If Rubio gets this child tax credit thing done

1356712

Comments

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,204 Senior Member
    And they have 90% of the wealth. You know how they can make sure that people in the lower income groups pay a bigger share? Pay them more.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    You know how they can make sure that people in the lower income groups pay a bigger share? Pay them more.

    Hard to compete with robots and computers.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-26/america-s-rich-poor-divide-keeps-ballooning-as-robots-take-jobs
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    And should we go ahead and let those that refuse to buy insurance die?

    People are already doing that and paying the fine instead. So what's different?

    The I.R.S. commissioner, John A. Koskinen, said that 6.5 million taxpayers reported paying a total of $3 billion in penalties for not having coverage in 2015. In addition, 12.7 million taxpayers claimed exemptions from the coverage requirement, on account of hardship or other factors. And more than four million people filed “silent returns,” not paying a penalty, not indicating if they had coverage and not claiming an exemption.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/us/politics/congress-moves-to-stop-irs-from-enforcing-health-law-mandate.html

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanellis/2017/11/15/individual-mandate-repeal-is-a-middle-class-tax-cut/#6c688ccb4b80
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,204 Senior Member
    Really they are being denied access to medical care? I am saying literally, let them die. If you can afford it and choose not to get it, thereby raising everybody else's rates, then you made your choice. Freedom comes with risk. Rub some mud on it and hope it goes away.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,369 Senior Member
    Unless they are clueless or wish to be sued, hospitals treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. In most states it is mandated by law.

    Here's a simple fact following from that that Republicans seem not being to grasp: If hospitals can't collect from patients or patients' insurance, the rest of us wind up footing the bill, either via higher taxes or higher insurance premiums. The GOPpers and Trumpsters love to natter on about individual responsibility, but they hate the ACA, which actually encourages people to assume responsibility by buying insurance.

    Does not compute, except perhans in Trumpistan.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • swizzswizz Senior Member Posts: 2,533 Senior Member
    I could care less about the rich getting richer....

    They were building multi-million dollar homes and putting the products my company makes in them. Thus I got to stay employed and so did a boat load of factory workers.
    Amen to this brother. My business thrives on high-end home construction. Today I landed a $33K project with two larger bids pending on other projects that will be ready by spring. Will I be hiring this spring? Hells ya! Will I be paying well? Hells ya! Will I be purchasing materials? Hells ya! Will I be paying less in taxes? Hells ya! Will I buy a few more toys along the way? Hells ya!
    Economy, it's a good thing.
    All of your Trout are belong to me.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,298 Senior Member
    Joe, let us know how much of a raise you get as a result of your company paying less corporate tax. Newsflash: Unless you own stock it ain’t gonna happen.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 5,298 Senior Member
    Also, consumer confidence numbers will be interesting to see after this has been enacted. I’m sure they will be up but I’m already bucking that trend and am even more worried about my retirement savings.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Unless they are clueless or wish to be sued, hospitals treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. In most states it is mandated by law.

    Here's a simple fact following from that that Republicans seem not being to grasp: If hospitals can't collect from patients or patients' insurance, the rest of us wind up footing the bill, either via higher taxes or higher insurance premiums. The GOPpers and Trumpsters love to natter on about individual responsibility, but they hate the ACA, which actually encourages people to assume responsibility by buying insurance.

    Does not compute, except perhans in Trumpistan.
    Higher hospital bills will result from those that can't pay also.

    And that's the whole problem with the system. It's not who pays, but what we pay.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    Shawn C. wrote: »
    Joe, let us know how much of a raise you get as a result of your company paying less corporate tax. Newsflash: Unless you own stock it ain’t gonna happen.
    It won't come in the form of a yearly raise like you are thinking. It will mean more money dumped in my profit sharing plan by the company.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,204 Senior Member
    Profit sharing!?!? Communist!
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,204 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Unless they are clueless or wish to be sued, hospitals treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. In most states it is mandated by law.


    I am saying let's get rid of that. If you are able to pay and choose not to, too bad, so sad, gonna miss you when your gone. Talk about an incentive. You would not need a mandate.

    Freedom comes with risk. Make that risk real.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    Profit sharing!?!? Communist!

    Corporate Communism baby!!
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    I am saying let's get rid of that. If you are able to pay and choose not to, too bad, so sad, gonna miss you when your gone. Talk about an incentive. You would not need a mandate.

    Freedom comes with risk. Make that risk real.

    Now you are talking silly.
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 9,571 Senior Member
    Now you are talking silly.
    No, he's dead on. Being poor and sick is a choice. I choose to not be.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 21,204 Senior Member
    I didn't say poor. I said able to pay and choosing not to.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,369 Senior Member
    What's your definition of fair considering the upper income level tax payers pay a majority of the taxes?

    https://howmuch.net/articles/high-income-americans-pay-majority-of-federal-taxes

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

    Here's why I call this bill "unfair": Higher income groups receive a far higher percentage increase in income after tax income than lower income groups.

    [/I]The Republican tax bill that the House and Senate are set to pass as soon as Tuesday night would give most Americans a tax cut next year, according to a new analysis. However, it would by far benefit the richest Americans the most. Meanwhile, many lower- and middle-class Americans would have higher taxes a decade from now ... unless a future Congress extends the cuts.

    The average household would get a tax cut of $1,610 in 2018, a bump of about 2.2 percent in that average household's income, according to a report released Monday by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank that has been critical of the tax overhaul plan.

    However, extremes make averages, and the benefits would be much larger for richer households. A household earning $1 million or more would get an average cut of $69,660, an income bump of 3.3 percent. Compare that to the average household earning $50,000 to $75,000, which would get a tax cut of $870, or 1.6 percent...[/I]

    Here's the link. Look at the charts for 2018 and 2027. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/19/571754894/charts-see-how-much-of-gop-tax-cuts-will-go-to-the-middle-class

    The original data can be found here: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/distributional-analysis-conference-agreement-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act

    If you want to see what a non Kool-Aid drinking billionaire thinks: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/18/michael-r-bloomberg-this-tax-bill-is-a-trillion-dollar-blunder/
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 1,635 Senior Member
    This is my favorite part.

    750k+pay+more+in+taxes_221cdf_6467574.jpg
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 8,369 Senior Member
    I don't know about California, but in NYC and DC $750,00 might get you a small one bedroom condo, but more likely a small studio (one room + bath apartment). Folks earning less than six figure incomes and not forced or choosing to live in a slum have a long commute or share apartments or group houses. People in those places with low six figure incomes are by no stretch of the imagination rich.

    BTW - here's an editorial worth reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/opinion/tax-bill-trump-republicans.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 1,913 Senior Member
    We should have just dealt with corporate tax reform, but of course, the Left would make that impossible.
    Why should corporations get a break, but not people right?

    Instead, we were forced into the quagmire of trying to do something with individual rates.
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 1,635 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    People in those places with low six figure incomes are by no stretch of the imagination rich.

    They ain't poor, either, no matter where they live. Also I think Feinstein is probably confusing "median" with "Average."
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 1,635 Senior Member
    I read today that the rich aren't actually getting a tax cut that's proportional to the amount they pay. It stands to reason that they will always get the lion's share of the cut since they pay the most, but according to Brookings 84% of all taxpayers will get a cut. That's not bad.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 1,913 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    I don't know about California, but in NYC and DC $750,00 might get you a small one bedroom condo, but more likely a small studio (one room + bath apartment). Folks earning less than six figure incomes and not forced or choosing to live in a slum have a long commute or share apartments or group houses. People in those places with low six figure incomes are by no stretch of the imagination rich.

    BTW - here's an editorial worth reading: [url]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/opinion/tax-bill-trump-republicans.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region[/url]

    Is President Trump a member of the House or Senate? I think I remember from junior high school social studies, he's neither, right?

    And I think I remember that the President doesn't write bills, he only signs them. I think I saw that on "Schoolhouse Rock."

    Too bad, the editorial writer for the New York Times didn't go to junior high school or watch Saturday morning cartoons.
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    If a tax cut is paid for by increasing the national debt, is it really a tax cut, or is it just borrowing against future income?
  • sherbsherb Senior Member Posts: 1,635 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    If a tax cut is paid for by increasing the national debt, is it really a tax cut, or is it just borrowing against future income?

    So long as we're the world's reserve currency I don't think it matters if its financed by debt.

    I just made that up. Somebody factcheck me.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 1,913 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    If a tax cut is paid for by increasing the national debt, is it really a tax cut, or is it just borrowing against future income?

    I think the question is: Is a tax cut really stimulative if people just assume they're going to have to pay it back? The answer is yes, if there are unused resources that can be put to work to add to aggregate demand.
  • BushartBushart Senior Member Posts: 1,540 Senior Member
    Just keep removing taxes

    I have the job of feeding that goose that lays Golden eggs in DC---It magically pays for all those services you need

    Aint it a great world??
  • creekguycreekguy Senior Member Posts: 3,905 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    I think the question is: Is a tax cut really stimulative if people just assume they're going to have to pay it back? The answer is yes, if there are unused resources that can be put to work to add to aggregate demand.

    Yeah, OK, sure.....
  • BushartBushart Senior Member Posts: 1,540 Senior Member
    creekguy wrote: »
    Yeah, OK, sure.....

    C'mon CG--lets just all agree the partisan Republicans are financial geniuses ----you get all the things you need and You Don't have to pay for it---****, I could only hope to reach that level of intelligence (OK I got it CG---I can be smart like that if I paint an X between my eyes and you hit that X with a Baseball Bat----Then all this will make sense---(I only hope I won't then be smarter than the governing party after my "infliction")

    Garsh
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 9,068 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Here's why I call this bill "unfair": Higher income groups receive a far higher percentage increase in income after tax income than lower income groups.

    [/I]The Republican tax bill that the House and Senate are set to pass as soon as Tuesday night would give most Americans a tax cut next year, according to a new analysis. However, it would by far benefit the richest Americans the most. Meanwhile, many lower- and middle-class Americans would have higher taxes a decade from now ... unless a future Congress extends the cuts.

    The average household would get a tax cut of $1,610 in 2018, a bump of about 2.2 percent in that average household's income, according to a report released Monday by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank that has been critical of the tax overhaul plan.

    However, extremes make averages, and the benefits would be much larger for richer households. A household earning $1 million or more would get an average cut of $69,660, an income bump of 3.3 percent. Compare that to the average household earning $50,000 to $75,000, which would get a tax cut of $870, or 1.6 percent...[/I]

    Here's the link. Look at the charts for 2018 and 2027. https://www.npr.org/2017/12/19/571754894/charts-see-how-much-of-gop-tax-cuts-will-go-to-the-middle-class

    The original data can be found here: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/distributional-analysis-conference-agreement-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act

    If you want to see what a non Kool-Aid drinking billionaire thinks: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/18/michael-r-bloomberg-this-tax-bill-is-a-trillion-dollar-blunder/
    I'm ok with this and don't care what happens with the Rich. I'lll take my extra $$ over the next decade and invest it in my IRA.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file