new tax plan

[t-c]

I will admit, I am still trying to keep my head in the sand as much as possible, so I may have missed something, but could anyone here please explain to me how the new tax plan will benefit low and middle income trump supporters?

This is a genuine question, though I suspect the answer is that it will not benefit them at all.

And, if that is the case, why do they still support him?

It’s the power of short-term thinking. For an extra $20-40 per week over the next couple of years, people are willing to give away hundreds of thousands a week to DJT and his ilk, and give up affordable higher education (one of the surest way to higher income), healthcare in the form of Medicare and Medicaid, and social security.

They aren’t thinking about the fact that this extra money a week is only TEMPORARY , but the hundreds of thousands to DJT and businesses are PERMANENT. They aren’t thinking about what this tax bill says in terms of how the republicans value Joe Schmoe vs Joe Billionaire. They’ll see that extra $20/week and that will be enough to buy their vote next year. This is what Republicans are counting on. And I’m sorry to say, yes, most of us are just that stupid.



By the way, the mere millionaires, specially in blue states, are going to be hit hard by this tax plan. Your regular Wall St high-earning worker isn’t happy that all the benefits go to hedge fund managers — and the carried interest loophole wasn’t even eliminated. So this tax bill doesn’t favor the 1%, this favors the 0.01%.

 

[Dancing Fire]

TC
you can

all you want, if our economy continues to grow for the next few yrs Trump will be re-elected in 2020.

 

[t-c]

TC
you can

all you want, if our economy continues to grow for the next few yrs Trump will be re-elected in 2020.

I am making arguments. You are the one blah-ing — can’t even support any of the BS you post, as usual

Let me know when California cuts your wife’s pension benefits.

 

[Dancing Fire]

AT&T pissed on Schumer's face...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...t-hours-announce-bonuses-domestic-investment/

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

Great news ...$1K bonuses for the little people.... This news will shut up the Dem. critics.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/att-...es-200000-employees-tax-reform-193620207.html

Oh wow, about .50 extra an hour FROM ONE COMPANY, that'll surely make up for everything that will be cut and taken away. Great job!

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

Yes, it is a tax cut mostly for the corporations. We, the US, have one of the highest tax rates and the new tax rate will make us more competitive in world markets. However, other countries are now considering lowering their tax rates to undercut the new US rate.

I do really have a question about the new tax system. When Romney was running, 47 % of tax payers didn't pay any taxes(remember Romney was overheard by open mike making a derogatory comment). I was very surprised to read this. A few years ago this topic came up and I researched it and something like 43 % did not pay taxes. I think it was Loves Vintage who also looked it up and said she found the figure was 39%. So why make such a fuss over the low benefit the lower income people will get when 39% of the lower end income population don't pay taxes?

Now, I'm retired and have seen my income cut more than 2/3 since the financial crisis. I don't itemize as my house is paid for, and most of my income was interest and dividends. I try to preserve capital, so I invest in the market to get a return , as savings acc't yield almost nothing. I have gone from paying a lot in taxes to paying almost nothing. Last yr I paid about $400.00 in taxes, on an income of 35,000.00. Why would I complain that I may only get a 60.00 benefit? I hardly pay any taxes.
Of course it makes sense that those who pay the most in taxes, which all of you want to call "the rich", get most of the benefit.

I worry that the over emphasis on the tax cut and (I'm throwing this in) and the belief that the Dems will win next time on this issue is misplaced. The poor don't pay taxes, those that earn the most should get the benefits.(IMO).

Annette

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I forgot to mention that ATT issued a statement that 200,000 workers would get a 1,000 bonus. Comcast followed with the same for their workers, now that the tax cut has passed.

If you want to poo-pa a raise to the minimum wage for some workers in Cal, go ahead. I'm sure those workers will like it. Some jobs do not pay well, perhaps that is what they are worth.

I think this is a good sign. 401K plans should also do well. I admit I have done well this year. I still can't stand Trump.
Annette

 

[t-c]

Hi,

Yes, it is a tax cut mostly for the corporations. We, the US, have one of the highest tax rates and the new tax rate will make us more competitive in world markets. However, other countries are now considering lowering their tax rates to undercut the new US rate.

I do really have a question about the new tax system. When Romney was running, 47 % of tax payers didn't pay any taxes(remember Romney was overheard by open mike making a derogatory comment). I was very surprised to read this. A few years ago this topic came up and I researched it and something like 43 % did not pay taxes. I think it was Loves Vintage who also looked it up and said she found the figure was 39%. So why make such a fuss over the low benefit the lower income people will get when 39% of the lower end income population don't pay taxes?

Now, I'm retired and have seen my income cut more than 2/3 since the financial crisis. I don't itemize as my house is paid for, and most of my income was interest and dividends. I try to preserve capital, so I invest in the market to get a return , as savings acc't yield almost nothing. I have gone from paying a lot in taxes to paying almost nothing. Last yr I paid about $400.00 in taxes, on an income of 35,000.00. Why would I complain that I may only get a 60.00 benefit? I hardly pay any taxes.
Of course it makes sense that those who pay the most in taxes, which all of you want to call "the rich", get most of the benefit.

I worry that the over emphasis on the tax cut and (I'm throwing this in) and the belief that the Dems will win next time on this issue is misplaced. The poor don't pay taxes, those that earn the most should get the benefits.(IMO).

Annette

The issue isn't just the tax cut, but the tax cut in place of what? This bill cuts taxes on the rich, but it will be paid for by cuts in "safety net benefits" to regular people. Because there is a PAYGO budget rule that says that if a legislation costs the government more than $0 (averaged over 5 year and 10 years) then the presidents is required to sequester (i.e. make an across-the-board cut) an equal amount of money from certain mandatory spending programs. Some programs (Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, etc) were made exempt, so the cost of this bill (projected at $1.5 TRILLION) will come out of Medicare (you're retired...do you benefit from Medicare?), student loan programs (any children or grandkids thinking of going to college or grad school?), etc...

I don't know about you, but just because I don't benefit from these programs doesn't mean I think they should be taken away from people to give more money to those who have so much money they don't know what to do with it (and that includes corporations who have historically more cash right now than at any point in history -- but still not giving their workers higher salaries).

So, take a look at unintended consequences with massive legislations such as this. Although I would argue that the consequences of this tax bill is exactly as intended -- the Republicans want to cut "entitlements" either by tanking the economy so the government has no money, or telling people the economy is doing so well they don't need government to provide any safety net (so eventually your -- or more accurately, your kids' -- social security benefits will get walloped as well).

 

[t-c]

Hi,

I forgot to mention that ATT issued a statement that 200,000 workers would get a 1,000 bonus. Comcast followed with the same for their workers, now that the tax cut has passed.

If you want to poo-pa a raise to the minimum wage for some workers in Cal, go ahead. I'm sure those workers will like it. Some jobs do not pay well, perhaps that is what they are worth.

I think this is a good sign. 401K plans should also do well. I admit I have done well this year. I still can't stand Trump.
Annette

401k may go up now, but all the increase in value are realized only when the securities are turned to cash. I'm sure people who lost most of their 401k value in the 2001 and 2008 crashes can give a lecture on it.

What you're doing is short-term low order thinking when the issue deserves a higher-order thinking and longer outlook. This bill isn't just about this year or next. This bill will have looooong term effects. Just like Prop 13 in California. Anything that affects how much revenue the government takes in tend to.

 

[redwood66]

@smitcompton thank you and I agree with you. The "rich" aren't being "given" anything and I am not envious of what others have. Nor do I see the need to take more from someone who either earned what they made or even if they inherited it just because others don't have as much. Allowing someone to keep more of the $ they earned is not "giving" them anything. It is not the government's money in the first place. The people earned it one way or another. We shall see if this tax plan works as it is intended. If not then the republicans will be voted out, but if it does then it will be great for all Americans. I am pretty much in the same boat as you and must balance all expenditures now that we have much less income. I won't get much of a break but will be happy with what I get. But it's not about me. The percentage that don't pay much or any taxes should not be expecting a big gift as that is actually income redistribution which I am fundamentally opposed to.

I do hope that the corporations that have come out with capital spending plans, wage increases, and bonuses will continue to grow in numbers. And no one is taking away any programs. That is just a scare tactic. Entitlement reform has to happen if any of the programs will be around for the future elderly and truly needy.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/12/21...ail&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-4c8c2242a0-83959769

It does appear that there is a section of this new bill that will have a 21% excise tax on non-profits that pay their top executives $1mil or more. Frankly this needed to happen. Nonprofits are supposed to be helping people, not making $. Churches, schools, and other organizations. I can't find an article right now.

Edit - It will be interesting to watch what happens in Europe with regard to their tax structure.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Hi,

I forgot to mention that ATT issued a statement that 200,000 workers would get a 1,000 bonus. Comcast followed with the same for their workers, now that the tax cut has passed.

If you want to poo-pa a raise to the minimum wage for some workers in Cal, go ahead. I'm sure those workers will like it. Some jobs do not pay well, perhaps that is what they are worth.

I think this is a good sign. 401K plans should also do well. I admit I have done well this year. I still can't stand Trump.
Annette

Annette
You must understand that more jobs for americans means less votes for the Dem. party. The Dems. want to keep more americans in poverty for votes. IOW...good news for Americans means bad news for the Dem. party.

 

[partgypsy]

Again Redwood, if you read between the lines, there is a fiscal crisis. "With the federal government more than $20 trillion in debt, the fiscal crisis grows closer by the day." Wallstreet is booming, unemployment is low by historic standards, and this is when Republicans decide to give corporations, Wall street, and the .01% a big tax cut? When have a deficit and a known shortage in the future for mandated plans like social security?
The historically huge tax cut is is going to increase the deficit.I really don't see how this will be achieved without either cutting benefits and or increasing costs for average Americans, regardless of what "lyin Ryan" has to say at this particular juncture. Excuse me, I would rather refuse a 1K tax cut, if that means I then have to pay an additional 10K a year in health insurance premiums.

 

[redwood66]

Again Redwood, if you read between the lines, there is a fiscal crisis. "With the federal government more than $20 trillion in debt, the fiscal crisis grows closer by the day." Wallstreet is booming, unemployment is low by historic standards, and this is when Republicans decide to give corporations, Wall street, and the .01% a big tax cut? When have a deficit and a known shortage in the future for mandated plans like social security?
The historically huge tax cut is is going to increase the deficit.I really don't see how this will be achieved without either cutting benefits and or increasing costs for average Americans, regardless of what "lyin Ryan" has to say at this particular juncture. Excuse me, I would rather refuse a 1K tax cut, if that means I then have to pay an additional 10K a year in health insurance premiums.

It isn't between the lines, it is in our face every day. But I don't see anyone doing anything about it no matter the amount of $ the government receives. The government has a spending problem and giving them more $ is not the answer either. The status quo won't cut it any longer.

 

[Matata]

Great news ...$1K bonuses for the little people.... This news will shut up the Dem. critics.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/att-...es-200000-employees-tax-reform-193620207.html

@Dancing Fire -- I'm happy to piss on your parade. These bonuses were part of union negotiations and occur every year and have nothing to do with the tax plan.

 

[redwood66]

@Dancing Fire -- I'm happy to piss on your parade. These bonuses were part of union negotiations and occur every year and have nothing to do with the tax plan.

But do you think the passage of the tax reform was not in the corporation's mind when negotiating? As well as capital expenditure plans? Of course these announcements are political in nature. What isn't these days?

 

[Matata]

But do you think the passage of the tax reform was not in the corporation's mind when negotiating? As well as capital expenditure plans?

No.

 

[redwood66]

No.

Ok. I believe they have been thinking about tax reform since November 8th, 2016.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,
T_C, I can't stop laughing at your characterization of the low order thinking that I possess, while you have higher order thinking about longer range consequences. Not quite a diplomatic response.

Ok. I have myself under control. One of the reasons they are delaying the signing of the bill is so that any of the automatic responses to cutting some programs is not instituted. And the medicare cut is limited to 4%. The benefits don't necessarily have to come off the patients end, but could come off the Drs or hospitals end. If you saw my medical bills for my last stay and knew the truth of them, you would know why I chose Drs for reducing costs.

I realize they are trying to dismantle the affordable care act, but I believe you said that maybe this is what they should do to make people (Trump folk) aware of what they have lost. If they do dismantle it there is more money to go around for the tax cut.

Of course there is Chip for children. I believe it will be funded next month. I also have the belief that Medicaid will stay intact. SS disability is in question as the increases there have been large.

I am not at all against a safety net for people, but this was really meant as a tax cut for corporations. You are right, they are doing well now, and when the next democrat majority comes in a tax increase may be on the way. It looks as if the parties are reversing rolls.

Redwood-- I am like you. If someone has more then me or makes more, I don't care--good for them. They should want their Gov't to help when necessary, but other than that, their money is their own. We can redistribute income to some degree, but there comes a time to draw a line in the sand. I agree, we will see what the tax cut brings.

Annette

 

[Dancing Fire]

@Dancing Fire -- I'm happy to piss on your parade. These bonuses were part of union negotiations and occur every year and have nothing to do with the tax plan.

Of course not!...that's why these big corps. waited for the tax bill to pass before they made the announcement.

 

[Matata]

Of course not!...that's why these big corps. waited for the tax bill to pass before they made the announcement.

https://thinkprogress.org/att-praises-tax-bill-c4bab31e1067/

 

[redwood66]

https://thinkprogress.org/att-praises-tax-bill-c4bab31e1067/

What kind of 5 year old foot stomping bargaining is this?

"Mom said I could have it so you have to give it to me!"

However, a CWA spokesperson noted in an email to ThinkProgress that AT&T executives had agreed to the special bonus only after CWA argued that its employees should be given the “$4,000 wage increase promised by the Republican corporate tax cut.” CWA officials also reached out to CEOs at other corporations where its members work, like Verizon and American Airlines, to make their case.

Edit - A better bargaining position would have been to research corp profits for the previous year and submit the comparison after the tax reform. To present that the employees are part of the reason for these profits is a good position to be in. Every stateside ATT employee I have come in contact with is exceptional considering my previous years of experience with Verizon.

 

[t-c]

And no one is taking away any programs. That is just a scare tactic. Entitlement reform has to happen if any of the programs will be around for the future elderly and truly needy.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/12/21...ail&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-4c8c2242a0-83959769

@smitcompton Don't just take my word for it. Research PAYGO on your own. It can get waived and waived, but what's the likelihood of it being waived by Republicans every year if/when the deficit increases? Aren't you Republican? If not, ask @redwood66; she thinks there should be entitlement reform. But reform always means lower benefits, doesn't it?

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-paygo

Q. What is PAYGO?
A. A budget rule requiring that new legislation affecting revenues and spending on entitlement programs, taken as a whole, does not increase projected budget deficits.
​

https://www.bondbuyer.com/news/tax-bill-passes-house-headed-to-senate

President Trump may have to wait until January to sign the sweeping overhaul of the nation’s tax system that cleared Congress midday Wednesday in order to postpone to 2019 across-the-board spending cuts — including federal subsidy payments for Build America Bonds and other direct-pay bonds.

Once Trump signs the bill, it could trigger a requirement in the Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 for the Office of Management and Budget to order billions of dollars of cuts in mandatory federal programs. This would include a $25 billion cut to Medicare and most other federal programs, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office told House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md. in November.

If Trump signs the tax bill this year without a waiver from the PAYGO Act, OMB would have to order a $136 billion cut in mandatory federal programs, wiping out federal subsidies for BABs and other direct-pay bonds.

The across-the-board spending cuts would be triggered because the tax bill will add almost $1.5 trillion in new deficits over 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn said at an event Wednesday morning sponsored by Axios that the administration is hoping that the PAYGO Act cuts will be waived as part of a short-term continuing resolution to keep the federal government operating past Dec. 22. [...]​

 

[t-c]

Hi,
T_C, I can't stop laughing at your characterization of the low order thinking that I possess, while you have higher order thinking about longer range consequences. Not quite a diplomatic response.

Ok. I have myself under control. One of the reasons they are delaying the signing of the bill is so that any of the automatic responses to cutting some programs is not instituted. And the medicare cut is limited to 4%. The benefits don't necessarily have to come off the patients end, but could come off the Drs or hospitals end. If you saw my medical bills for my last stay and knew the truth of them, you would know why I chose Drs for reducing costs.

I realize they are trying to dismantle the affordable care act, but I believe you said that maybe this is what they should do to make people (Trump folk) aware of what they have lost. If they do dismantle it there is more money to go around for the tax cut.

Of course there is Chip for children. I believe it will be funded next month. I also have the belief that Medicaid will stay intact. SS disability is in question as the increases there have been large.

I am not at all against a safety net for people, but this was really meant as a tax cut for corporations. You are right, they are doing well now, and when the next democrat majority comes in a tax increase may be on the way. It looks as if the parties are reversing rolls.

Redwood-- I am like you. If someone has more then me or makes more, I don't care--good for them. They should want their Gov't to help when necessary, but other than that, their money is their own. We can redistribute income to some degree, but there comes a time to draw a line in the sand. I agree, we will see what the tax cut brings.

Annette

If the government drops reimbursement to hospitals and doctors, they'll drop Medicare patients. I know lots that already don't take Medicare; they tend to be the ones in demand, because they can do that.

The Republicans get rid of the ACA insurance mandate so healthy folks aren't required to get insurance, therefore the sick will make up a larger fraction of the health insurance pool increasing cost to insurance companies who are sure to pass that on. At the same time, they've promised to fund cost-sharing because that's what it took to get Susan Collins' vote. So...the poor folks are covered by the cost-sharing program, the healthy don't need insurance, rich folks can afford insurance. Who's left out -- sick people in the middle class.

But that's okay, you don't need the ACA or Medicare -- by the way, that 4% cut per year is an 18.5% cut in Medicare in 5 years -- you think the hospitals and doctors are going to eat that? They have lobbyists in Washington, so good luck with that.

Republicans have agreed to include CHIP in the continuing resolution and fund it to March 2018, but they have not funded the actual program.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,
t_c--your higher order thinking seems to miss the point that the laws, or( what ever its called) for the triggering of automatic cuts was enacted for the very purpose that you object to. The law or laws are doing the job they were intended to do. Once the frightening deficit grows to the point which triggers the cuts, it begins, as it should.

If you say 25 billion is the medicare cut, I say that's 4%. Let them do it. If you do not think there are wasteful and inefficient programs there, I think you are mistaken.

You see me as having lower order thinking, I see you as irresponsible.

No, I am happy to report, I am no Republican and never have been. I am for responsible Gov't.

Annette

 

[Dancing Fire]

Here is the negative side on full employment..
Full employment can/will cause an high inflation environment which will cause interest rate to rise very quickly in turn it will burst the current stock market bubble and the current housing market bubble.

Remember, You guys heard it from me first!...

 

[Arkteia]

Paul Ryan has said Republicans will make cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in 2018. They just approved 1 trillion dollars in tax breaks to corporations and the top 1 percent. So hey let's now work on screwing over the poor and elderly. I don't know how these people sleep at night. I can't wait for the day the past year comes back to haunt them and they are voted out of office.

To me, the embodiment of everything what is wrong with our politics and politicians is Paul Ryan. Way more than Trump. Because Trump is exactly what he promised to be.

Not so Ryan. Blue-eyed, pretty, smart, greedy and very well understanding what he is doing. He is the worst. Maybe, just maybe the people of Wisconsin will get the epiphany?

 

[Arkteia]

I don't have a problem with people who are are working and still need some benefits. however I'd have have a problem with those people who are able and don't wanna work and feel like they are entitled to free money.

Come on, people who are able to work and don't are living in the areas where jobs once were.

West Baltimore. Was OK as long as it had steel mills and people knew that they and their kids would have jobs. What now? Unemployment, drugs, hopelessness. All jobs are in biomed sector.

Detroit. Horrible dump now. Did people get lazy or did the auto industry go downhill?

Or welcome to Tumwater, a town near my state capital. It had microbreweries till one corporate giant didn't buy and close them. Same pattern.

Pittsburgh was a ghost city even in the 90es.

You first create jobs - these people who you probably think are freeloaders, they not asking for attorneys' salaries - and then you complain that people don't want to work. But, jobs are outsourced...

P.S. Oh, not a Democrat anymore. After Franken resigned. Independent. And never used social funds myself. But my own salary and prosperity depends on prosperity of this country. So i would like the middle class to be stronger.

 

[LLJsmom]

Something my son studied recently. Downfall of the Weimar Republic and what precipitated the rise of a particular totalitarian. Seriously if I read this four years ago, I would have said it could never happen again. Little would I ever have guessed such a frightening parallel could be drawn now. Thank you @Arkteia. Your comment about preserving a middle class brought this to mind.

https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/111heil.html

 

[Tekate]

I screwed that up I meant to type STAGNATION but I am never one to look for errors in my post. As far as I know, wages aren't going up.. that is pie in the sky, where did you get your info?

 

[Tekate]

I will NEVER give Dimbart one hit. never. ever. ever.

AT&T pissed on Schumer's face...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...t-hours-announce-bonuses-domestic-investment/