Ready to pay more taxes!??

[Modest_anteater]

I️ am saving a lot of money. Still hate it. They are mortgaging our future. Will have to raise taxes just to pay the interest on our deficit alone. If we don’t just default on it like Trump does with his other businesses.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You realize what happens when someone defaults on something? the creditors get it. If we default on the debt Japan and Chinese lent us they will get the worthless asset (AKA the entire United States). Do you really want to have the US owned by another country?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[rxdawg21]

You realize what happens when someone defaults on something? the creditors get it. If we default on the debt Japan and Chinese lent us they will get the worthless asset (AKA the entire United States). Do you really want to have the US owned by another country?

Pretty sure it may work differently when countries are involved in the modern age

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

Pretty sure it may work differently when countries are involved in the modern age

There is a huge possibility of the world going back to the dark ages if the US ever defaults on its debt. US treasuries are supposedly one of the safest investment if not the safest in the world. We were okay with the deficit the last 8 years because interest rates were low. I don't blame Obama because he inherited two wars and the one of the greatest recession ever. But adding to the deficit when the economy is doing so well, when stocks are all all time high, is throwing wood on a fire.

I remembered the two recesssions during the Bush administration. I graduated in 09. A lot of my friends were unemployed. Earnings were bleek. A lot of friends and family member saw their savings vanished overnight, 401k dropping 50%. A lot of my friends who worked in finance where a lot of their compensation and 401k matching was in their employer's stock got cents on the dollars.

Personally I came out okay. I entered when the market was at the lowest and saw my 401k returned 13-14% every year. I was fully employed. I shudder to think what a recession would do to retail this time as many pharmacies in my opinion are in weak standing.

 

[wagrxm2000]

Stock market going up = making more in investments then salary.

This tax reform is awesome.

 

[owlegrad]

I guess all these companies announcing pay raises and bonuses along with significant investments isn't happening?

I honestly cannot gauge the sincerity of this post. Kudos.

 

[owlegrad]

Stock market going up = making more in investments then salary.

This tax reform is awesome.

Until the reckoning. Or maybe this bull market never has to end!

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

You realize what happens when someone defaults on something? the creditors get it. If we default on the debt Japan and Chinese lent us they will get the worthless asset (AKA the entire United States). Do you really want to have the US owned by another country?

No, China does not own our country if we default. Our credit ratings drops and we become the next Greece.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[awval999]

Like it’s ridiculous that highly educated pharmacists don’t understand the difference between the USAs sovereign debt and Greece’s debt in a currency they don’t issue.

The only risk to people holding US debt is inflation. Not default.

 

[lord999]

You realize what happens when someone defaults on something? the creditors get it. If we default on the debt Japan and Chinese lent us they will get the worthless asset (AKA the entire United States). Do you really want to have the US owned by another country?

No, sovereign default simply does not work that way. I'd love to see the Japanese, Chinese, or the EU try to "collect" on their worthless asset against the might and power of the US Military. The US actually has defaulted before on its public debts (1935 being the last one), as has the British, the Germans, and everyone else, although the US has never done a total default like those other examples yet.

The real risk of sovereign debt is that you hold it at the pleasure of the sovereign, which if they default, who the hell are you going to ask to collect? The bailiff or sheriff who is employed by the sovereign? The court system that has a mandate to uphold the sovereign? The only defense that you have in case of default is either military intervention (which you could have done without loaning the party any money in the first place) or denying their access to markets until they pay you first. Problem is with Russia and China, they offer dreams of gold and then screw over dumb people who don't read history. With the banana republics in the Americas, there is a reason why their interbank interests rates are so high.

The other matter is we hold goods that others still want to buy if we default. We are for sale, as well as our weapons, and our agriculture even in cases where we are completely blocked from trading. As for services like ours, well, it'd be like Greece where good luck sourcing any non-US manufactured or ingredient for pharmaceuticals (like most of them).

 

[BidingMyTime]

you are missing an important, little-known piece. We were never eligible for child tax credit in past due to income limit of 110,00 for married. With new plan, income limit is 230,000 for married. Thats an extra $1600 credit (much more valuable than deduction) per child

This is not correct, at couple income levels over $110,000, the child tax credit started to phase out, but these couples would still get a partial tax credit (I think it's around 25% decrease for every $20,000 over the $110,000 income, ie $130,000 would get 75% of the child tax credit.) You might be thinking of the earned income credit for children, which is not available at income levels of $110,000.

Anyway, I had really expected to pay more taxes, but after entering my numbers from last year on the tax calculator posted above, it says I would save almost $4000.00! Wow, I didn't expect that at all. Good for me, but I am concerned about how much debt the US will be taking on to pay for these tax decreases. It doesn't seem like there are any plans to cut spending accordingly.

 

[PharmDminus]

This is not correct, at couple income levels over $110,000, the child tax credit started to phase out, but these couples would still get a partial tax credit (I think it's around 25% decrease for every $20,000 over the $110,000 income, ie $130,000 would get 75% of the child tax credit.) You might be thinking of the earned income credit for children, which is not available at income levels of $110,000.

Anyway, I had really expected to pay more taxes, but after entering my numbers from last year on the tax calculator posted above, it says I would save almost $4000.00! Wow, I didn't expect that at all. Good for me, but I am concerned about how much debt the US will be taking on to pay for these tax decreases. It doesn't seem like there are any plans to cut spending accordingly.

with 1 child the credit would be completely phased out by 130k. I suppose that would change though if you had more than 1 child. thanks for clarifying

 

[PharmDBro2017]

This is not correct, at couple income levels over $110,000, the child tax credit started to phase out, but these couples would still get a partial tax credit (I think it's around 25% decrease for every $20,000 over the $110,000 income, ie $130,000 would get 75% of the child tax credit.) You might be thinking of the earned income credit for children, which is not available at income levels of $110,000.

Anyway, I had really expected to pay more taxes, but after entering my numbers from last year on the tax calculator posted above, it says I would save almost $4000.00! Wow, I didn't expect that at all. Good for me, but I am concerned about how much debt the US will be taking on to pay for these tax decreases. It doesn't seem like there are any plans to cut spending accordingly.

Similar outcome for me, as well. Statistics are saying 8/10 people will get a tax cut though...

Interesting to see so many people whining (on fb) about this tax bill, when it's mostly just because Trump got something passed and they dislike him being our president. At the end of the day, you bring home more money... I guess that upsets some people?

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I'll be better off tax wise by about $180/paycheck. Right into the Vanguard account it will go.

Timing the market will be hard. It's going to go gangbusters at first, but the momentum is going to run out eventually...and when it does, this whole cutting taxes in a boom phase while increasing the debt thing will rear its ugly head and a pretty terrible recession will probably happen. The fed won't be able to do what they did in 2008 to save everyone's asses as effectively. This is a pretty stupid budget plan long term.

 

[gwarm01]

The national debt is a funny thing. Everyone seems to think that China "owns" the US due to its debt holdings, despite the fact that the vast majority of debt is owned by US citizens. Japan owns nearly as much as China, and no one seems to worry about them anymore.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

The national debt is a funny thing. Everyone seems to think that China "owns" the US due to its debt holdings, despite the fact that the vast majority of debt is owned by US citizens. Japan owns nearly as much as China, and no one seems to worry about them anymore.

As a percent of GDP it isn't that bad. But the US Central Bank deploys Keynesian methods to smooth out economic cycles. It's like we are proper Keynsians during recessions...and they say to hell with it and splurge more during the boom times when we should be more conservative with debt. Its the bad part of relatively short terms in office. Nobody wants to be the person that has to be responsible and reasonable and doing the right thing gets kicked down the road.

 

[pezdispenser]

This is not correct, at couple income levels over $110,000, the child tax credit started to phase out, but these couples would still get a partial tax credit (I think it's around 25% decrease for every $20,000 over the $110,000 income, ie $130,000 would get 75% of the child tax credit.) You might be thinking of the earned income credit for children, which is not available at income levels of $110,000.

Anyway, I had really expected to pay more taxes, but after entering my numbers from last year on the tax calculator posted above, it says I would save almost $4000.00! Wow, I didn't expect that at all. Good for me, but I am concerned about how much debt the US will be taking on to pay for these tax decreases. It doesn't seem like there are any plans to cut spending accordingly.

I think the child tax credit is now $2,000 per child under 17 with an income phaseout starting at $400,000. However, everyone loses the $4,050 per person personal exemption, which is made up for by this child tax credit and the increased standard deduction.

 

[GypsyHummus]

You are getting back 180$ per paycheck and still complaining? This overall was a huge (read, Yuge) win for America. The only people who dont win are massive income earners in California and New York because of the state tax deduction.

The momentum wont wear out, this is a new ear for industry and growth for America. Sure there will be cycles of ups and downs, but in aggregate this is a very good thing for people. The biggest win was the lowering of the corporate tax from 35% down to 21%. Now companies can stay here and actually employ people. Imagine the job growth if that percentage was 5 or 0. Who knows, maybe CVS wont cut jobs now.

Next up is spending reform. There has to be a restructuring of entitlement and social programs like medicaid, medicare, and social security.

Trump Has delivered more in his first term than I ever thought possible, and more importantly, he is keeping his promises.

I'll be better off tax wise by about $180/paycheck. Right into the Vanguard account it will go.

Timing the market will be hard. It's going to go gangbusters at first, but the momentum is going to run out eventually...and when it does, this whole cutting taxes in a boom phase while increasing the debt thing will rear its ugly head and a pretty terrible recession will probably happen. The fed won't be able to do what they did in 2008 to save everyone's asses as effectively. This is a pretty stupid budget plan long term.

 

[Old Timer]

You are getting back 180$ per paycheck and still complaining? This overall was a huge (read, Yuge) win for America. The only people who dont win are massive income earners in California and New York because of the state tax deduction.

The momentum wont wear out, this is a new ear for industry and growth for America. Sure there will be cycles of ups and downs, but in aggregate this is a very good thing for people. The biggest win was the lowering of the corporate tax from 35% down to 21%. Now companies can stay here and actually employ people. Imagine the job growth if that percentage was 5 or 0. Who knows, maybe CVS wont cut jobs now.

Next up is spending reform. There has to be a restructuring of entitlement and social programs like medicaid, medicare, and social security.

Trump Has delivered more in his first term than I ever thought possible, and more importantly, he is keeping his promises.

Have you been dipping into the Oxycodone at work or did you fail economics in college?

Come back to this thread in 2-3 years. This money is going to go to the shareholders. Every single company that has spouted off talked about a one time $1,000.00 bonus. No raise, no expansion. I'm not a massive earner and I will at best break even. This is not tax reform, it's a tax cut. It's a tax cut at at a time when we don't need a great deal of stimulation. It adds to the debt for no real advantage. This kind of money would be better spent on rebuilding the entire Interstate Highway System. Replacing every bridge in the country. That would create real jobs that would last years and would be given to people who would spend the money on new cars, bigger houses, furniture for the new houses.

Every situation is different. And tax cuts don't exist in a vacuum. The Kennedy, tax cuts, the Reagan tax cuts, and the Bush tax cuts, all had different effects because other actors affected the economy. Remember Bill Clinton raised taxes and got economic growth. There is no simple taxes go down growth goes up and taxes go up growth goes down correlation.

And as I pointed out earlier, Trump has not delivered on any of his promises, except a tax cut passed. The middle class gets crumbs for a few years , while the wealthy get a 5 course meal in perpetuity.

 

[rxdawg21]

There is a huge possibility of the world going back to the dark ages if the US ever defaults on its debt. US treasuries are supposedly one of the safest investment if not the safest in the world. We were okay with the deficit the last 8 years because interest rates were low. I don't blame Obama because he inherited two wars and the one of the greatest recession ever. But adding to the deficit when the economy is doing so well, when stocks are all all time high, is throwing wood on a fire.

I remembered the two recesssions during the Bush administration. I graduated in 09. A lot of my friends were unemployed. Earnings were bleek. A lot of friends and family member saw their savings vanished overnight, 401k dropping 50%. A lot of my friends who worked in finance where a lot of their compensation and 401k matching was in their employer's stock got cents on the dollars.

Personally I came out okay. I entered when the market was at the lowest and saw my 401k returned 13-14% every year. I was fully employed. I shudder to think what a recession would do to retail this time as many pharmacies in my opinion are in weak standing.

define huge, no one knows what would happen if the US defaulted, my guess is war.

Both W. Bush and Obama contributed quite a lot to the national debt. Both in my opinion were wrong. But lets put the blame where it really lies and that's congress who actually passes budgets/spending bills. And its been controlled by both parties since 2000 and our debt has skyrocketed.

No one wants to make the hard fixes, no one wants to pay more in taxes. Something has to give if we are to pay back the debt. I don't think we will, I hope we can stop adding to it and pay off the interest but who knows. To go from 2 trillion in debt to 20 trillion in < 2 decades is mind blowing.

 

[rxdawg21]

Have you been dipping into the Oxycodone at work or did you fail economics in college?

Come back to this thread in 2-3 years. This money is going to go to the shareholders. Every single company that has spouted off talked about a one time $1,000.00 bonus. No raise, no expansion. I'm not a massive earner and I will at best break even. This is not tax reform, it's a tax cut. It's a tax cut at at a time when we don't need a great deal of stimulation. It adds to the debt for no real advantage. This kind of money would be better spent on rebuilding the entire Interstate Highway System. Replacing every bridge in the country. That would create real jobs that would last years and would be given to people who would spend the money on new cars, bigger houses, furniture for the new houses.

Every situation is different. And tax cuts don't exist in a vacuum. The Kennedy, tax cuts, the Reagan tax cuts, and the Bush tax cuts, all had different effects because other actors affected the economy. Remember Bill Clinton raised taxes and got economic growth. There is no simple taxes go down growth goes up and taxes go up growth goes down correlation.

And as I pointed out earlier, Trump has not delivered on any of his promises, except a tax cut passed. The middle class gets crumbs for a few years , while the wealthy get a 5 course meal in perpetuity.

From quick scanning of articles there are at least two large banks increasing their minimum wage to $15 an hour, another large company is investing 300 million into their workers through bonuses, wage increases, and increased employer paid training (100 million each).

It's not that I agree/disagree with your stance, it's just you are getting the facts wrong on easily verifiable stuff.

And to answer another posters 8 out of 10 get tax cuts, that 20% that is going to see an increase is definitely going to be people with a HUGE amount of write offs/deductions (ie high taxed states). I don't think the repubs care too much as they don't win in California or NY.

 

[GypsyHummus]

Ah yes, the broken window fallacy with infrastructure.

I won’t get into your personal finacincrs and such with the individual tax breaks, but this is nice for the middle and upper middle class people not living in California or New York. Everyone is saving about 2k.

Again, while the individual tax cut is nice, what makes this bill money is the corporate tax cuts. Look at Ireland, they had the biggest corporate taxes and had a horrible economy. Then they lowered their taxes and every company wanted to move there and it’s thriving now. We had the highest

And Trump has delivered on his promises:

He promised to take us out of TPP, which would have decimated America. He did that.

He pulled out out of the Paris climate arrangement, which was essentially just a tax on America that nobody else (read China) had to pay.

He has slowed the North Korea escalation and got China to cooperate with us on sanctions.

He has spurred 3%+ GDP when everyone said he couldn’t do it.

The boarder wall has started. I want it faster but I understand.

Illegal aliens down by I think 30% last time I checked.

Tax cuts. With this he also repealed the individual mandate on Obamacare

Declared Jerusilm the capital of Israeli.

For every regulation put into place, they had to remove 2. It’s extremely good for small business.

And so many other things.

Unemployment is at record lows. For Hispanics, it is the lowest it has ever been. And these are full time jobs. Who knows, the pharmacy world might benefit from this.

It hasn’t all been success, but he has done more than I ever thought possible and he is on track to becoming the best president we have had in the last 100 years.

Have you been dipping into the Oxycodone at work or did you fail economics in college?

Come back to this thread in 2-3 years. This money is going to go to the shareholders. Every single company that has spouted off talked about a one time $1,000.00 bonus. No raise, no expansion. I'm not a massive earner and I will at best break even. This is not tax reform, it's a tax cut. It's a tax cut at at a time when we don't need a great deal of stimulation. It adds to the debt for no real advantage. This kind of money would be better spent on rebuilding the entire Interstate Highway System. Replacing every bridge in the country. That would create real jobs that would last years and would be given to people who would spend the money on new cars, bigger houses, furniture for the new houses.

Every situation is different. And tax cuts don't exist in a vacuum. The Kennedy, tax cuts, the Reagan tax cuts, and the Bush tax cuts, all had different effects because other actors affected the economy. Remember Bill Clinton raised taxes and got economic growth. There is no simple taxes go down growth goes up and taxes go up growth goes down correlation.

And as I pointed out earlier, Trump has not delivered on any of his promises, except a tax cut passed. The middle class gets crumbs for a few years , while the wealthy get a 5 course meal in perpetuity.

 

[CetiAlphaFive]

Have you been dipping into the Oxycodone at work or did you fail economics in college?

This kind of money would be better spent on rebuilding the entire Interstate Highway System. Replacing every bridge in the country. That would create real jobs that would last years and would be given to people who would spend the money on new cars, bigger houses, furniture for the new houses.

.

LOL. Seriously, LOL.

[ ] $1trillion
[ ] Replacing every bridge and highway
[ ] Replacing even half of the county roads in the country


Choose one and only one of the above options.

Are you even serious?
Do you really believe in New Dealonomics?

You have to be joking.

 

[BMBiology]

Let’s keep this thread simple and just discuss taxes.

The $10 k max in state income tax deductions and property tax deduction....Does this also apply to couples who filed jointly?

If you and your spouse are pharmacists and each pays $10 k in state income tax, would it be beneficial to file separately? I have not gone over the numbers and the new brackets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OXYFORALL]

Nice that the tax cut goes to the sector of the economy that needs it most. Corporations and the top 10% of earners have been struggling for years. I'm sure when a Ferrari is purchased that some of the profit will trickle down to the mechanics and lot guys. So here's to the tax cut. Dilly Dilly!!!

 

[OXYFORALL]

Let’s keep this thread simple and just discuss taxes.

The $10 k max in state income tax deductions and property tax deduction....Does this also apply to couples who filed jointly?

If you and your spouse are pharmacists and each pays $10 k in state income tax, would it be beneficial to file separately? I have not gone over the numbers and the new brackets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's 10k total per couple.

 

[GypsyHummus]

A corporation would have shifted taxes to the consumer. All a corporation is, is a price of paper that allows people to do business.

Those fancy fat cats you love to complain about? This tax cut allows the little guy to be an entrepreneur and provide goods and services to people without the backbreaking taxes and regulations that the big corps can deal with. That’s all a big tax on corporations does, it allows the big guys to get away with it because they can pay the taxes and the little guys can’t.

How do people not get this? The people benefitting from this are the people who couldn’t afford to stay in America.

Nice that the tax cut goes to the sector of the economy that needs it most. Corporations and the top 10% of earners have been struggling for years. I'm sure when a Ferrari is purchased that some of the profit will trickle down to the mechanics and lot guys. So here's to the tax cut. Dilly Dilly!!!

 

[WVUPharm2007]

You are getting back 180$ per paycheck and still complaining? This overall was a huge (read, Yuge) win for America. The only people who dont win are massive income earners in California and New York because of the state ...

Yeah, it's like someone telling you that you get free pizza every day for a year. Sounds awesome, but you'll probably die of one of the myriad complications of morbid obesity.

You don't cut taxes in a bull market after a recession where you lowered interest rates to basically zero. The borrowed money needs addressed. You raise taxes, if anything. Or cut spending. These fools are maintaining spending and cutting taxes in a boom market. It's just irresponsible.

 

[OXYFORALL]

A corporation would have shifted taxes to the consumer. All a corporation is, is a price of paper that allows people to do business.

Those fancy fat cats you love to complain about? This tax cut allows the little guy to be an entrepreneur and provide goods and services to people without the backbreaking taxes and regulations that the big corps can deal with. That’s all a big tax on corporations does, it allows the big guys to get away with it because they can pay the taxes and the little guys can’t.

How do people not get this? The people benefitting from this are the people who couldn’t afford to stay in America.

Then why not limit the rate cut to smaller companies that actually need it. Or better yet if you have to have a tax cut give it to the people most likely to spend it and increase growth directly. Instead we are going to increase the net worth of the stock market of which 2/3 is owned by non-americans.

 

[GypsyHummus]

I fail to see how keeping more of the money that you have earned is the equivalent of getting free pizza. That is not an argument.

I agree, we need to freeze spending and then cut it. Bare bones. No more entitlement programs.

Yeah, it's like someone telling you that you get free pizza every day for a year. Sounds awesome, but you'll probably die of one of the myriad complications of morbid obesity.

You don't cut taxes in a bull market after a recession where you lowered interest rates to basically zero. The borrowed money needs addressed. You raise taxes, if anything. Or cut spending. These fools are maintaining spending and cutting taxes in a boom market. It's just irresponsible.

 

[GypsyHummus]

you do know most working people have a 401k that is tied into the stock market?

That’s what trump is doing, he is reapealing regulations so that small businesses can compete. You can do what you are suggesting by signaling out specific “big corps” from competing, but it doesn’t matter because they can buy their way out of regulations and just shift the costs to the consumer and still win. Lowering the regs for everyone is the only way what remains of the free market can help everyone via competition.

Think about it, your a pharmacist who wants to go into business for yourself but can’t compete with CVS. This tax cut and de regulation allows you to finally be able to compete. You start selling drugs at a lower price than CVS, treat your employees better, people will start buying and working for you.

Or, you can keep going the way it’s been going for the past some odds years with increasing regulation. How has that worked out for pharmacists?

Then why not limit the rate cut to smaller companies that actually need it. Or better yet if you have to have a tax cut give it to the people most likely to spend it and increase growth directly. Instead we are going to increase the net worth of the stock market of which 2/3 is owned by non-americans.

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

I fail to see how keeping more of the money that you have earned is the equivalent of getting free pizza. That is not an argument.

I agree, we need to freeze spending and then cut it. Bare bones. No more entitlement programs.

You realize that social security and Medicare are programs you pay into, like your 401k. It’s not a giveaway. Some Medicaid reform is fine but it’s mostly children, elderly, and disabled. You want them to die in the streets?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[pezdispenser]

Let’s keep this thread simple and just discuss taxes.

The $10 k max in state income tax deductions and property tax deduction....Does this also apply to couples who filed jointly?

If you and your spouse are pharmacists and each pays $10 k in state income tax, would it be beneficial to file separately? I have not gone over the numbers and the new brackets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SALT deduction limit
$10,000 single
$10,000 married filing jointly
$5,000 married filing separately

From the bill: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-115hr1eas2/pdf/BILLS-115hr1eas2.pdf

SEC. 11042. LIMITATION ON DEDUCTION FOR STATE AND LOCAL, ETC. TAXES.
(6) LIMITATION ON INDIVIDUAL DEDUCTIONS FOR TAXABLE YEARS 2018 THROUGH 2025.
—In the case of an individual and a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026—
(B) the aggregate amount of taxes taken into account under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) and paragraph (5) of this sub
section for any taxable year shall not exceed $10,000 ($5,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return).

 

[lord999]

I want to point out that the reason that you all have comfortable lives is because health care is most definitely a government supported function. You owe your existence to CMS directly (if you work for the chains or private hospitals), work for the government directly (government hospitals at all levels), or work people with odd handshakes or believe in such odd things (Shriner's, Catholic Health Care). If this was a purely consumer-driven system, there would not be anywhere near the amount of money in the system because no one can afford healthcare. We're part of what government chose as the winners. We are taking the money spent on entitlement programs into feeding our family and buying our nice things. Any entitlement reform would have a much more adverse outcome for healthcare in particular than any tax change.

As for the tax changes, I actually think we should be paying higher taxes to reduce the deficit, particularly for the cost of our long wars. What galls me is that Corker and the other deficit hawks caved into an idea that we are paying for this tax cut with a $500B increase to the deficit, an increase we can ill afford without hyperinflation. If you are wondering why I don't act like the rest of you in terms of being religious about saving money, that's my own belief about the way the economy works. If you had your money at the time Nixon was elected, almost all of that money evaporated away during Nixon's, Carter's, and into Reagan's tenure, wiping out a generation of rich people that was just was fully turned over by the mid 00s. I have my magic numbers ($3M in liquid and more in NW mostly from working from a basis of $680k net income between the two of us, so if we had been as good as Momus, we would have been somewhere around $12-14M NW) already if inflation does not gallop past 6%, but I cannot see that happening unless the cost to fund the petrodollar stabilizes. Why I continue working is that in the few times where there is hyperinflation, it was definitely more important to have means of production than to be passively generating income as all of those capitalists got wiped out.

That's why sovereign risk is so annoying, because it does not matter how good business is without a fundamental government baseline. If we want to be Mexico, that can work, but it does mean that no one is really satisfied with what they can buy (the poor cannot buy anything but have too little to be expropriated, the rich can possibly buy everything but needs nothing and have to be constantly paying against expropriation either by crime or by the government itself). It's why we don't like to talk about what happened to rich people during the New Deal, because a lot of their stuff got expropriated by the Federal Government through both laws meant to redirect resources to military and by currency games that cleaned out anyone who had specie.

 

[OXYFORALL]

you do know most working people have a 401k that is tied into the stock market?

That’s what trump is doing, he is reapealing regulations so that small businesses can compete. You can do what you are suggesting by signaling out specific “big corps” from competing, but it doesn’t matter because they can buy their way out of regulations and just shift the costs to the consumer and still win. Lowering the regs for everyone is the only way what remains of the free market can help everyone via competition.

Think about it, your a pharmacist who wants to go into business for yourself but can’t compete with CVS. This tax cut and de regulation allows you to finally be able to compete. You start selling drugs at a lower price than CVS, treat your employees better, people will start buying and working for you.

Or, you can keep going the way it’s been going for the past some odds years with increasing regulation. How has that worked out for pharmacists?

It's not the regulations that keep an independent from competing with the chains. The fact that a Pharmacy chain can buy a pbm and then direct the customers to the pharmacy they own is a huge problem. And the sheer size always them to buy drugs at a price independents only wish they can get. Cvs has made a boat load of money these past years-How much have they passed on to the techs, Rphs, and cashiers in the way of raises and bonuses. I find it more likely they will put more robots into the stores and have stock buybacks. Maybe some more regulations might help smaller companies compete against these giants who become bigger not by being better but by buying up the competition.

 

[GypsyHummus]

Yes, I understand that SS and Medicare are programs you pay into, but the system is broken. We take out more than can be put in, it is going bankrupt.

There is no money for this stuff. Eventually it will come to a head. At this point it’s just anouther tax, you and I (assuming your not 60) will never see this money.

I don’t understand why people have such a hard time understanding the concept of saving for retirement. I don’t expect people to pay for my medical bills when I get older. That was really the whole point of having kids. But now that people aren’t having as many kids, someone has to bail them out. So they turn to big daddy gov’ment.

No, I don’t want them to die on the streets. Funnily enough, we already have (or had) a system which takes care of the poor, it’s called charity. But that would force you to be nice to people during your heyday years and actually believe in your community and church and volunteer when you’re young rather than voting in a force that takes others money at gunpoint.

You realize that social security and Medicare are programs you pay into, like your 401k. It’s not a giveaway. Some Medicaid reform is fine but it’s mostly children, elderly, and disabled. You want them to die in the streets?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[GypsyHummus]

Less regulations would be better. If you have more regulations, Big companies can just buy their way out of the regulations. That’s why if you reduce regs, people can jump into the system.

It's not the regulations that keep an independent from competing with the chains. The fact that a Pharmacy chain can buy a pbm and then direct the customers to the pharmacy they own is a huge problem. And the sheer size always them to buy drugs at a price independents only wish they can get. Cvs has made a boat load of money these past years-How much have they passed on to the techs, Rphs, and cashiers in the way of raises and bonuses. I find it more likely they will put more robots into the stores and have stock buybacks. Maybe some more regulations might help smaller companies compete against these giants who become bigger not by being better but by buying up the competition.

 

[gwarm01]

It occurred to me that my prosperous professional career has taken place entirely within this massive bull market. I was a student during the great recession, but can recall the company I worked for during college slowly withering away until they were finally forced to shut their doors. I wonder how I would handle living through a recession? If not a recession, then a government that massively slashes funding to Medicare, Medicaid, and essentially guts the ACA. A contraction in the healthcare market might hurt quite a bit for overly abundant professionals such as us.

 

[BMBiology]

SALT deduction limit
$10,000 single
$10,000 married filing jointly
$5,000 married filing separately

From the bill: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-115hr1eas2/pdf/BILLS-115hr1eas2.pdf

This bill is so anti-marriage! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dred Pirate]

Let all the bleeding hearts and SJW's cry about the electric car industry or nonprofits, I only care about what is going to be in my wallet at the end of the day. And with this new tax plan I will be saving a chunk of change. Literally, this new tax plan will benefit everybody who works.

good attitude - screw over our future, our grandchildren, straddle them with debt and a crappy environment because we bowed down and prayed to the alter of fossil fuels

 

[Dred Pirate]

Less regulations would be better. If you have more regulations, Big companies can just buy their way out of the regulations. That’s why if you reduce regs, people can jump into the system.

if we reduce all regulations you will be stuck with 1 or 2 chains employing 95% of all retail pharmacists (although we are almost there already) then they have no competition, reduce salaires because there is no where for us to go. Then you get, guess what, Walgreens freezing salaries.

 

[Dred Pirate]

you do know most working people have a 401k that is tied into the stock market?

That’s what trump is doing, he is reapealing regulations so that small businesses can compete. You can do what you are suggesting by signaling out specific “big corps” from competing, but it doesn’t matter because they can buy their way out of regulations and just shift the costs to the consumer and still win. Lowering the regs for everyone is the only way what remains of the free market can help everyone via competition.

Think about it, your a pharmacist who wants to go into business for yourself but can’t compete with CVS. This tax cut and de regulation allows you to finally be able to compete. You start selling drugs at a lower price than CVS, treat your employees better, people will start buying and working for you.

Or, you can keep going the way it’s been going for the past some odds years with increasing regulation. How has that worked out for pharmacists?

an individual will NEVER be able to compete with CVS (this law, nor any previous laws by either party has helped the little guy compete with CVS). They can and will always be able to buy in bulk cheaper, negotiate with PBM's for better rates (provided they don't already own them). The only thing that will change this at this point is if the government comes in and breaks them up (aka AT&T and the baby bells) and I will give you 100,000,000 to 1 odds that isn't happening anytime with the current administration or 100,000 to 1 with the next administration.

 

[Modest_anteater]

No, sovereign default simply does not work that way. I'd love to see the Japanese, Chinese, or the EU try to "collect" on their worthless asset against the might and power of the US Military. The US actually has defaulted before on its public debts (1935 being the last one), as has the British, the Germans, and everyone else, although the US has never done a total default like those other examples yet.

The real risk of sovereign debt is that you hold it at the pleasure of the sovereign, which if they default, who the hell are you going to ask to collect? The bailiff or sheriff who is employed by the sovereign? The court system that has a mandate to uphold the sovereign? The only defense that you have in case of default is either military intervention (which you could have done without loaning the party any money in the first place) or denying their access to markets until they pay you first. Problem is with Russia and China, they offer dreams of gold and then screw over dumb people who don't read history. With the banana republics in the Americas, there is a reason why their interbank interests rates are so high.

The other matter is we hold goods that others still want to buy if we default. We are for sale, as well as our weapons, and our agriculture even in cases where we are completely blocked from trading. As for services like ours, well, it'd be like Greece where good luck sourcing any non-US manufactured or ingredient for pharmaceuticals (like most of them).

China is using it's creditline to the US as leverage for power to buy up US based companies and assets without US government interference. China has been buying US companys for over a decade and it's only accelerating (ex: "AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. AMC -2.62% agreed to buy Carmike Cinemas Inc. in a cash deal that would make a Chinese-owned company the largest movie-theater operator in the U.S", Chinese buying huge amounts of arable land in the US and other major companies. The US government can't say anything because China is literally it's owner and any nasty words to china could cause China to cut off the funds the US relies on. The US government is so incredibly inept that not only can they recklessly spend what money they get from us in taxes but they CONTINUE to spend in excess even while heavily in debt.

So I guess your right it won't take an outright default for the US to be owned by it's debtors. It's debtors are already secretly buying up all the good parts of the US.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I fail to see how keeping more of the money that you have earned is the equivalent of getting free pizza. That is not an argument.

We aren't paying back the debt we owe. That's what I'm trying to get across. When use Keynesian easing to get through a recession, it needs to be paid forward in the boom times. Go read up on Keynesian economics, kiddo.

 

[Momus]

That's why you don't vote republican to office until you are really rich / a business owner yourself. Trump plays the greatest con in the history. Spend <100M to be president and make it all back in billions with tax cut for himself. Prop to him. A genius.

The only thing to do is to buy even more companies/stocks since they get a massive benefit on this tax cut.

 

[lord999]

China is using it's creditline to the US as leverage for power to buy up US based companies and assets without US government interference. China has been buying US companys for over a decade and it's only accelerating (ex: "AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. AMC -2.62% agreed to buy Carmike Cinemas Inc. in a cash deal that would make a Chinese-owned company the largest movie-theater operator in the U.S", Chinese buying huge amounts of arable land in the US and other major companies. The US government can't say anything because China is literally it's owner and any nasty words to china could cause China to cut off the funds the US relies on. The US government is so incredibly inept that not only can they recklessly spend what money they get from us in taxes but they CONTINUE to spend in excess even while heavily in debt.

So I guess your right it won't take an outright default for the US to be owned by it's debtors. It's debtors are already secretly buying up all the good parts of the US.

Matsumoto Masahiro: "Perhaps you should think less of yourself and more of your group, try to work like in Japanese. I grew up with your soldiers; you were wise then. Now - music and movies are all America is good for. We make the machines, we build the future, we won the peace.

Nick Conklin: "And if there was ONE of you guys who had an original idea, you'd be so tight that you couldn't even pull it out of your ass!"

Well, that'll work as long as the Chinese can keep playing the balancing act. I'm skeptical even in the medium term due to Japan's experience where they had actually owned even more than China at one point, then took on massive levels of public debt to support the buys (the Chinese are doing so as well), but what always happens is that there is a shock to the system that forces an examination of trade relations. Can the Chinese do without us, or can we do without the Chinese? I can tell you from work I do with the Department of State that most Chinese in the red phone range hedge their bets and have major assets in the US for them to economically defect like the Russians did to the UK. Now, is the UK any better than the Russia? No, absolutely not in power terms, but the UK sure beats Russia in terms of lifestyle and the wealth sent to London survived the purges and defaults of that country.

With China, the major problems they have are whether or not their public accountancy discipline is enough to offset the waste from the GOCs and the endemic corruption of state enterprise before their demography catches up with them. With the US, the major problems are limited opportunities for productivity growth (we have developed infrastructure, we have people who actually work, and we are enthusiastic about economizing labor and costs such that there are very few opportunities for major gains), control fraud at multiple levels of the corporation, and a not insignificant portion of the populace that that can be recruited for insurrection and work within the black economy (illicit drug operations, unemployed veterans, smuggling networks).

We went through this with Germany and we went through this with Japan. In both cases, it's not worked out for either party. I doubt the Chinese have the longitudinal discipline to make it work before their short-term crushes them. I really don't care either way though, because the real economy is based on military projection, agricultural production (we are the premier produces of edible food), and transnational company economic colonization (encompassing both technology and specialist design and manufacturing).

We face no credible military threat outside of asymmetric suicidal warfare, our economy is an autarky when being cutoff from trade would hurt catastrophically but not fatally (but I am certain that it would be fatal to China at this stage), and American culture is what is forcing other cultures to take protection measures or go extinct. America's worst enemy is definitely itself when it comes to power projection and economic matters. More so than any other nation, we are the prime movers and most of the time, our problems are self-inflicted by our divided desires. But most of all, I trust the United States Government to be absolutely ruthless when it needs to be, more so than our European counterparts. When we talk policy about what we do with the opioid addicts, yes, sure, we are committing funds, but we are not dealing with the underlying problem. That is because if those people "take care of themselves", then there is not a problem. It is that type of effectiveness policy hypocrisy that the US has no real equivalent, the ability to believe in its own propaganda while committing its most selfish acts in its role as the international Great Satan. Because everywhere in the world I go, I see America in every KFC, McDonald's, movies (as in the above quote), every university that has an exchange scholar from an official program like Fulbright or unofficially through NGOs, and in every piece of major industrial concern and international commercial venture either as its main benefactor or most problematic competitor. No other country, not even the UK at its imperial peak, ever projected that kind of soft but omnipresent supremacy that the Americans do unconsciously every day.

 

[GypsyHummus]

Yes, I know all about the Keynes mentality. not a good one. he had a very "spend now worry later" mentality. Thats how credit card debt works.

We aren't paying back the debt we owe. That's what I'm trying to get across. When use Keynesian easing to get through a recession, it needs to be paid forward in the boom times. Go read up on Keynesian economics, kiddo.

 

[wagrxm2000]

Ah yes, the broken window fallacy with infrastructure.

I won’t get into your personal finacincrs and such with the individual tax breaks, but this is nice for the middle and upper middle class people not living in California or New York. Everyone is saving about 2k.

Again, while the individual tax cut is nice, what makes this bill money is the corporate tax cuts. Look at Ireland, they had the biggest corporate taxes and had a horrible economy. Then they lowered their taxes and every company wanted to move there and it’s thriving now. We had the highest

And Trump has delivered on his promises:

He promised to take us out of TPP, which would have decimated America. He did that.

He pulled out out of the Paris climate arrangement, which was essentially just a tax on America that nobody else (read China) had to pay.

He has slowed the North Korea escalation and got China to cooperate with us on sanctions.

He has spurred 3%+ GDP when everyone said he couldn’t do it.

The boarder wall has started. I want it faster but I understand.

Illegal aliens down by I think 30% last time I checked.

Tax cuts. With this he also repealed the individual mandate on Obamacare

Declared Jerusilm the capital of Israeli.

For every regulation put into place, they had to remove 2. It’s extremely good for small business.

And so many other things.

Unemployment is at record lows. For Hispanics, it is the lowest it has ever been. And these are full time jobs. Who knows, the pharmacy world might benefit from this.

It hasn’t all been success, but he has done more than I ever thought possible and he is on track to becoming the best president we have had in the last 100 years.

It's so refreshing to read comments from someone that actually knows what they are talking about.

Thank you

 

[Old Timer]

My very favorite thing. The Trump Supporter completely devoid of understanding how the world really works. Like Trump you think tactically and not strategically. Combine that with total allergy to facts or twist facts to suit your tactical agenda.

He promised to take us out of TPP, which would have decimated America. He did that.

Just what a ***** with 0-10% understanding of the world would do. TPP was really an amazing thing. Here is the USA acting as a Pacific Power in China's back yard making a trade deal with Asian nations that excluded China. Strategically this pact would have been to the detriment of China. Bringing almost all of Asia into a trade alliance with the USA making them less dependent on China than us. If you think tactically about small trade imbalances instead of strategically about how best to project economic power in China's back yard you would oppose TPP

He pulled out out of the Paris climate arrangement, which was essentially just a tax on America that nobody else (read China) had to pay.

You will tell me exactly how thumbing your nose at the rest of the western world when you could voluntarily opt out of any part of the accord you dislike is anything other than a tactical vs a strategic idea.

He has slowed the North Korea escalation and got China to cooperate with us on sanctions.

No, he has actually made the situation worse by thinking tactically instead of strategically. China is in a delicate balance. They do not want the NK state to go away as they don't want US troops that close to their border. They will only go so far. I don't know what the answer is personally. But I do know that threatening them makes them move faster than ever before to get a nuke to deter us. They are moving way faster now than before.

He has spurred 3%+ GDP when everyone said he couldn’t do it.

If you look at a chart of economic growth from 2008 until now you see a steady upward glide. There was no acceleration since Trump became president

IThe boarder wall has started. I want it faster but I understand.

Illegal aliens down by I think 30% last time I checked.

The only way we have growth at this point is via immigration. White people just aint making enough babies. Next all of us are descendants of immigrants. If you look at Peter Bergin's book The United States of Jihad, almost 100% of the terrorist attacks are people who were radicalized well after they were here. They did not come as terrorists and hid out for a while like sleeper cells.

Tax cuts. With this he also repealed the individual mandate on Obamacare

More tactical thinking. The tax cuts are nothing compared to what Reagan did. Reagan was s strategic thinker. There is no way he would try to do this without getting the support of the other side. Taking apart Obamacare in such a jack-assed way only takes people off of health insurance and makes other people's insurance go up. He has no strategic plan to replace Obamacare and never did. Remember what he said as a candidate and what he proposed. Sames as taxes candidate Trump and President Trump are not the same person

Declared Jerusilm the capital of Israeli.

This may be the single dumbest thing he has done in the first year. Everybody knows how this story ends. This is what every Israeli Government wants. He gave it away for free. That's what a deal maker does. Gives his best bargaining chip away for free. For friggin free.......

Donald Trump will go down as with out a doubt the worst President in the history of the country. That's because he only thinks tactically, not strategically. He has no strategy, except winning, which you can't do without a strategy. That's why he has the lowest public opinion support of any President in the history of polling. Reagan was better than him and the main stream media hated him just as much and there was no Fox News or right wing talk media to prop him up like Trump has.

As for taxes, it's the worst choice at wrong time. Will do more harm than good over the long term. If you want to stimulate the economy give the tax break to those who will spend it and that's the lower economic classes. Mark my words. one year from now CVS, who will get a huge break since they have no over seas income to speak of, will take this money and keep most of it. They will not increase salaries substantially. They will use it to pay down debt, buy back shares, and for M&A activity. Whether you like CVS or not Larry Merlo's sole job is increase share holder wealth. That is is fiduciary responsibility. That's what CEO's will do. They may leave a few crumbs for the workers, but the value goes to the share holders.....

 

[Momus]

Ah yes, the broken window fallacy with infrastructure.

I won’t get into your personal finacincrs and such with the individual tax breaks, but this is nice for the middle and upper middle class people not living in California or New York. Everyone is saving about 2k.

Again, while the individual tax cut is nice, what makes this bill money is the corporate tax cuts. Look at Ireland, they had the biggest corporate taxes and had a horrible economy. Then they lowered their taxes and every company wanted to move there and it’s thriving now. We had the highest

And Trump has delivered on his promises:

He promised to take us out of TPP, which would have decimated America. He did that.

He pulled out out of the Paris climate arrangement, which was essentially just a tax on America that nobody else (read China) had to pay.

He has slowed the North Korea escalation and got China to cooperate with us on sanctions.

He has spurred 3%+ GDP when everyone said he couldn’t do it.

The boarder wall has started. I want it faster but I understand.

Illegal aliens down by I think 30% last time I checked.

Tax cuts. With this he also repealed the individual mandate on Obamacare

Declared Jerusilm the capital of Israeli.

For every regulation put into place, they had to remove 2. It’s extremely good for small business.

And so many other things.

Unemployment is at record lows. For Hispanics, it is the lowest it has ever been. And these are full time jobs. Who knows, the pharmacy world might benefit from this.

It hasn’t all been success, but he has done more than I ever thought possible and he is on track to becoming the best president we have had in the last 100 years.

This is what he has done so far. A whole lots of nothing. Don't get me wrong, he made me money due to tax cuts for businesses and I support that. Every changes he made makes it worse for middle income families like YOU. He came after Obama brought down unemployment from 9% to 4%, he just took credit on what Obama has done. Hurrah.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

Yes, I know all about the Keynes mentality. not a good one. he had a very "spend now worry later" mentality. Thats how credit card debt works.

Not quite, it's much more complex than that. You can't compare personal finance with a living economy. If everyone cuts spending, there is no economy. It has to be a careful ballet.

But whether you like it or not, that's how they Fed has been presiding over the economy since Nixon, and you can't do what the Republicans are doing right now and expect it to end well.