Has anyone asked Trump what’s in the bill? I’ll bet he can’t articulate and explain three major features of either the senate or house bill.
The only way he'd be able to name 3 features would be if those features directly benefited him personally and he lobbied for them. I don't think there should be any tax reform legislation passed until Trump releases his returns so we can see how the reforms would directly affect him.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Ok, so junior may not be able to afford college, but companies that manage private jets will get a tax break. Got it.
The latest version of the Senate Republican tax reform bill includes a break for companies that manage private jets.
A measure in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would lower taxes on some of the payments made by owners of private aircraft to management companies that help maintain, store and staff those planes for owners.
The language would exempt owners or leasers of private aircraft from paying taxes on certain costs related to the upkeep and maintenance of the jets, according to a description from the Joint Committee on Taxation.
"Applicable services include support activities related to the aircraft itself, such as its storage, maintenance, and fueling, and those related to its operation, such as the hiring and training of pilots and crew, as well as administrative services such as scheduling, flight planning, weather forecasting, obtaining insurance, and establishing and complying with safety standards," it says.
The measure is attracting attention following recent controversies involving Cabinet officials' use of private jets.
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price resigned in September after it was discovered he spent more than $1 million on private and military flights at taxpayer expense.
A recent probe by the inspector general for the Department of the Interior also found that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke did not properly document his own privately chartered flights across the country, and that it is unclear whether his wife paid for her travel on the agency's flights.
Trump repeatedly claimed during the campaign that the federal government was understating the real unemployment rate.
"Don't believe these phony numbers," Trump told supporters early last year. "The number is probably 28, 29, as high as 35 [percent]. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent."
Trump's nominee for treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, echoed that sentiment during his confirmation hearing.
"The unemployment rate is not real," Mnuchin told the Senate Finance Committee. "I've traveled for the last year. I've seen this."
This is my argument. There are 6MM unfilled jobs in this country, mostly because we can't find qualified workers. The whole concept that this will create jobs is ludicrous. The second argument that employers will increase wages is ludicrous as well. Those people have never worked in a big org or are intentionally lying. Yes, end of year bonuses or merit may fatten up by a couple of basis points, but the vast majority will go to shareholders or PE owners. That core mentality is completely ingrained in the business community. $ goes up, not down.
This is my argument. There are 6MM unfilled jobs in this country, mostly because we can't find qualified workers. The whole concept that this will create jobs is ludicrous. The second argument that employers will increase wages is ludicrous as well. Those people have never worked in a big org or are intentionally lying. Yes, end of year bonuses or merit may fatten up by a couple of basis points, but the vast majority will go to shareholders or PE owners. That core mentality is completely ingrained in the business community. $ goes up, not down.
And the middle class gets it up the ass again. Anyone with kids approaching college age should be very concerned. What they want to do to higher education is criminal.
Eliminating the mandate is the only sliver of hope in this tax bill for me personally. Our insurance this year is going to be 750$ a month for a 13,000$ deductible. If I can opt out, I will.
I understand all that in principle, but the mandate had zero effect on lowering or even stabilizing the rapidly increasing costs. It grew exponentially before the mandate, it grew exponentially after the mandate, and it will continue to do so whether the mandate stays or goes.
I understand all that in principle, but the mandate had zero effect on lowering or even stabilizing the rapidly increasing costs. It grew exponentially before the mandate, it grew exponentially after the mandate, and it will continue to do so whether the mandate stays or goes.
I know. The mandate does nothing to control costs. I’m just saying costs should go up without it two fold: fewer people are paying money to insurance companies, and they end up paying more out. I suppose the companies will work toward being able to bounce people with pre-existing conditions, which I think is one of the criteria for making us great again.
Why can't we just do the only thing that makes sense and implement single payer.
We’re getting close to the tipping point and consensus as far as the public is concerned. The next level of resistance will be from all the people who have been making big cash and riding the gravy train for a long time.
Why can't we just do the only thing that makes sense and implement single payer.
We’re getting close to the tipping point and consensus as far as the public is concerned. The next level of resistance will be from all the people who have been making big cash and riding the gravy train for a long time.
Why can't we just do the only thing that makes sense and implement single payer.
We’re getting close to the tipping point and consensus as far as the public is concerned. The next level of resistance will be from all the people who have been making big cash and riding the gravy train for a long time.
Why can't we just do the only thing that makes sense and implement single payer.
We’re getting close to the tipping point and consensus as far as the public is concerned. The next level of resistance will be from all the people who have been making big cash and riding the gravy train for a long time.
Why can't we just do the only thing that makes sense and implement single payer.
We’re getting close to the tipping point and consensus as far as the public is concerned. The next level of resistance will be from all the people who have been making big cash and riding the gravy train for a long time.
Using the data from the TPC’s analysis, I’ve created two charts that boil down the story of the Senate tax bill. The first chart details the average tax change for each major income group, by year, if the Senate plan becomes law, in dollars:
This shows that in certain respects, the plan actually gets more regressive over time. The tax cuts for the four lower-income quintiles basically shrivel up and disappear by 2027, with the two lowest quintiles ultimately seeing either a tax hike or no change, while the middle and fourth see the tax cut dwindle away to almost nothing. By contrast, in 2027, the top one percent sees an average tax cut of more than $30,000, and the top 0.1 percent sees an average tax cut of more than $200,000 — more than double what it was in 2019, and a good deal more than it was in 2025.
Because of all these complexities, some people in every income group see a tax hike at each juncture, and some people in every one of them see a tax cut. That’s all reflected in the averages in the chart above, which in the short term tilt toward a cut for all groups. But come 2027, most of the benefits for lower- and middle-income taxpayers vanish, even as the corporate tax cuts continue delivering a massive reduction to the top:
This, too, shows that the plan gets more regressive over time. Large majorities of the middle three quintiles see tax hikes in 2027. Meanwhile, virtually all the people in the top 1 percent and top 0.1 percent see a tax cut. Taken all together, 50 percent of overall taxpaying units see a tax hike; the vast majority of those people are concentrated in the lower quintiles.
@Halifax2TheMax I'm pretty sure the tax cuts for consumers are sunsetting whereas the corp tax cuts are permanent. I'm sure that's in one of the two plans. Even though my quintile shows a break for me, I can assure you my taxes are going up. And that's probably the case for my neighbors too. I'm shocked (not shocked) that my idiot congressman Dave Brat is voting for it. He's actually a bigger a-hole than my previous rep, Eric Cantor.
@Halifax2TheMax I'm pretty sure the tax cuts for consumers are sunsetting whereas the corp tax cuts are permanent. I'm sure that's in one of the two plans. Even though my quintile shows a break for me, I can assure you my taxes are going up. And that's probably the case for my neighbors too. I'm shocked (not shocked) that my idiot congressman Dave Brat is voting for it. He's actually a bigger a-hole than my previous rep, Eric Cantor.
Brilliant, isn't it, in its brilliancy? The real brilliancy is in the fact that the average Trump voter can't see past next week, never mind 2027 (hell, I might be dead by then). And what you posit is true. Only a very select few see the benefits immediately and beyond 2027. And for what? Where are all of those deficit hawks? Yea right, a RINO is in office.
Senate GOP tax bill hurts the poor more than originally thought, CBO finds By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.
Senate GOP tax bill hurts the poor more than originally thought, CBO finds By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.
What a shocker.
But the lower income Trump voters won't pay attention to this, and the higher income Trump voters will be pleased with it, so it's win-win for him.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
As the GOP tax bills make their way through each side of Congress, it is clear that there are large give-aways to corporations and the rich at your expense. Republican operatives assure us that tax cuts for these entities will bring prosperity, despite the fact that corporations already have record amounts of cash on hand. They tell you that while a company might have $10B in loose change and hire no one, another billion will inspire them to take on more employees. Wall Street is excited because they know this is not true... the investor class will benefit, not you.
I have voted to pay more in taxes to educate your children, to fix the broken infrastructure we all share, and to do the things that only government can do, like the sort of big science that is required to reverse the effects of climate change. But, you "won". So, the world you leave your children will become more and more unlivable every day. The infrastructure upon which we rely will continue to crumble around us. Your upbringing, which enables you to carry a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance while ignoring the urge to resolve it, will be inflicted upon your descendants. Without a proper education they, like you, will be all but incapable of critical thought and so be ripe for exploitation by the same sort of people exploiting you, now.
In the meantime, you have voted to send your tax dollars more-or-less directly to my investments. Despite what you have been told, those dollars have not made me a job-creator. The money you have sent to me has been added to what I already had to the point that my money makes me more money than my work does, and my work is well-paid. Also, thanks to you, my money is taxed at a lower rate than my or your hard work.
So, the rich will become richer. You will become poorer. Your politicians will provide you with scapegoats, like immigrants, to blame for the results. They will distract you with culture wars and actual wars. All the while, your "I got mine" philosophy will ensure you have less and less over time. I am truly sorry for you.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
College administrators worry about funding under new tax plan
The latest version of the Senate Republican tax reform bill includes a break for companies that manage private jets.
A measure in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would lower taxes on some of the payments made by owners of private aircraft to management companies that help maintain, store and staff those planes for owners.
The language would exempt owners or leasers of private aircraft from paying taxes on certain costs related to the upkeep and maintenance of the jets, according to a description from the Joint Committee on Taxation.
"Applicable services include support activities related to the aircraft itself, such as its storage, maintenance, and fueling, and those related to its operation, such as the hiring and training of pilots and crew, as well as administrative services such as scheduling, flight planning, weather forecasting, obtaining insurance, and establishing and complying with safety standards," it says.
The measure is attracting attention following recent controversies involving Cabinet officials' use of private jets.
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price resigned in September after it was discovered he spent more than $1 million on private and military flights at taxpayer expense.
A recent probe by the inspector general for the Department of the Interior also found that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke did not properly document his own privately chartered flights across the country, and that it is unclear whether his wife paid for her travel on the agency's flights.
4 Republican Senators in Private Talks That Could Kill Current Tax Reform Bill - TIME https://apple.news/AtZyNrKM5SO-9sAV7ctndtg
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Trump repeatedly claimed during the campaign that the federal government was understating the real unemployment rate.
"Don't believe these phony numbers," Trump told supporters early last year. "The number is probably 28, 29, as high as 35 [percent]. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent."
Trump's nominee for treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, echoed that sentiment during his confirmation hearing.
A party without a soul.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Our insurance this year is going to be 750$ a month for a 13,000$ deductible.
If I can opt out, I will.
It grew exponentially before the mandate, it grew exponentially after the mandate, and it will continue to do so whether the mandate stays or goes.
Using the data from the TPC’s analysis, I’ve created two charts that boil down the story of the Senate tax bill. The first chart details the average tax change for each major income group, by year, if the Senate plan becomes law, in dollars:
This shows that in certain respects, the plan actually gets more regressive over time. The tax cuts for the four lower-income quintiles basically shrivel up and disappear by 2027, with the two lowest quintiles ultimately seeing either a tax hike or no change, while the middle and fourth see the tax cut dwindle away to almost nothing. By contrast, in 2027, the top one percent sees an average tax cut of more than $30,000, and the top 0.1 percent sees an average tax cut of more than $200,000 — more than double what it was in 2019, and a good deal more than it was in 2025.
Because of all these complexities, some people in every income group see a tax hike at each juncture, and some people in every one of them see a tax cut. That’s all reflected in the averages in the chart above, which in the short term tilt toward a cut for all groups. But come 2027, most of the benefits for lower- and middle-income taxpayers vanish, even as the corporate tax cuts continue delivering a massive reduction to the top:
This, too, shows that the plan gets more regressive over time. Large majorities of the middle three quintiles see tax hikes in 2027. Meanwhile, virtually all the people in the top 1 percent and top 0.1 percent see a tax cut. Taken all together, 50 percent of overall taxpaying units see a tax hike; the vast majority of those people are concentrated in the lower quintiles.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/11/21/the-trump-tax-plan-is-much-worse-than-you-thought-a-new-analysis-confirms-it/?undefined=&utm_term=.d5e4126b4b4c&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.
What a shocker.
But the lower income Trump voters won't pay attention to this, and the higher income Trump voters will be pleased with it, so it's win-win for him.
As the GOP tax bills make their way through each side of Congress, it is clear that there are large give-aways to corporations and the rich at your expense. Republican operatives assure us that tax cuts for these entities will bring prosperity, despite the fact that corporations already have record amounts of cash on hand. They tell you that while a company might have $10B in loose change and hire no one, another billion will inspire them to take on more employees. Wall Street is excited because they know this is not true... the investor class will benefit, not you.
I have voted to pay more in taxes to educate your children, to fix the broken infrastructure we all share, and to do the things that only government can do, like the sort of big science that is required to reverse the effects of climate change. But, you "won". So, the world you leave your children will become more and more unlivable every day. The infrastructure upon which we rely will continue to crumble around us. Your upbringing, which enables you to carry a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance while ignoring the urge to resolve it, will be inflicted upon your descendants. Without a proper education they, like you, will be all but incapable of critical thought and so be ripe for exploitation by the same sort of people exploiting you, now.
In the meantime, you have voted to send your tax dollars more-or-less directly to my investments. Despite what you have been told, those dollars have not made me a job-creator. The money you have sent to me has been added to what I already had to the point that my money makes me more money than my work does, and my work is well-paid. Also, thanks to you, my money is taxed at a lower rate than my or your hard work.
So, the rich will become richer. You will become poorer. Your politicians will provide you with scapegoats, like immigrants, to blame for the results. They will distract you with culture wars and actual wars. All the while, your "I got mine" philosophy will ensure you have less and less over time. I am truly sorry for you.
/Not borrowed
/Stolen with pride