.
Steve Bannon At a cocktail party in November, 2013, he described himself as “Leninist” to the writer and historian Ronald Radosh. In a piece at the Daily Beast, Radosh recalled that Bannon had said to him, “Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” Steve Bannon Steven MillerThe White House unleashed Miller on the Sunday morning shows. What I saw was not simply unconventional or weird, even, but downright disturbing and unethical. Often looking like a deer caught in the headlights, or perhaps reading from a teleprompter, with tones and vocalizations that seemed not to quite match the words coming out of his mouth, the man simply told lie after lie after lie. I would call it peculiar, but dishonesty is now the norm out of the White House. However, it was one of the hardest things I’ve ever watched - in part because it’s not actually a joke — this inexperienced bigot is crafting America’s new (failed) policies.KING: Stephen Miller is the latest liar and bigot on Team Trump - NY Daily News Sebastian GorkaIt’s been evident for a while now that Sebastian Gorka, Trump’s top counterterrorism adviser, has at least flirted with fascism. One clue was when Gorka, who was born in London to Hungarian parents, dressed up for one of Trump’s inaugural balls in a black braided jacket popular with the Hungarian far right, pinned with a medal associated with Hungarian Nazi collaborators. Then in February, Jewish newspaper the Forward found that from 2002–2007, when Gorka was active in politics in Hungary, he worked closely with anti-Semitic politicians and wrote for openly anti-Semitic newspapers.A top Trump aide has been strongly linked to a Nazi group. "About 70 percent of federal funding for public broadcasting goes to subsidize the operations of about 1400 local radio and television stations that primarily just rebroadcast national programs to their surrounding communities." Funding for Public Broadcasting Is Just 0.01 Percent of the Federal Budget. It Should Still Be Eliminated. - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Sounds to me like kids in SF, LA and New York will still get to watch big bird, but maybe not the kids in rural PA, KY and WV huh?
So, yes - oil companies get the same depreciation write offs that everyone uses.
"A mortgage tax write off" is a CEO subsidy - HELP! If the GOP chooses to try and cut out the Mortgage interest deduction, would be fine with labeling it a "CEO Subsidy?"
Here is a point you ignored...If Republicans are "villains" for keeping in place the same write-offs that all companies use...why aren't Democrats villains for doing it?
Democrats have controlled all 3 (WH, Sen. and HR) more than the Republicans have since the depreciation has existed - including Obama and Bill Clinton had opportunities to get rid of it. Is Obama a villain?
It seems Democrats like you will use lies and distortions to blast it when Republicans are in control and quickly go silent or get factual when Democrats are in control.
Doesn't that hurt America that issues are only issues and we are only honest on the issues when certain parties are in power?
P.S. Will you blast Democrats for trying to ruin democracy as they worked to rig their primary?
"The obesity epidemic could be playing a role in the increase in deaths from heart disease, strokes, diabetes and possibly Alzheimer's. It could also be that doctors have reached the limit of what they can do to fight heart disease with current treatments.
The epidemic of prescription opioid painkillers and heroin abuse is probably fueling the increase in unintentional injuries, Arun Hendi, a demographer at Duke University, wrote in an email. The rise in drug abuse and suicide could be due to economic factors causing despair."U.S. Life Expectancy Declines : Shots - Health News : NPR
What you posted is a logical fallacy, commonly called Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: "after this, therefore because of this") The following is a simple example: The rooster crows immediately before sunrise; therefore the rooster causes the sun to rise.
Annual cost to taxpayers: $700 million to $3.5 billion
No. Reducing their taxes doesn't cost the taxpayer anything. Taxpayers are not entitled to their money and oil companies pay a lot of money in taxes. And employ many people who pay income tax.
Meanwhile a poor person pays next to nothing in taxes, gets to enjoy the fruits of a society they're not contributing to, and yet you're acting like a bulldog for such a parasite?
Poor people should only shut-up and count themselves lucky they're in a society with more productive members. A society of all poor people with no productive members to support them looks like Afghanistan or Zimbabwe.
No. Reducing their taxes doesn't cost the taxpayer anything. Taxpayers are not entitled to their money and oil companies pay a lot of money in taxes. And employ many people who pay income tax.
Of course it does, that's like saying that ending a tax break doesn't save the taxpayer money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaskingIguana
Meanwhile a poor person pays next to nothing in taxes, gets to enjoy the fruits of a society they're not contributing to, and yet you're acting like a bulldog for such a parasite?
Everyone with expendable income pays taxes. Income tax is NOT the only tax. That's pure silliness, just name one class of person who pays NO TAXES I'll be here waiting [/quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaskingIguana
Poor people should only shut-up and count themselves lucky they're in a society with more productive members. A society of all poor people with no productive members to support them looks like Afghanistan or Zimbabwe.
And it could be said that people who don't do the due diligence to investigate who the people are who receive social service benefits, how much they actually receive, and how long they receive the benefits might do well to shut-up rather than wasting time throwing out broad unsubstantiated claims about people they clearly know very little about.
Let's be frank and set political correctness aside for a moment.
The sad reality is that 5% of Americans -- the vast majority of whom are elderly -- account for 95% of the health care costs in America. Our country is spending an enormous percentage of its wealth (taxpayer money and debt) to keep people alive in their 70s, 80s, and 90s. Limiting health care to only the elderly that can afford higher premiums will dramatically reduce costs, enabling Congress to reduce taxes (or debt). Once you understand this, the Republican proposal makes much more sense.
People in their 70s+ have medicare they paid into. They will continue to be insured and receive comprehensive medical care disappointing as it may be to you.
Republicans will be hurt by this the most. Let Trump sign it. Enjoy it guys. I will enjoy my blue state zero premium platinum plan. Obamacare, ryancare, trumpcare who cares..... .. it's your bill. You own it. Poor farmer from red state enjoy it. Your leader says its good so it must be right???
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
