Ok, does anyone really believe that this plan fundamentally improve the fortunes of anyone other than the ultra wealthy?

We know that Trump is lying when he says it won't benefit him. The only year of his return made public had him paying 31 million in AMT, which he wants to eliminate and whatever trickery he wants to do with pass throughs which benefits him by 8 figures.

Frankly I don't want to hear anything else from his Goldman Sachs financial people either, they're dirtiying up "The swamp" on a daily basis

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

well I can say this plan gives me thousands extra per year via the doubled standard deduction and the increased child tax credit. That's money I can throw right into equity on my home to pay off my mortgage early.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

I agree. I'm just shocked after hearing forever that we need to reduce the debt and even shit like disaster relief needs "offsets" that so many of our board brethren are seemingly ok with adding to it now.

Improving fortunes sounds too dramatic. It's not intended to do that. If I make $50K a year, I'm not expecting to become a millionaire because of the tax cut. But like Ogie said, having an extra thousand or more to throw at a mortgage or whatever will significantly increase my life.

_________________

If that were fundamentally the point of the changes, I wouldn't object. It's been well established that lower and middle income earners will spend a much higher percentage of any cut and directly stimulate the economy. But the main thrust reverts to a plank of the voodoo economics that has largely gotten us into the financial mess we're in.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

That's their own personal financial decision. I'm decidedly middle class, but I have enough financial literacy to know where my tax refund should go. Last year's tax refund finished my wife's student loan.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

I've said many time that Republicans have lost their lust for fiscal discipline. It's hard to believe that we just missed getting a balanced budget amendment approved by one vote during the Clinton years. Now neither side is really for fiscal discipline, and they bad mouthed the sequester before the ink even dried because it was going to starve the military and social programs of funding.

Well, we're on a runaway train to fiscal ruin. Automatic spending, entitlements and interest, will continue to consume ever larger portions of tax revenues. Discretionary spending will continue to dwindle, and that is all that Congress controls. I believe Kasich and possibly Christie were the only ones willing to talk about entitlement reform.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

your question was whether it fundamentally improves the fortunes of anyone other than the ultra wealthy. My answer is yes, as I read it.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.

When I read the 9 page framework I'm going to very curious how Congress could simply afford tax cuts for business. Not only is the tax corporate rate being sliced to 20% but there will be an "at least" 5-year period of full expensing of depreciable assets! On top of the rate cut!

Woo boy.

In these days of thin margins of elections no one is willing to be the politician to take the bullet of ending or cutting things that should be ended or cut.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Or to be the one to say "no. We need to pay back the money we took from SS and remove the cap on what it's taken from".

You following me?

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Do you mean the income cap on the payroll tax? Benefits are linked to what is paid in, so uncapping that would only increase benefits to those paying in. I am not sure a further 12%+ income tax on high wage earners and their employers is the way to go to make SS solvent in the long run. But yeah I expect to see that in some form in our lifetime.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Good to see Baby McCown is now a fiscal conservative.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

That kind of happens when the other side is proposing something. If the Dems were increasing spending, the Republican fiscal hawks would be out in full force. I wonder how he'll feel when we propose Medicare for all?

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Bmac stands for nothing other than annoyance.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

sure, that's true. But there's a better chance of telling China we won't pay them back and come and get us than either party getting that done.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.

Child #1 won't be able to live those 18 years on 6 million bucks? That's 333k a year, or roughly 480,000 a year with a 30% tax rate if the parent was alive making money.

Ok One Post. Maybe let's just get it all out and going now. Why even allow anyone to even make more than 6 million bucks? Of course, if you hit the powerball spend it fast because your kids aren't getting it. And all those athletes and movie star kids better hope to do well in college.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Not fair, he can't respond. He used up his One Post.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Do you understand the difference, from a policy standpoint, between earned income and inherited income?

Yes of course. I was getting at the fact that people happily will want to take rich people's money when they die if they do not know them. They are a faceless source. When they like them like rich athletes and celebrities they think differently.

As for my not making more than $6m comment that is simple. Why wait until people die to control wealth and have a source of funds. Why not just cap the living as they earn? We should not have royalty and inequality anyway.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Because we supposedly value hard work in America.

_________________

Good one.

_________________

So the answer is "no" you don't understand the difference between earned income and inherited income from a policy standpoint.

Earned income is generally associated with the creation of value. Services, capital investment, etc. Earned income for the most part in theory and in practice has generated the creation of value. The transfer of money in an inheritance situation creates no value, it simply transfers assets from one party to another. The economy is no better off because of the transfer.

So that's the difference. All taxes are punitive, but being punitive in an earned income situation hurts value creation, being punitive in an inheritance situation, for the most part, doesn't.

Or we value "you" working hard to build a fortune so your kids work less hard? Argue all you want I just have a fundamental opposition to taking people's stuff.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Yeah I get that and don't care. See below reply to Leash.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

How do you propose we fund our governments at the state local and federal level?

Hawg vibe.

_________________

Standard taxation. I am only opposed in this thread to estate taxation. If I had to agree to that at all it would not exceed the max tax rate the deceased ever paid.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.