Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-27-2017, 05:29 AM
 
2,003 posts, read 1,169,102 times
Reputation: 1949

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
No, the proposal is to eliminate ALL deductions except for mortgage interest and charitable contributions. And then there's the big elephant in the room that they didn't mention in their one page tax plan:

Cutting deductions for retirement accounts

[i]The tax plan doesn’t explicitly comment on retirement accounts — such as 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts — but there are concerns swirling as to how far its mention of eliminating deductions may go.

Before you say "Oh no! He will never mess with our 401k" you had better think.. someone has to pay for these huge tax breaks to corporations and to the wealthy and it won't be Trump or his Wall Street swamp monster cabinet members
Glad someone is paying attention. We are screwed. If they get rid of the 401k deduction, are they going to get rid of the cap on making Roth contributions?? Currently at 196k a married couple can no longer make Roth contributions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-27-2017, 05:44 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,317 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Wrong again, in one quarter of 2004, GDP grew by over 7%, the highest GDP growth since 1984 (under another Republican president).

You are picking out one quarter to make your case that tax incentives work, seriously.

The Bush tax cuts of 2001 & 2003 are still in place, so where's the growth?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 05:57 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,317 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15654
Quote:
Originally Posted by JIMANDTHOM View Post
Do you think the patron Saint Reagan, would like the AMT being eliminated.


You may be able to find some footage of him saying to the effect, that the people who wouldn't like his plan are those who are not paying their fair share. That was his prelude into announcing the creation of the AMT.


Yes I just saw the clip of the Gipper himself saying that-- see tonights Lawrence ODonnel. I didn't realize that it was Reagan who instituted it.


Yes he did, AMT was part of the Tax Reform act of 1986 but it was bipartisan. It basically capped deductions for joint returns over $40,000, problem is it wasn't indexed for inflation. They wanted more revenue from upper income but it really began to hit middle class people in the 1990's. I think they meant well but poorly thought out, would have been better and more equitable to eliminate deductions completely and lower the tax rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 07:28 AM
 
Location: Eastern UP of Michigan
1,204 posts, read 873,374 times
Reputation: 1292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Yes he did, AMT was part of the Tax Reform act of 1986 but it was bipartisan. It basically capped deductions for joint returns over $40,000, problem is it wasn't indexed for inflation. They wanted more revenue from upper income but it really began to hit middle class people in the 1990's. I think they meant well but poorly thought out, would have been better and more equitable to eliminate deductions completely and lower the tax rate.

Absolutely, should be/been indexed.


The point that was made by Reagan, in the TV clip, was that the biggest losers in that bipartisan bill were the higher earners.


Also everyone who chimes, look what happened with the economy after the Reagan cuts, need to also consider that the rates where cut from substantially higher levels---up to 70%.


We were also in the tail end of the early beginnings of rapid industrialization of the lesser developed economies so we still had a bit of muscle that gave us an edge. Probably without that cut we would really be in poo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 07:44 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,683,781 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Remember when all the conservatives here went ballistic that Obama was not reducing the deficit fast enough after the biggest economic collapse in decades? Remember that?

Looks like Trump and the GOP are proving once again that the Democrats here were right. When in power the GOP spends like drunken sailors, and don't care about debt. Remember, every year pretty much Democrats lowered the deficit.
At least try to be honest. Look at the deficit spending under Bush. As soon as the dems took over both houses, the deficit soared. They spent almost $2 trillion bailing out big corporations, and the very banks that caused the financial crisis.

So don't peddle that crap that dems are unique, as if only they cut federal spending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Top White House aides, GOP leaders meet on Hill over Trump
Lets hope he meant debt, not deficit.

And cutting taxes to drive Growth? One word. Kansas.

So once again after this mess is over the Democrats will probably once again be expected to clean up after this, and like a drunken party goer the GOP will complain they arent fixing it fast enough.

Good news for the swamp though, massive profit increases, while government debt piles sky high to pay for it. But good news, the swamp makes money off that debt too.

Seriously, economics says now is the time to pay down the debt so if another recession hits we can spend out of it.
I told people that Trump seemed to be a big government spending kind of guy. He identified himself as a Democrat for most of his life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,659,569 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
What are you talking about?

GDP growth was good after the Bush tax cuts.

And government revenue grew by $785 billion from 2004-2007 after the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the largest four-year increase in history up to that time. It didn't lead to "greater deficits." Overspending does.
If his tax cuts had worked, we would not be talking about cutting taxes again.

Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 04-27-2017 at 08:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 07:48 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,659,569 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grainraiser View Post
They are not listening to you. The the rich will benefit from the tax cuts. Not even small businesses will benefit because most of them are S-corps.
S-Corp taxes would be cut to 15%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,803 posts, read 41,031,367 times
Reputation: 62204
Quote:
Per the White House:

We are going to cut taxes for businesses to make them competitive, and we are going to cut taxes for the American people – especially low and middle-income families.

In 1935, we had a one-page tax form consisting of 34 lines and two pages of instructions. Today, the basic 1040 form has 79 lines and 211 pages of instructions. Instead of a single tax form, the IRS now has 199 tax forms on the individual side of the tax code alone. Taxpayers spend nearly 7 billion hours complying with the tax code each year, and nearly 90% of taxpayers need help filing their taxes.

We are going to cut taxes and simplify the tax code by taking the current 7 tax brackets we have today and reducing them to only three brackets: 10 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent.

We are going to double the standard deduction so that a married couple won’t pay any taxes on the first $24,000 of income they earn. So in essence, we are creating a 0 percent tax rate for the first $24,000 that a couple earns.

The larger standard deduction also leads to simplification because far fewer taxpayers will need to itemize, which means their tax form can go back to that one simple page.

Families in this country will also benefit from tax relief to help them with child and dependent care expenses.

We are going to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT creates significant complications and burdens by requiring taxpayers to do their taxes twice to see which is higher. That makes no sense; we should have one simple tax code."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2017...-you-need-know
I'm waiting to see who in the House and Senate screams bloody hell. You'll know who their donors are. Politicians always promise tax simplification but never do it because of the LAWYER lobby/donors and the fact that most on Capitol Hill are lawyers themselves. Lawyers, accountants and tax preparers want to keep lots of regulations and keep the tax code complicated because they make money off of it being complicated. I can tell you right now, they are more concerned with simplification than they are with tax breaks.

If this passes (and it better) regular people (and small business Schedule C filers) are going to have a nice refund to spend on some expensive things next year before the elections...and maybe some of those part timers will go back to full time jobs, too.

Go ahead, Democrat politicians. Tell your voters you are against them getting a big fat refund or having not learned anything at all from the 2016 election that jobs were the Number 1 issue. And Republicans on Capitol Hill, you better not bleep this up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 08:17 AM
 
Location: Formerly New England now Texas!
1,708 posts, read 1,100,407 times
Reputation: 1562
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Remember when all the conservatives here went ballistic that Obama was not reducing the deficit fast enough after the biggest economic collapse in decades? Remember that?

Looks like Trump and the GOP are proving once again that the Democrats here were right. When in power the GOP spends like drunken sailors, and don't care about debt. Remember, every year pretty much Democrats lowered the deficit.


Top White House aides, GOP leaders meet on Hill over Trump
Lets hope he meant debt, not deficit.

And cutting taxes to drive Growth? One word. Kansas.

So once again after this mess is over the Democrats will probably once again be expected to clean up after this, and like a drunken party goer the GOP will complain they arent fixing it fast enough.

Good news for the swamp though, massive profit increases, while government debt piles sky high to pay for it. But good news, the swamp makes money off that debt too.

Seriously, economics says now is the time to pay down the debt so if another recession hits we can spend out of it.
ROFL after 10 trillion dollar Obama you want to reduce debt. Please put a warning up when something this funny is posted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2017, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,317 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15654
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I'm waiting to see who in the House and Senate screams bloody hell. You'll know who their donors are. Politicians always promise tax simplification but never do it because of the LAWYER lobby/donors and the fact that most on Capitol Hill are lawyers themselves. Lawyers, accountants and tax preparers want to keep lots of regulations and keep the tax code complicated because they make money off of it being complicated. I can tell you right now, they are more concerned with simplification than they are with tax breaks.

If this passes (and it better) regular people (and small business Schedule C filers) are going to have a nice refund to spend on some expensive things next year before the elections...and maybe some of those part timers will go back to full time jobs, too.

Go ahead, Democrat politicians. Tell your voters you are against them getting a big fat refund or having not learned anything at all from the 2016 election that jobs were the Number 1 issue. And Republicans on Capitol Hill, you better not bleep this up.
So balanced budgets no longer matter just selfish self interest, as long as taxpayers get a tax break all is good. The benefits of the 3 brackets are heavily skewed to favor those in the top bracket, do you not see an issue.


When politicians start saying things like "these tax cuts will pay for themselves" we should question their sanity, yet here we have a Goldman Sachs exec dictating monetary policy again. Hopefully some adult congressmen will step forward and bring some sanity to the situation rather than telling the American people that they don't need to suffer any pain to get to a balanced budget.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top