paulsurovell said:

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:

GOP plan: cut taxes on corporations and the wealthy, create a huge deficit, blame the deficit on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and proceed to cut those programs.

The attacks on America's social safety net start in 2018:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/363642-ryan-pledges-entitlement-reform-in-2018

It was all in the plan in the 2016 election.

It started long before 2016

And still the lesson was ignored.

It's greed. Pure and simple. Those that have want more and they don't want others to have what they have (even though the system has been rigged in their favor for decades/centuries).

sportsnut said:

ml1 said:

 It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

As much as I loathe tax increases and the amount of taxes I pay, this is what really bothers me about this process and the state of U.S. politics today.  It's not about doing the right thing, its about sticking it to the "other" guy.

paulsurovell said:

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:

GOP plan: cut taxes on corporations and the wealthy, create a huge deficit, blame the deficit on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and proceed to cut those programs.

The attacks on America's social safety net start in 2018:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/363642-ryan-pledges-entitlement-reform-in-2018

It was all in the plan in the 2016 election.

It started long before 2016

And before -

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

Letter to Edgar Newton Eisenhower, his brother (8 November 1954)

Eisenhower wrote this in 1954 when there were attemots to cut the social net, in the guise of fighting communism and its cousin, socialism. Ironically, for him, its his party that is now doing this.

Things have changed. Its no longer a tiny splinter group whose number is negligible and they may well do this. Also, thanks to the dumbing down of America, that party will survive, to be heard from again.

Here are my two questions. 

If entitlements are in a state of crisis, why create the huge deficits? 

But if the tax cuts are going to pay for themselves, where's the crisis? 

sportsnut said:

ml1 said:

 It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

As much as I loathe tax increases and the amount of taxes I pay, this is what really bothers me about this process and the state of U.S. politics today.  It's not about doing the right thing, its about sticking it to the "other" guy.

yes, there isn't even any pretense that it's the right thing.  There was  GOP strategist on a talk show over the weekend talking about how the tax bill had to be passed so Republicans could have a "win" and stay in power.  She didn't even pretend that the bill was going to do any good for anyone except members of Congress.

well, let's not be coy about it. It's about getting Dems and "liberal institutions". Like colleges.

sportsnut said:


As much as I loathe tax increases and the amount of taxes I pay, this is what really bothers me about this process and the state of U.S. politics today.  It's not about doing the right thing, its about sticking it to the "other" guy.

This is true of Democrats keeping Republicans out of office at all costs as well.  The tax bill equates to taxation without representation. 

ml1 said:


the worst part of all of this, is that even the GOP voters know this.  The bill remains tremendously unpopular everywhere in the country.  It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

sportsnut said:

ml1 said:

 It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

As much as I loathe tax increases and the amount of taxes I pay, this is what really bothers me about this process and the state of U.S. politics today.  It's not about doing the right thing, its about sticking it to the "other" guy.

Have you used the WSJ calculator mentioned in another thread? Are your taxes going up or down?

but Democrats want to keep Republicans out of office because of policy issues like this tax bill.  or their stated intention to enact "entitlement reform."  So it makes logical sense.

A lot of Republican voters just want to keep Democrats out of office because they're Democrats.  

Most liberals I know used to vote for sensible Republicans.  I voted for Tom Kean, Millicent Fenwick, Matt Rinaldo, and Christie Whitman (once).  There are Republican voters who will vote for an accused creeper instead of a Democrat.  Because Democrat.

lord_pabulum said:

This is true of Democrats keeping Republicans out of office at all costs as well.  The tax bill equates to taxation without representation. 

ml1 said:


the worst part of all of this, is that even the GOP voters know this.  The bill remains tremendously unpopular everywhere in the country.  It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

I applaud your consistency in always misreading the political environment.

Dems and Repubs- Yeah, they do the same things. Because reasons.

lord_pabulum said:

This is true of Democrats keeping Republicans out of office at all costs as well.  ....

BG9 said:

paulsurovell said:

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:

GOP plan: cut taxes on corporations and the wealthy, create a huge deficit, blame the deficit on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and proceed to cut those programs.

The attacks on America's social safety net start in 2018:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/363642-ryan-pledges-entitlement-reform-in-2018

It was all in the plan in the 2016 election.

It started long before 2016

And before -

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

Letter to Edgar Newton Eisenhower, his brother (8 November 1954)

Eisenhower wrote this in 1954 when there were attemots to cut the social net, in the guise of fighting communism and its cousin, socialism. Ironically, for him, its his party that is now doing this.

Things have changed. Its no longer a tiny splinter group whose number is negligible and they may well do this. Also, thanks to the dumbing down of America, that party will survive, to be heard from again.

The attacks are not going to be about abolishing the social safety net, but privatizing it, providing "choice." Further enriching the wealthy at the expense of the middle- and lower-classes.

And reducing benefits under those programs.  A later retirement age, lower payouts, higher out of pocket costs, etc.

paulsurovell said:

BG9 said:

paulsurovell said:

nohero said:

paulsurovell said:

GOP plan: cut taxes on corporations and the wealthy, create a huge deficit, blame the deficit on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and proceed to cut those programs.

The attacks on America's social safety net start in 2018:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/363642-ryan-pledges-entitlement-reform-in-2018

It was all in the plan in the 2016 election.

It started long before 2016

And before -

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

Letter to Edgar Newton Eisenhower, his brother (8 November 1954)

Eisenhower wrote this in 1954 when there were attemots to cut the social net, in the guise of fighting communism and its cousin, socialism. Ironically, for him, its his party that is now doing this.

Things have changed. Its no longer a tiny splinter group whose number is negligible and they may well do this. Also, thanks to the dumbing down of America, that party will survive, to be heard from again.

The attacks are not going to be about abolishing the social safety net, but privatizing it, providing "choice." Further enriching the wealthy at the expense of the middle- and lower-classes.

LOST said:

sportsnut said:

ml1 said:

 It's really striking how undemocratic this process has been.  The Republicans in Congress are ramming this bill through over the objections of even their own voters.

The country is now in a place where Congress and the White House don't even need to be responsive to their own constituents. Most Republican voters only care about keeping Democrats out of office at all costs. As a result, Congress is free to represent only their donors and lobbyists.

As much as I loathe tax increases and the amount of taxes I pay, this is what really bothers me about this process and the state of U.S. politics today.  It's not about doing the right thing, its about sticking it to the "other" guy.

Have you used the WSJ calculator mentioned in another thread? Are your taxes going up or down?

I have not.  

Market watch also has a tax calculator.

https://www.marketwatch.com/graphics/2017/trump-tax-calculator/

They create the large deficit as an excuse to cut the entitlement programs,  When the money to pay for the tax cuts needs to be found, this is where they will start.

tom said:

Here are my two questions. 

If entitlements are in a state of crisis, why create the huge deficits? 

But if the tax cuts are going to pay for themselves, where's the crisis? 

BG9 said:

Market watch also has a tax calculator.

https://www.marketwatch.com/graphics/2017/trump-tax-calculator/

according to that calculator, our family would have paid $5K more in taxes last year.

ml1 said:

BG9 said:

Market watch also has a tax calculator.

https://www.marketwatch.com/graphics/2017/trump-tax-calculator/

according to that calculator, our family would have paid $5K more in taxes last year.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The money drain from Blue states to Red states will get worse. NJ now gets back about 60 cents for every dollar sent to the Feds. There are Red states that get back 1.50 for every dollar they send.

We're being held up. We have Red state goobers calling us useless liberal elitists while living off us.

BG9 said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The money drain from Blue states to Red states will get worse. NJ now gets back about 60 cents for every dollar sent to the Feds. There are Red states that get back 1.50 for every dollar they send.

We're being held up. We have Red state goobers calling us useless liberal elitists while living off us.

Yep. I've been seeing a lot of claims in "the comments" that southerners are sick and tired of subsidizing the blue states and it's time we paid our own way.

I thought this was an interesting piece on Blue States as "donor states" and Red States as "donee states."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/salty-proposal-15585.html

The biggest scam in this bill is the corporate tax break during a time of record corporate profits, low unemployment and stagnant wages. With the decline of collective bargaining, corporations have more power than ever to underpay workers and keep profits. And we know trickle-down economics is a lie and this corporate tax cut won’t result in higher wages - especially at lower levels of income. 

So how about a (minimum) wage increase requirement as part of the tax bill, huh? Yeah, I won’t hold my breath. 

hmmm. Looks liked I'd OWE $15k more. Gee, thanks!

And a friend who made $17,500 last year with 2 kids would have owed $650 MORE. That's just awful.

How is this helping anyone?

conandrob240 said:

hmmm. Looks liked I'd OWE $15k more. Gee, thanks!

And a friend who made $17,500 last year with 2 kids would have owed $650 MORE. That's just awful.

How is this helping anyone?

That's not correct. With the standard deduction and  child tax credit in both the House and Senate versions your friend would owe zero in taxes. 

Do the calculation again and use the standard deduction for an individual and put "2" in number of children who qualify for the child tax credit. Be sure to scroll down to the bottom of the page where it show tax liability after the child tax credit. 

Ah, okay. I see it zeros out at the bottom. Okay. Well, not better but at least not worse for her

It's unclear at this juncture whether the AMT will be abolished.  So much is being made about the SALT deductions, but you don't include SALT for purposes of calculating AMT.  It is amazing that the AMT simply won't die.

The tax cuts will probably be good for me, as a very small real estate investor. Is anyone surprised that the bill was written to favor Trump?

Tax Plan Crowns a Big Winner: Trump’s Industry

House and Senate Republicans, in their divergent bills, both offered steeply reduced rates to corporate giants, partnerships and family-owned firms across the board. But when it came time to eliminate special breaks or impose tighter standards, real estate was generally excused from the room.

Most businesses were hit with new limits on deductions for interest payments, but not real estate. Most industries lost the ability to defer taxes on the exchange of similar kinds of property, but not real estate. Domestic manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies lost some industry-specific breaks, like the tax credit for so-called orphan drugs, in exchange for lower rates.

The real estate industry ended up with an even more generous depreciation timetable, allowing owners to shelter more income.

And in a break from previous practice, rental and mortgage-interest income qualifies for a lower tax rate, the kind of special treatment traditionally reserved for long-term capital gains and certain qualified dividends.

“Real estate does great,” said Daniel N. Shaviro, a professor of taxation at New York University Law School, who as a congressional staff member helped write the 1986 tax overhaul. “It’s hard to imagine what they might have asked for that they don’t have.”

The primary objective for any organisation is survival.  It is self-evident that professional politicians want to protect the status quo.  I applaud your consistent blinkered view.

drummerboy said:

I applaud your consistency in always misreading the political environment.

Dems and Repubs- Yeah, they do the same things. Because reasons.

lord_pabulum said:

This is true of Democrats keeping Republicans out of office at all costs as well.  ....

lord_pabulum said:

The primary objective for any organisation is survival.  It is self-evident that professional politicians want to protect the status quo.  I applaud your consistent blinkered view.

drummerboy said:

I applaud your consistency in always misreading the political environment.

Dems and Repubs- Yeah, they do the same things. Because reasons.

lord_pabulum said:

This is true of Democrats keeping Republicans out of office at all costs as well.  ....

The "status quo" would mean always the same number of republicans and Democrats. If you think that is far-fetched look at how the NJ Legislature drew Congressional Districts after the last census. They all but insured that every incumbent of both Parties was re-elected.

Yes, gerrymandering is one of the tools used to protect the status quo 

It can be used to protect the status quo, or it can be used to cement the power of one party. But it's never used to empower voters.

lord_pabulum said:

Yes, gerrymandering is one of the tools used to protect the status quo 

It disenfranchises large groups of voters.

tom said:

It can be used to protect the status quo, or it can be used to cement the power of one party. But it's never used to empower voters.

lord_pabulum said:

Yes, gerrymandering is one of the tools used to protect the status quo