Federal Income Tax Reform Proposal - Effect on Californians (Oakland: renting, condo)

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

I didn’t say they weren’t ... in the short term. I said the “breaks” contribute to long-term destruction of our democracy by further burdening our national debt - thus feeding oligarchy. And that true conservatives wouldn’t try to frame this nonsense as a break for the common man ... because it isn’t. Intelligent conservative capitalists know better than to kill the consumers they thrive on - which is what occurs through schemes that feed extremes of wealth disparity.

We do not live in a democracy. Never have. We are a constitutional republic. Our debt matters little. Neither side cares about debt. Again you can't say who this policy hurts because in the brackets that are lower they got a break. You have a tinfoil hat on if you think these breaks contribute to our destruction long term.

I am still waiting for an example of an actual person this negatively affects and I have no doubt there are other factors that they can control which would minimize the impact if not remove the impact.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

The fact of the matter is the impact is minimal.

"According to the Franchise Tax Board, 5.9 million California taxpayers reported itemized deductions on federal income taxes in 2015. Of them, 2.1 million made between $100,000 and $250,000. This group claimed $11 billion in real estate tax deductions, more than any other group.

“Why them?” asks Darien Shanske, a law professor at the University of California, Davis. “It’s hard to understand why they should be the ones to get a big tax increase. A very wealthy real estate investor in Texas doesn’t get a tax increase. And that’s the arbitrariness of it, right?”

‘The federal government really jacked us’: How Trump’s tax cuts are working out for Californians:
https://www.desertsun.com/story/news...ia/3436865002/

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

"According to the Franchise Tax Board, 5.9 million California taxpayers reported itemized deductions on federal income taxes in 2015. Of them, 2.1 million made between $100,000 and $250,000. This group claimed $11 billion in real estate tax deductions, more than any other group.

“Why them?” asks Darien Shanske, a law professor at the University of California, Davis. “It’s hard to understand why they should be the ones to get a big tax increase. A very wealthy real estate investor in Texas doesn’t get a tax increase. And that’s the arbitrariness of it, right?”

‘The federal government really jacked us’: How Trump’s tax cuts are working out for Californians:
https://www.desertsun.com/story/news...ia/3436865002/

So what specific itemized deduction are they losing and how much of the deduction are they losing?

I want to understand this

ETA: The article you link is hilarious to read. They are pissed because of the $16,000 in local and state taxes they paid they are missing out on deducting $6000 of it. The problem is not the $6000 in deductions they can't deduct which would net them an additional ~$2000. It is the $16,000 they are paying out. Again hole in the boat the size of a car and one the size of a finger, but yeah focus on the finger size hole. Hey I don't mind writing the check for $16,000, but the $2000 one is killing me.

Again your state can make changes that would easily offset this but they don't and you guys continue to put the same morons in office. It is like getting mad at the new hooker in town for moving here a husband goes to see but not the husband.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by ViFitzgerald

Most Middle income families I know are going to have $75 to $120 worth of food on their table per month due to the tax cut.

That's called anecdotal evidence and is not very compelling. I don't know a single person who likes lima beans but I doubt if that could be applied to the population as a whole

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

Again your state can make changes that would easily offset this but they don't and you guys continue to put the same morons in office.

Again, you pick and chose what you want to read and what you want to ignore.

From the article: "Californians could be voting their pocketbooks on this issue. Polling data suggested the $10,000 SALT deduction along with the $750,000 cap on mortgage interest deduction factored into Republican losses when Democrats swept all seven U.S. House seats in Orange County."

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Again, you pick and chose what you want to read and what you want to ignore.

From the article: "Californians could be voting their pocketbooks on this issue. Polling data suggested the $10,000 SALT deduction along with the $750,000 cap on mortgage interest deduction factored into Republican losses when Democrats swept all seven U.S. House seats in Orange County."

Yes but Dems are notorious for raising taxes and it has recently been a notoriously Democrat state. So you basically had a bunch of politicians at the state level who over the last 20 years have raised and raised and raised taxes. Then a Republican President puts forth tax policy which adds to the enormous tax bill the citizens currently have due to the Democratic state policies and vote the Repubs out to put the Dems responsible for the state policies back into office.


In simpler terms tax liability for a person went from let's say $6,000 per year to $20,000 per year over a certain amount of time (10-20 years?) and now it is going to go from $20,000 per year to $22,000 per year (for a minority of people)and you put the people back into place who allowed it to go from $6000 to $20,000. No wonder so many are broke.

If I made a movie with a character doing this no one would see it because they would say no one is that stupid. Oh yes they are.


Hey I am going to leave my lying cheating wife who cheated on me once to get back together with my ex-wife who cheated on me 10 times.

You all get the government you deserve by voting the way you do.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

We do not live in a democracy. Never have. We are a constitutional republic. Our debt matters little. Neither side cares about debt. Again you can't say who this policy hurts because in the brackets that are lower they got a break. You have a tinfoil hat on if you think these breaks contribute to our destruction long term.

I am still waiting for an example of an actual person this negatively affects and I have no doubt there are other factors that they can control which would minimize the impact if not remove the impact.

Oh bulltweet. “Democracy” has become an appropriately generalized term for our constitutional republic system. Stop the niggling nonsense.

“Neither side cares about debt”? Certainly the brain-dead among us (which are many) refuse to look at it. That doesn’t mean it is carefree or immaterial.

It is also true that debt is a healthy foundational element of our system. Our economy / banking system requires debt to issue new money, in fact. Yet, once again, there is nuance being ignored here ... by both parties. As I often say: “ideologies are bad excuses for lazy intellects.” While healthy debt feeds the system, too much debt kills the golden goose.

Once again, the point I am hammering is that these “breaks” aren’t breaks: they are poison lozenges mistakenly embraced as a cure. Ridiculous. And the greatest hypocrisy is the embrace of this sleight of hand by the very electorate that just a few years ago based their pitchfork and torches protests on unmanageable spiraling debt.

EVERY person is negatively affected by the collapse of our culture into oligarchy. Even the oligarchs, ultimately. This is cancer. It eats its host.

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Oh bulltweet. “Democracy” has become an appropriately generalized term for our constitutional republic system. Stop the niggling nonsense.

“Neither side cares about debt”? Certainly the brain-dead among us (which are many) refuse to look at it. That doesn’t mean it is carefree or immaterial.

It is also true that debt is a healthy foundational element of our system. Our economy / banking system requires debt to issue new money, in fact. Yet, once again, there is nuance being ignored here ... by both parties. As I often say: “ideologies are bad excuses for lazy intellects.”

Once again, the point I am hammering is that these “breaks” aren’t breaks: they are lozenges mistakenly embraced as a cure. Ridiculous. And the greatest hypocrisy is the embrace of this sleight of hand by the very electorate that just a few years ago based their pitchfork and torches protests on unmanageable spiraling debt.

EVERY person is negatively affected by the collapse of our culture into oligarchy. Even the oligarchs, ultimately. This is cancer. It eats its host.

But you know that neither party at this point will ever care about the debt so it is a moot point. You cannot elect anyone who cares about it. It is literally impossible as of now. So we can establish that we will add to the debt regardless.

We are not collapsing in an oligarchy. That is tinfoil hat crap.

I would love for any candidate to put forth an actual balanced budget and a true fair tax plan where they take the debt and liabilities and divide it up among the citizens. Won't happen. Free stuff get you elected. Responsibility does not.

I do not want to be part of a true democracy. The citizens of this country are far too stupid in masses to be able to elect.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

Yes but Dems are notorious for raising taxes and it has recently been a notoriously Democrat state. So you basically had a bunch of politicians at the state level who over the last 20 years have raised and raised and raised taxes. Then a Republican President puts forth tax policy which adds to the enormous tax bill the citizens currently have due to the Democratic state policies and vote the Repubs out to put the Dems responsible for the state policies back into office.


In simpler terms tax liability for a person went from let's say $6,000 per year to $20,000 per year over a certain amount of time (10-20 years?) and now it is going to go from $20,000 per year to $22,000 per year (for a minority of people)and you put the people back into place who allowed it to go from $6000 to $20,000. No wonder so many are broke.

If I made a movie with a character doing this no one would see it because they would say no one is that stupid. Oh yes they are.


Hey I am going to leave my lying cheating wife who cheated on me once to get back together with my ex-wife who cheated on me 10 times.

You all get the government you deserve by voting the way you do.

In bold above ... you admit the stacking of lunacy. Thanks.

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

In bold above ... you admit the stacking of lunacy. Thanks.

What I admit to is that the policy added a small % to some people's enormous tax bill created for Californians by Dems and they get mad at the small % added instead of the reason the bill is so high in the first place.

Again using some arbitrary numbers their tax bill went from $6000 to $20,000 and then now to $22,000 and they couldn't care less how it went from $6000 to $20,000 and think the people that took it from $6000 to $20,000 are now the solution. That is laughable.

Oh and to be crystal clear it is lunacy. Repubs are like the Flu and Dems are like Cancer. Just because I would rather have the Flu over cancer doesn't mean I like the Flu.