PDA

View Full Version : Democrats Release Tax Hike Plan




Swordsmyth
03-09-2018, 04:47 PM
This week, Congressional Democrats (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/07/senate-democrats-tax-cuts-infrastructure-392523) released a detailed tax hike plan that they promised to implement (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/377180-senate-dems-propose-rolling-back-tax-cuts-to-pay-for-infrastructure) if given majority control of the House and Senate after the 2018 midterm elections. So much for the crocodile tears about the deficit--Democrats want to raise taxes (https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/goptaxscam-delivers-billions-to-corporate-executives-and-wealthy-shareholders-while-middle-class-workers-are-left-behind) not to reduce the debt, but rather to spend that tax hike money on boondoggle projects.
As you might expect, hold onto your wallets (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-tax-cuts-are-unpopular-and-should-be-lifted-to-pay-for-infrastructure/article/2650925). Here are the details:
Increase the top marginal income tax rate from 37 percent to 39.6 percent. This nearly 3 percentage point increase in the top personal rate is not only a hike in the top bracket levy, but it's also a direct tax increase on small and mid-sized businesses. The 30 million companies which are organized as sole proprietorships, partnerships, Subchapter-S corporations, and LLCs pay their business taxes on their owners' 1040 personal tax returns. Hiking the top tax rate is a small business tax increase.

Increase the corporate income tax rate from 21 percent to 25 percent. Up until this year, the United States labored under the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world. As a result, jobs and capital were fleeing America for more normal tax rates that could be found in tax havens like France and China (saracasm font very much activated). Finally, after many years of bipartisan consensus that the U.S. corporate rate had become an impediment to attracting new jobs and investment, Congress cut the rate all the way from 35 to 21 percent. Even doing that only puts us in the middle of the pack (https://taxfoundation.org/us-corporate-income-tax-more-competitive/) of developed nations, but that's a heck of a lot better than dead last.

Bring back the alternative minimum tax (AMT) for 4 million families. Up until this year, 4 million upper middle class families (https://www.atr.org/democrats-call-trillion-dollar-tax-hike) had to calculate their income taxes two different ways, and then pay the higher result. This was due to a provision of the law known as the "alternative minimum tax" or AMT.

Cut the "death tax" standard deduction in half. Over the past few decades, no tax has proven more unpopular in every single poll (https://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2016/03/31/face-it-americans-just-dont-like-the-estate-tax/#7ba143b622bd) than the death tax, the federal tax on estates. 60 to 70 percent of poll respondents consistently call for its full repeal. The new tax law didn't repeal the death tax, but it did the next best thing--it doubled the death tax's "standard deduction" from $5.5 million to $11 million (and twice that for surviving spouses).

All of this is very confusing given that the new tax law is supported by a majority of the American people (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/377134-support-rising-for-gops-tax-overhaul-poll) and is growing in popularity. A good chunk of people haven't even yet realized they've received a tax cut, so the favorable numbers should continue to grow. Maybe that's why a Democrat pollster and strategist (https://medium.com/@stefan_30846/democrats-and-the-gop-tax-bill-its-not-good-f7c2dba12570) recently wrote:

Since the passage of the Republicans’ tax bill, and even before it, Democrats have been losing the messaging war. Now that many Americans are seeing the results in their paystubs, it’s even harder for Democrats to make this a winning issue. Voters are seeing the bill’s positive impact and are not likely to oppose it because we tell them they’re not benefiting, and many voters who aren’t seeing the impact still support the bill. If Democrats want to continue using this bill as a major issue for November, we need a new messaging strategy.




More at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanellis/2018/03/09/democrats-release-tax-hike-plan/#7bc2f5627b9e

oyarde
03-09-2018, 11:43 PM
The only contribution a Dem can make , tax increases . Why do they hate america and the children ?

Zippyjuan
03-10-2018, 02:12 PM
When Reagan saw his tax cuts causing the debt to balloon, he signed a bill raising them again. Trump likes debt. Republicans used to care about it but not anymore it seems.

Swordsmyth
03-10-2018, 02:53 PM
When Reagan saw his tax cuts causing the debt to balloon, he signed a bill raising them again. Trump likes debt. Republicans used to care about it but not anymore it seems.

You cut spending, YOU DON'T RAISE TAXES.

Zippyjuan
03-10-2018, 07:23 PM
You cut spending, YOU DON'T RAISE TAXES.

You need both. They voted to cut taxes- which adds to the deficit/ debt and have also been voting to increase spending. Deficit for next year likely to be $1 trillion.

oyarde
03-10-2018, 07:31 PM
When Reagan saw his tax cuts causing the debt to balloon, he signed a bill raising them again. Trump likes debt. Republicans used to care about it but not anymore it seems.
Who is the new avatar Zip ?

nikcers
03-10-2018, 07:32 PM
Who is the new avatar Zip ?
I liked the old zippy better

Zippyjuan
03-10-2018, 07:35 PM
Who is the new avatar Zip ?

"Q". Might have noticed that he is a bit popular among some circles for his "inside information" cryptic posts from 8chan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(Star_Trek)

oyarde
03-10-2018, 07:38 PM
"Q". Might have noticed that he is a bit popular among some circles for his "inside information" cryptic posts from 8chan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(Star_Trek)

I have never been on 8Chan , they got any good coupons on there ?

Zippyjuan
03-10-2018, 07:41 PM
I have never been on 8Chan , they got any good coupons on there ?

Lots of creative writing.

nikcers
03-10-2018, 07:47 PM
"Q". Might have noticed that he is a bit popular among some circles for his "inside information" cryptic posts from 8chan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(Star_Trek)
if you are a Star Trek fan are you fimilar with the old Vulcan proverb that stated "Only Nixon could go to China"?

oyarde
03-10-2018, 08:58 PM
Any vote for any Dem in the house or senate is a vote to increase taxes and grind the anemic economy ( 2 percent growth ) to a halt .

Swordsmyth
03-10-2018, 10:38 PM
Who is the new avatar Zip ?

Q from Star Trek, a malevolent omnipotent entity that liked to toy with the crew.

Swordsmyth
03-10-2018, 10:39 PM
You need both. They voted to cut taxes- which adds to the deficit/ debt and have also been voting to increase spending. Deficit for next year likely to be $1 trillion.

You don't need both, our taxes are already too high.

r3volution 3.0
03-10-2018, 10:40 PM
Does it include a tax on consumers of steel and aluminum?

oyarde
03-10-2018, 10:58 PM
You need both. They voted to cut taxes- which adds to the deficit/ debt and have also been voting to increase spending. Deficit for next year likely to be $1 trillion.

Back to Obummer numbers ?

oyarde
03-10-2018, 10:59 PM
Does it include a tax on consumers of steel and aluminum?

And everyone else except welfare people most likely .

r3volution 3.0
03-10-2018, 11:01 PM
And everyone else except welfare people most likely .

You mean steel workers?

oyarde
03-10-2018, 11:02 PM
You mean steel workers?

Yes , those democrats too .

TheCount
03-11-2018, 01:32 AM
You cut spending, YOU DON'T RAISE TAXES.Trump campaigned on increasing spending. He's not going back on that.

TheCount
03-11-2018, 01:33 AM
Does it include a tax on consumers of steel and aluminum?Trump's tax increases are patriotic freedom-increasing taxes, you anti-American heathen.

A Son of Liberty
03-11-2018, 06:08 AM
When Reagan saw his tax cuts causing the debt to balloon, he signed a bill raising them again. Trump likes debt. Republicans used to care about it but not anymore it seems.

This tax cut is the FIRST FUCKING THING I'VE SEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO TO GET OFF MY BACK IN MY ADULT LIFE. It's literally the only "good" thing I can cite that Trump has done (and please don't turn this into a discussion about Gorsuch, or anything else... I don't go in for that nonsense and I don't really care).

For ONCE, I've gotten some relief! Imagine, a sworn and avowed thief "opting" to leave a little more behind?!

So stick the "debt" and "budget" talk in your ass. They can figure out a way to make due with a few less dollars.

Right now I'm just a casual observer. Don't make me get into the game.

Wooden Indian
03-11-2018, 09:58 AM
Had I my druthers, they would have decreased both spending and taxes.

My next choice would be lower spending, leave taxes.

But... I'll take the "tax cut" even though I know the eventual repercussions because that debt and inflation is going to happen and grow regardless. They won't decrease spending. Ever.

RonZeplin
03-11-2018, 11:04 AM
The D&R Party Tax Hike Plan. Taxes, fees, inflation, tariffs, sanctions.
https://st.hzcdn.com/simgs/12928a2709e9fefc_8-7389/home-design.jpg

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 01:18 PM
You don't need both, our taxes are already too high.

Ron Paul himself has said he would love to get rid of the income tax- but you have to do something about spending FIRST- otherwise you are just adding to the deficits. Cutting taxes without spending cuts just makes things worse.

Swordsmyth
03-11-2018, 02:06 PM
Ron Paul himself has said he would love to get rid of the income tax- but you have to do something about spending FIRST- otherwise you are just adding to the deficits. Cutting taxes without spending cuts just makes things worse.

Not really, the only effect it has is to make the spending less painful for the public, our spending and taxes are still outrageous enough that the tax cuts won't make it any harder to get people to want to cut them.

nikcers
03-11-2018, 02:10 PM
Not really, the only effect it has is to make the spending less painful for the public, our spending and taxes are still outrageous enough that the tax cuts won't make it any harder to get people to want to cut them.
Not right away but after you get inflation the tax cuts become temporary because people go into higher tax brackets and prices will go up.

A Son of Liberty
03-11-2018, 02:20 PM
Ron Paul himself has said he would love to get rid of the income tax- but you have to do something about spending FIRST- otherwise you are just adding to the deficits. Cutting taxes without spending cuts just makes things worse.

If Ron said this, then I disagree with him and you.

I'm here and now, son. I'm busting my ass TODAY, not in the future. I have no obligation to the future to anything. And yes I have kids. I have kids right now that I'm trying to provide for today.

Fuck this argument about the future... No politician does anything about the future other than deferring decisions to it, in the hopes that they'll be comfortably retired by then. I'll pick up my rifle as long as there is a strand of muscle in my arms when that day comes... in the meantime, DON'T TREAD ON ME.

I'm done with people like you. I owe you nothing.

Go ahead and report that to your superiors, you piece of shit. Go ahead and report my ip address.

Fuck you. I'll see you on the other side.

Swordsmyth
03-11-2018, 02:21 PM
Not right away but after you get inflation the tax cuts become temporary because people go into higher tax brackets and prices will go up.

Which is why we MUST cut the spending that causes the inflation.

nikcers
03-11-2018, 02:25 PM
If Ron said this, then I disagree with him and you.

I'm here and now, son. I'm busting my ass TODAY, not in the future. I have no obligation to the future to anything. And yes I have kids. I have kids right now that I'm trying to provide for today.

$#@! this argument about the future... No politician does anything about the future other than deferring decisions to it, in the hopes that they'll be comfortably retired by then. I'll pick up my rifle as long as there is a strand of muscle in my arms when that day comes... in the meantime, DON'T TREAD ON ME.

I'm done with people like you. I owe you nothing.

Go ahead and report that to your superiors, you piece of $#@!. Go ahead and report my ip address.

$#@! you. I'll see you on the other side.
I don't know if people just conflate these ideas but Ron has often endorsed any sort of Taxation Cuts. He also just sees spending as a form of taxation so claiming to do tax cuts while increasing taxes is a myth, so is claiming to reduce taxes while increasing spending and tarrifs, because spending and tarrifs are a tax. The problem is you have a bunch of fake people claiming to cut taxes while they are increasing spending which is the worst kind of tax.

nikcers
03-11-2018, 02:26 PM
Which is why we MUST cut the spending that causes the inflation.
Deferring your taxes to inflation is still a tax, its just a hidden tax. Its the worst kind of tax. The dollar is on a rollercoaster down because of Trumps war on the dollar.

Swordsmyth
03-11-2018, 02:28 PM
Deferring your taxes to inflation is still a tax, its just a hidden tax. Its the worst kind of tax. The dollar is on a rollercoaster down because of Trumps war on the dollar.

Actually it is the best kind of tax, it's problem is that it is too perfect and people don't keep it under control because they don't feel it, we are nowhere near the point that people don't feel anything and aren't motivated to cut taxes and spending.

nikcers
03-11-2018, 02:30 PM
Actually it is the best kind of tax, it's problem is that it is too perfect and people don't keep it under control because they don't feel it, we are nowhere near the point that people don't feel anything and aren't motivated to cut taxes and spending.
No its terrible, its the worst because it removes the pressures of the market only temporary and creates a boom bust cycle.

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 02:55 PM
Which is why we MUST cut the spending that causes the inflation.

If spending causes inflation, why has the US inflation rate been declining (aside from a couple bumps here and there) since 1980 while spending has been increasing?

http://open.lib.umn.edu/macroeconomics/wp-content/uploads/sites/194/2016/10/e8ad0250857d52cb37ed54797f01e883.jpg

https://www.mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Chart1-Spending-Per-Capita-vero.png

Swordsmyth
03-11-2018, 03:00 PM
If spending causes inflation, why has the US inflation rate been declining (aside from a couple bumps here and there) since 1980 while spending has been increasing?

http://open.lib.umn.edu/macroeconomics/wp-content/uploads/sites/194/2016/10/e8ad0250857d52cb37ed54797f01e883.jpg

https://www.mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Chart1-Spending-Per-Capita-vero.png

1 they lie about inflation
2 there are other causes of inflation
3 they use various manipulations to suppress and delay inflation

Superfluous Man
03-11-2018, 03:07 PM
You need both.

The projected federal revenue for 2018 is $3.37 Trillion, out of a GDP of $17.4 Trillion. In the early 1900's total federal revenue was well below 10% of GDP.

They don't need to raise taxes. They need to cut them more. And they need to cut spending.

Raising taxes will only make it easier for them to keep spending more. The primary objective is not to cut the deficit, it's to cut spending. If the deficit went up and spending went down, that would be a net positive.

Superfluous Man
03-11-2018, 03:10 PM
If spending causes inflation, why has the US inflation rate been declining (aside from a couple bumps here and there) since 1980 while spending has been increasing?


On your own graph it shows a positive rate of inflation over the entire period. Not once was there deflation to balance out the ongoing devaluation of the dollar that continued through the entire period.

And you presented this as evidence that inflation wasn't happening?

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 03:18 PM
1 they lie about inflation
2 there are other causes of inflation
3 they use various manipulations to suppress and delay inflation

Yes, there are other causes of inflation.

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 03:21 PM
The projected federal revenue for 2018 is $3.37 Trillion, out of a GDP of $17.4 Trillion. In the early 1900's total federal revenue was well below 10% of GDP.

They don't need to raise taxes. They need to cut them more. And they need to cut spending.

Raising taxes will only make it easier for them to keep spending more. The primary objective is not to cut the deficit, it's to cut spending. If the deficit went up and spending went down, that would be a net positive.

If you want to do that (get back to 1900 which isn't going to happen), you will need to get this down to $430 billion- how would you get there?:

https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/pres_budg_total_spending_pie.png

Superfluous Man
03-11-2018, 03:23 PM
If you want to do that (get back to 1900 which isn't going to happen), you will need to get this down to $430 billion- how would you get there?:

https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/pres_budg_total_spending_pie.png

I don't see a single item on that pie chart that I would have a problem with cutting all the way down to zero.

It may be right that the severe cuts that are needed aren't ever going to happen. But the fact remains, giving the government more revenue only enables them to spend even more. That's the opposite of what we want. We want to starve it.

nikcers
03-11-2018, 03:26 PM
Yes, there are other causes of inflation.
Why do you bring up price inflation when talking about about government spending when monetary inflation is the problem? Your right the government can't inflate prices because prices aren't determined by government spending. The market determines pricing, and one of the equations is the monetary supply. Its not the only thing that affects prices but it is how prices get measured so it distorts prices and creates boom and bust cycles.

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 03:43 PM
I don't see a single item on that pie chart that I would have a problem with cutting all the way down to zero.

It may be right that the severe cuts that are needed aren't ever going to happen. But the fact remains, giving the government more revenue only enables them to spend even more. That's the opposite of what we want. We want to starve it.

With deficit spending, cutting taxes does not act as a brake on spending. Congress just voted a large tax cut- reducing revenues by more that $1 trillion over the next ten years- but didn't cut a penny from spending. That shortage requires more government borrowing which can lead to higher interest rates.

The deficit/ debt has a bigger negative impact on the economy than the total level of government spending though reducing that spending reduces the need for borrowing. The tax cuts expanded the need for borrowing.

Superfluous Man
03-11-2018, 04:11 PM
With deficit spending, cutting taxes does not act as a brake on spending.

Sure it does. It must. Or else taxation would be zero already.

Politicians would have no incentive to levy any taxes at all if it weren't the case that doing so enabled them to spend more.

It's true that they can borrow and spend. But there are natural limitations on that. And their ability to do it is dependent on their perceived ability to pay back their lenders with money that they are ultimately expected to raise via taxation. At the end of the day, yes, they can always spend more than their tax revenue. But it's still the case that the amount they can spend with more tax revenue will always be more than the amount they could spend with less revenue.

Zippyjuan
03-11-2018, 04:13 PM
Even Republicans seem to be abandoning the notion of keeping borrowing under control. The idea that budgets should be balanced has been fading away (at least at the Federal level- many states have laws requiring them to balance their budgets while leaders in those states enviously eye the lack of such restrictions on Federal spending).