Tax Reform

124

Comments

  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,762
    Unemployment is 4.1%.  Someone explain to me why we need these tax cuts in order to improve the job market?  In VA, we have 25K plus jobs that can't be filled because there aren't qualified candidates.  I have four unfilled positions in my compliance team alone, because the candidates I get are not very good.  
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 9,548
    mrussel1 said:
    Unemployment is 4.1%.  Someone explain to me why we need these tax cuts in order to improve the job market?  In VA, we have 25K plus jobs that can't be filled because there aren't qualified candidates.  I have four unfilled positions in my compliance team alone, because the candidates I get are not very good.  
    It’s going to put the coal miners back to work.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 6,001
    mrussel1 said:
    Unemployment is 4.1%.  Someone explain to me why we need these tax cuts in order to improve the job market?  In VA, we have 25K plus jobs that can't be filled because there aren't qualified candidates.  I have four unfilled positions in my compliance team alone, because the candidates I get are not very good.  
    You’re going to have even more positions that you can’t fill. Added bonus: China owns even more of our ass. 
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,762
    mrussel1 said:
    Unemployment is 4.1%.  Someone explain to me why we need these tax cuts in order to improve the job market?  In VA, we have 25K plus jobs that can't be filled because there aren't qualified candidates.  I have four unfilled positions in my compliance team alone, because the candidates I get are not very good.  
    You’re going to have even more positions that you can’t fill. Added bonus: China owns even more of our ass. 
    I doubt if that's even the case... We just finished a half million EBIT project yesterday.  It will generally go to our equity owner.  That's how it works.  The $ goes up.  Cutting the rate from 35-20% simply goes to the ownership.  Yes, perhaps a few jobs are created.  Maybe there are low skilled jobs that will be created.  But there's already a dearth of candidates for high skilled jobs.  
  • Interesting proposals. No Obamacare stuff though. That surprises me a bit, but we've still got the Senate proposal next week.
  • Not sure I can make a poll in the middle of a thread, but how many of y'all itemize deductions? 
  • mookeywrenchmookeywrench Posts: 5,227
    edited November 6
    I itemize before and will itemize after Trump's tax plan.

    I also ran a tax projection and I will be saving $90 annually through Trump's plan.

    But once/if i lose the grandfathered mortgage interest deduction I will be worse off. And that's coming from a first time home buyer in the Seattle area with a home below the median fair market value. Moreover I would now have to wait until 2021 to sell my first home tax free instead of 2018 as the exclusion changes to living in a principal residence from 2 out of 5 years to 5 out of 8 years.  The only way to continue the savings in the long-run through Trump's plan is to get married.

    He's throwing short-term rewards at Taxpayers in hopes they stay blind to the long term effects.  
    Post edited by mookeywrench on
    350x700px-LL-d2f49cb4_vinyl-needle-scu-e1356666258495.jpeg
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 17,068
    edited November 7
    Am I correct on thinking that this tax plan is similar to the one implemented in Kansas ? 
    Post edited by josevolution on
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,533
    I itemize before and will itemize after Trump's tax plan.

    I also ran a tax projection and I will be saving $90 annually through Trump's plan.

    But once/if i lose the grandfathered mortgage interest deduction I will be worse off. And that's coming from a first time home buyer in the Seattle area with a home below the median fair market value. Moreover I would now have to wait until 2021 to sell my first home tax free instead of 2018 as the exclusion changes to living in a principal residence from 2 out of 5 years to 5 out of 8 years.  The only way to continue the savings in the long-run through Trump's plan is to get married.

    He's throwing short-term rewards at Taxpayers in hopes they stay blind to the long term effects.  
    I'm not sure that there are short term rewards except for the wealthy.

    This bill is absolute bullshit.  It sounds like it might have trouble getting through the house in current form.  That's pretty bad.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,533
    Am I correct on thinking that this tax plan is similar to the one implemented in Kansas ? 
    yes....the talking heads keep talking about how we shouldn't worry about the deficit it creates because the payoff will be several years down the road.

    Absolute bullshit.  

    If we had high unemployment and high inflation this plan might do some good.  Right now it is doing nothing but benefiting the wealthy.

    And we still haven't seen tRump's tax returns.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 17,068
    Am I correct on thinking that this tax plan is similar to the one implemented in Kansas ? 
    yes....the talking heads keep talking about how we shouldn't worry about the deficit it creates because the payoff will be several years down the road.

    Absolute bullshit.  

    If we had high unemployment and high inflation this plan might do some good.  Right now it is doing nothing but benefiting the wealthy.

    And we still haven't seen tRump's tax returns.
    No doubt yeah people should take a look at how it worked out for Kansas it decimated the state ...
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 9,642
    So irresponsible to be increasing the deficit.  This economy is probably as good as it is gonna get for a long while so we need to be paying down some debt or at least not adding to it.
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,533
    So irresponsible to be increasing the deficit.  This economy is probably as good as it is gonna get for a long while so we need to be paying down some debt or at least not adding to it.
    It's surreal to see the GOP try to explain away the deficit spending related to this bill.  The ACA was deficit neutral and you would think it created the entire fucking deficit the way they criticize it.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,762
    I itemize deductions today but won't be able to do so if this is passed.  The loss of SALT and personal exemptions means that the standardized will now exceed my allowable itemized.  I think I mentioned my taxable income goes up by $30k. Yeah!!!  
  • Senate proposes lower top indiviual bracket, more brackets, more itemized deductions, higher passthrough rates. Oh, and it wouldn't kick in until 2019. 

    There should be a snowball's chance of getting this done by Christmas.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,762
    Senate proposes lower top indiviual bracket, more brackets, more itemized deductions, higher passthrough rates. Oh, and it wouldn't kick in until 2019. 

    There should be a snowball's chance of getting this done by Christmas.
    For me, the bill is actually worse.  It eliminates all property taxes as deductible.  So now I'd lose SALT + property... awesome.  
    I can see how it's better for some, with the add back for student loan and medical, but at the end of the day, I hope the whole thing dies.  
  • mrussel1 said:
    Senate proposes lower top indiviual bracket, more brackets, more itemized deductions, higher passthrough rates. Oh, and it wouldn't kick in until 2019. 

    There should be a snowball's chance of getting this done by Christmas.
    For me, the bill is actually worse.  It eliminates all property taxes as deductible.  So now I'd lose SALT + property... awesome.  
    I can see how it's better for some, with the add back for student loan and medical, but at the end of the day, I hope the whole thing dies.  
    We don’t need it. It’s crazy. Another money grab by the Uber wealthy. Like they didn’t get enough in the Bush years.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • 09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,113
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,533
    CM189191 said:
    It's odd...the Senators that opposed the healthcare crap are now being forced to vote for the mandate repeal?  Not likely...
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • KatKat There's a lot to be said for nowhere.Posts: 3,183
    "Well, as far as I know, music makes people happy. I know it makes me happy." -- Fats Domino
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,533
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • Yup, lets make higher education less affordable and less able to assist those who create new companies, innovate and are the future of the economy so the 1% can have yet another tax cut and afford to lobby against the future. Those clowns writing legislation don't have a clue, in case you hadn't noticed already.

    To the members of the community:

    The tax legislation now pending in Congress contains several provisions that could have damaging impact on members of our community and the university as a whole.

    Because the situation is complex and fluid, I write to offer our current assessment of which provisions concern us the most and why, and to let you know that we're actively following developments in DC and striving to achieve a better outcome. If you share our concern, you can express your views to Congressional leaders.

    What provisions in the pending tax bills concern us most?

    Congress is considering several provisions that could place new and potentially very serious financial burdens on students (especially graduate students), remove important incentives for employees seeking further education, and diminish the funds the university relies on for research, education and financial aid.

    At a time when officials across the political spectrum stress the value of increasing access to higher education and of building US economic strength through innovation, these measures seem counterproductive. For example:

    ·         Impact on students
    The House version of the bill would repeal several current tax provisions that help students afford university education, including eliminating the deduction for interest on student loans. It would also treat tuition reductions for graduate students as taxable income. If this change became law, it could have severe consequences for our nearly 7,000 graduate students, perhaps increasing an individual’s income tax by as much as $10,000 a year.

    In arguing against this provision, we take great inspiration from our graduate student leaders, who are conducting intensive phone-banking to make sure Congress understands that, for a graduate student receiving the average stipend of $37,000, a new tax burden on that scale could be devastating. The university would have to provide further aid to compensate, which would lead to a sharp cut in the size of the student body. This week, our students are working to communicate our position in print, on radio and through social media, making clear what’s at stake for them personally and professionally, and arguing that to discourage advanced education is to squander the kind of talent that could bring the nation new knowledge, innovation and economic growth.

    ·         Impact on faculty and staff
    The House version of the bill would eliminate some current tax provisions that help our employees defray the cost of further education. For example, it would treat tuition waivers for employees and their families as taxable income. Again, a tax that would make higher education more expensive for families is hard to understand. We are also concerned about other provisions that would put a drag on innovation.

    ·         Impact on the university
    Both the House and the Senate versions of the bill would impose a tax on the net investment income generated by the university’s endowment. Our endowment income is a primary source of funds for the work central to our mission: supporting research (including by covering the unreimbursed indirect costs of federal grants) and advancing education, especially by providing the financial aid that keeps a university education affordable to students of modest means, and by pioneering digital pathways to make higher education accessible to all. Taxing endowment earnings will directly reduce our ability to fund our core purpose.

    How is the university taking action?

    Several offices – including our Washington office, the Office of the Vice President for Finance, the Office of the General Counsel and the Chancellor’s office, which is working with the graduate student community – have been collaborating to assess the implications of the bill and to express our concerns strategically in DC. In addition, we are working closely with the Association of American Universities and other university groups, which have been publicly outspoken and very active in building Congressional opposition to these damaging tax proposals.

    What happens next?

    This week, the House will vote on its version of the bill, and the Senate will consider its version in the Senate Finance Committee. A final bill will not be ready for a vote for at least several more weeks.

    In the meantime, we are intently focused on persuading Congress to remove provisions that would derail our students’ education, damage our ability to prepare these exceptionally talented young people, thwart their scientific and technical contributions, and discourage the research and innovation the nation depends on.

    Sincerely,


    Does anyone on here believe that Trump could read this, comprehend it and explain it, whether he agreed with it or not?

    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,329
    Yup, lets make higher education less affordable and less able to assist those who create new companies, innovate and are the future of the economy so the 1% can have yet another tax cut and afford to lobby against the future. Those clowns writing legislation don't have a clue, in case you hadn't noticed already.

    To the members of the community:

    The tax legislation now pending in Congress contains several provisions that could have damaging impact on members of our community and the university as a whole.

    Because the situation is complex and fluid, I write to offer our current assessment of which provisions concern us the most and why, and to let you know that we're actively following developments in DC and striving to achieve a better outcome. If you share our concern, you can express your views to Congressional leaders.

    What provisions in the pending tax bills concern us most?

    Congress is considering several provisions that could place new and potentially very serious financial burdens on students (especially graduate students), remove important incentives for employees seeking further education, and diminish the funds the university relies on for research, education and financial aid.

    At a time when officials across the political spectrum stress the value of increasing access to higher education and of building US economic strength through innovation, these measures seem counterproductive. For example:

    ·         Impact on students
    The House version of the bill would repeal several current tax provisions that help students afford university education, including eliminating the deduction for interest on student loans. It would also treat tuition reductions for graduate students as taxable income. If this change became law, it could have severe consequences for our nearly 7,000 graduate students, perhaps increasing an individual’s income tax by as much as $10,000 a year.

    In arguing against this provision, we take great inspiration from our graduate student leaders, who are conducting intensive phone-banking to make sure Congress understands that, for a graduate student receiving the average stipend of $37,000, a new tax burden on that scale could be devastating. The university would have to provide further aid to compensate, which would lead to a sharp cut in the size of the student body. This week, our students are working to communicate our position in print, on radio and through social media, making clear what’s at stake for them personally and professionally, and arguing that to discourage advanced education is to squander the kind of talent that could bring the nation new knowledge, innovation and economic growth.

    ·         Impact on faculty and staff
    The House version of the bill would eliminate some current tax provisions that help our employees defray the cost of further education. For example, it would treat tuition waivers for employees and their families as taxable income. Again, a tax that would make higher education more expensive for families is hard to understand. We are also concerned about other provisions that would put a drag on innovation.

    ·         Impact on the university
    Both the House and the Senate versions of the bill would impose a tax on the net investment income generated by the university’s endowment. Our endowment income is a primary source of funds for the work central to our mission: supporting research (including by covering the unreimbursed indirect costs of federal grants) and advancing education, especially by providing the financial aid that keeps a university education affordable to students of modest means, and by pioneering digital pathways to make higher education accessible to all. Taxing endowment earnings will directly reduce our ability to fund our core purpose.

    How is the university taking action?

    Several offices – including our Washington office, the Office of the Vice President for Finance, the Office of the General Counsel and the Chancellor’s office, which is working with the graduate student community – have been collaborating to assess the implications of the bill and to express our concerns strategically in DC. In addition, we are working closely with the Association of American Universities and other university groups, which have been publicly outspoken and very active in building Congressional opposition to these damaging tax proposals.

    What happens next?

    This week, the House will vote on its version of the bill, and the Senate will consider its version in the Senate Finance Committee. A final bill will not be ready for a vote for at least several more weeks.

    In the meantime, we are intently focused on persuading Congress to remove provisions that would derail our students’ education, damage our ability to prepare these exceptionally talented young people, thwart their scientific and technical contributions, and discourage the research and innovation the nation depends on.

    Sincerely,


    Does anyone on here believe that Trump could read this, comprehend it and explain it, whether he agreed with it or not?

    It's clear the the GOP in its current incarnation is anti-education, particularly anti-science. That's not surprising, as more educated voters tend to vote democrat, and a more educated citizenry can better understand the fake news that Trump et al are strewing around. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Yup, lets make higher education less affordable and less able to assist those who create new companies, innovate and are the future of the economy so the 1% can have yet another tax cut and afford to lobby against the future. Those clowns writing legislation don't have a clue, in case you hadn't noticed already.

    To the members of the community:

    The tax legislation now pending in Congress contains several provisions that could have damaging impact on members of our community and the university as a whole.

    Because the situation is complex and fluid, I write to offer our current assessment of which provisions concern us the most and why, and to let you know that we're actively following developments in DC and striving to achieve a better outcome. If you share our concern, you can express your views to Congressional leaders.

    What provisions in the pending tax bills concern us most?

    Congress is considering several provisions that could place new and potentially very serious financial burdens on students (especially graduate students), remove important incentives for employees seeking further education, and diminish the funds the university relies on for research, education and financial aid.

    At a time when officials across the political spectrum stress the value of increasing access to higher education and of building US economic strength through innovation, these measures seem counterproductive. For example:

    ·         Impact on students
    The House version of the bill would repeal several current tax provisions that help students afford university education, including eliminating the deduction for interest on student loans. It would also treat tuition reductions for graduate students as taxable income. If this change became law, it could have severe consequences for our nearly 7,000 graduate students, perhaps increasing an individual’s income tax by as much as $10,000 a year.

    In arguing against this provision, we take great inspiration from our graduate student leaders, who are conducting intensive phone-banking to make sure Congress understands that, for a graduate student receiving the average stipend of $37,000, a new tax burden on that scale could be devastating. The university would have to provide further aid to compensate, which would lead to a sharp cut in the size of the student body. This week, our students are working to communicate our position in print, on radio and through social media, making clear what’s at stake for them personally and professionally, and arguing that to discourage advanced education is to squander the kind of talent that could bring the nation new knowledge, innovation and economic growth.

    ·         Impact on faculty and staff
    The House version of the bill would eliminate some current tax provisions that help our employees defray the cost of further education. For example, it would treat tuition waivers for employees and their families as taxable income. Again, a tax that would make higher education more expensive for families is hard to understand. We are also concerned about other provisions that would put a drag on innovation.

    ·         Impact on the university
    Both the House and the Senate versions of the bill would impose a tax on the net investment income generated by the university’s endowment. Our endowment income is a primary source of funds for the work central to our mission: supporting research (including by covering the unreimbursed indirect costs of federal grants) and advancing education, especially by providing the financial aid that keeps a university education affordable to students of modest means, and by pioneering digital pathways to make higher education accessible to all. Taxing endowment earnings will directly reduce our ability to fund our core purpose.

    How is the university taking action?

    Several offices – including our Washington office, the Office of the Vice President for Finance, the Office of the General Counsel and the Chancellor’s office, which is working with the graduate student community – have been collaborating to assess the implications of the bill and to express our concerns strategically in DC. In addition, we are working closely with the Association of American Universities and other university groups, which have been publicly outspoken and very active in building Congressional opposition to these damaging tax proposals.

    What happens next?

    This week, the House will vote on its version of the bill, and the Senate will consider its version in the Senate Finance Committee. A final bill will not be ready for a vote for at least several more weeks.

    In the meantime, we are intently focused on persuading Congress to remove provisions that would derail our students’ education, damage our ability to prepare these exceptionally talented young people, thwart their scientific and technical contributions, and discourage the research and innovation the nation depends on.

    Sincerely,


    Does anyone on here believe that Trump could read this, comprehend it and explain it, whether he agreed with it or not?

    It's clear the the GOP in its current incarnation is anti-education, particularly anti-science. That's not surprising, as more educated voters tend to vote democrat, and a more educated citizenry can better understand the fake news that Trump et al are strewing around. 
    The dumbing down of the American populace continues.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,113
    Yup, lets make higher education less affordable and less able to assist those who create new companies, innovate and are the future of the economy so the 1% can have yet another tax cut and afford to lobby against the future. Those clowns writing legislation don't have a clue, in case you hadn't noticed already.

    To the members of the community:

    The tax legislation now pending in Congress contains several provisions that could have damaging impact on members of our community and the university as a whole.

    Because the situation is complex and fluid, I write to offer our current assessment of which provisions concern us the most and why, and to let you know that we're actively following developments in DC and striving to achieve a better outcome. If you share our concern, you can express your views to Congressional leaders.

    What provisions in the pending tax bills concern us most?

    Congress is considering several provisions that could place new and potentially very serious financial burdens on students (especially graduate students), remove important incentives for employees seeking further education, and diminish the funds the university relies on for research, education and financial aid.

    At a time when officials across the political spectrum stress the value of increasing access to higher education and of building US economic strength through innovation, these measures seem counterproductive. For example:

    ·         Impact on students
    The House version of the bill would repeal several current tax provisions that help students afford university education, including eliminating the deduction for interest on student loans. It would also treat tuition reductions for graduate students as taxable income. If this change became law, it could have severe consequences for our nearly 7,000 graduate students, perhaps increasing an individual’s income tax by as much as $10,000 a year.

    In arguing against this provision, we take great inspiration from our graduate student leaders, who are conducting intensive phone-banking to make sure Congress understands that, for a graduate student receiving the average stipend of $37,000, a new tax burden on that scale could be devastating. The university would have to provide further aid to compensate, which would lead to a sharp cut in the size of the student body. This week, our students are working to communicate our position in print, on radio and through social media, making clear what’s at stake for them personally and professionally, and arguing that to discourage advanced education is to squander the kind of talent that could bring the nation new knowledge, innovation and economic growth.

    ·         Impact on faculty and staff
    The House version of the bill would eliminate some current tax provisions that help our employees defray the cost of further education. For example, it would treat tuition waivers for employees and their families as taxable income. Again, a tax that would make higher education more expensive for families is hard to understand. We are also concerned about other provisions that would put a drag on innovation.

    ·         Impact on the university
    Both the House and the Senate versions of the bill would impose a tax on the net investment income generated by the university’s endowment. Our endowment income is a primary source of funds for the work central to our mission: supporting research (including by covering the unreimbursed indirect costs of federal grants) and advancing education, especially by providing the financial aid that keeps a university education affordable to students of modest means, and by pioneering digital pathways to make higher education accessible to all. Taxing endowment earnings will directly reduce our ability to fund our core purpose.

    How is the university taking action?

    Several offices – including our Washington office, the Office of the Vice President for Finance, the Office of the General Counsel and the Chancellor’s office, which is working with the graduate student community – have been collaborating to assess the implications of the bill and to express our concerns strategically in DC. In addition, we are working closely with the Association of American Universities and other university groups, which have been publicly outspoken and very active in building Congressional opposition to these damaging tax proposals.

    What happens next?

    This week, the House will vote on its version of the bill, and the Senate will consider its version in the Senate Finance Committee. A final bill will not be ready for a vote for at least several more weeks.

    In the meantime, we are intently focused on persuading Congress to remove provisions that would derail our students’ education, damage our ability to prepare these exceptionally talented young people, thwart their scientific and technical contributions, and discourage the research and innovation the nation depends on.

    Sincerely,


    Does anyone on here believe that Trump could read this, comprehend it and explain it, whether he agreed with it or not?

    It's clear the the GOP in its current incarnation is anti-education, particularly anti-science. That's not surprising, as more educated voters tend to vote democrat, and a more educated citizenry can better understand the fake news that Trump et al are strewing around. 
    The dumbing down of the American populace continues.

    half the population is of below average intelligence

    never underestimate the stupidity of the average american
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 17,068
    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/11/15/gary-cohn-looks-for-assurances-from-ceos-on-tax-plan-gets-crickets.html

    Yeah all those CEO's are really eager to trickle down all of their tax relief cash lol 
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/11/15/gary-cohn-looks-for-assurances-from-ceos-on-tax-plan-gets-crickets.html

    Yeah all those CEO's are really eager to trickle down all of their tax relief cash lol 
    “Because yea, it’s going to save jobs and keep them here in the good ‘ol US of A,” says the guy who used to work for Carrier before his plant moved to Mexico.

    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 17,068
    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/11/15/gary-cohn-looks-for-assurances-from-ceos-on-tax-plan-gets-crickets.html

    Yeah all those CEO's are really eager to trickle down all of their tax relief cash lol 
    “Because yea, it’s going to save jobs and keep them here in the good ‘ol US of A,” says the guy who used to work for Carrier before his plant moved to Mexico.

    What a crock of shite you can tell he could care less about anyone other than millionaires & billionaires fucking thief ...
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • stuckinlinestuckinline Posts: 1,822

    House Republicans Pass Tax Bill

    No one seemed to care that the bill isn’t particularly popular.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-passes-tax-reform_us_5a0dd657e4b0c0b2f2f8afe9?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
Sign In or Register to comment.