Ready to pay more taxes!??

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
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.

Ben Bernanke gets no love.

Members don't see this ad.
 
The big losers:
- live in a state with income tax (CA)
- new homeowners with a big mortgage (CA)
- homeowners with a huge property tax (CA)
- family with a lot of kids
- single mom/dad with kids

The majority of pharmacists will see their taxes go up.

Here are the winners and losers in the GOP tax plan

Tired of winning yet?

Previously the state income tax could be deducted from federal. So effectively the whole country was subsidizing high tax states because people living in these states were not actually paying more than anyone else. So I'm not complaining.

Same thing with property tax and dependents. Why should a single person who rents have to subsidize a family who buys a home? These deductions only existed to encourage people to have children and own a house. While I agree that these are good things for the country, I don't think it's the governments job to reward and penalize certain behaviors; it's not freedom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I would be in favor of this tax bill if we got equal or more of a tax cut than corporates.

This tax bill is paid for by us and future generations to give CVS a tax break. It makes no sense. Trickle down economy never works. Companies were making record profits during the last few years. They don't need a tax cut. They run on the basis of being as efficient as possible. The idea that CVS will give pharmacists and tech more raises than what is necessary to keep them, or hire more workers than what they can get away with shows that these guys have no understanding of economics....

The entire purpose of this tax bill is to prevent companies and jobs from leaving the USA. Did you not watch a single Trump speech? It's not about who "needs" a tax cut, it's about keeping innovation, jobs, and future growth in the USA. It doesn't matter if a company needs the tax cut or not, if they can pay lower taxes somewhere else then they will.

Even if trickle down economics doesn't work at all, these companies will still be contributing to our GDP, paying taxes to the USA, and hiring Americans. And American workers working the USA pay USA income tax. A Mexican working for Ford in Mexico pays no income tax to the USA.

Would you rather:
a) Make $100,000/year and have a neighbor who makes $500,000/year
b) Make $50,000/year and have a neighbor who make $80,000/year

In choice (a) there is more money in the total economy, and you as an individual also make more. But in choice (b) there is less income inequality!!!!!!! YAYYY

P.S. AT&T just handed a bonus check to 200,000 employees as a result of tax cuts, the trickling has already begun
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
It's not the governments job to decide who "needs" what. You can live off of 40k, so do you "need" 120k? Just because you don't need it, is the government entitled to it? That's called tyranny
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Dude, Time magazine is bias. The whole media is bias against him, save two news anchors on Fox News. When the whole media hates you, you know you are doing something right. He is an existential threat to the swamp.

And that Obama unemployment statistic is so baked. First, it doesn’t include people who gave up looking for employment because of the horrible economy. So you have less unemployment there. Next, it counted jobs in total, so you had people who had full time work get laid off, and then had to take up 2-3 part time jobs. Yay, more jobs!

And my folks are middle class and work really hard for their money. They are going to save about 2k with this tax bill.

So, people can be doubting Davids all they want, but Trump has done the most and delivered on the most promises of any president I can ever remember. He is going to win realection if he keeps winning like this.

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.
 
If Trump keeps going like this, he might audit and end the fed. That would also be a huge win for people.

What they need to do now is massively cut spending. If they do that, they can hopefully grow enough of the economy to at least pay on debt.

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.
 
If Trump keeps going like this, he might audit and end the fed. That would also be a huge win for people.

What they need to do now is massively cut spending. If they do that, they can hopefully grow enough of the economy to at least pay on debt.

What? This makes no sense.. but please explain your thought.. for comedy more than anything else
 
“TPP is actually an amazing thing”

Uh, it would have given all of our authority, sovereignty, and bargaining power away. It was so unpopular that even the muppet Bernie Sanders opposed it. It was widely known to be a horrible agreement.

Paris climate was just anouther tax, while other countries are exempt, many which use more Carbon dioxide than us. Bravo on Trump for pulling Americans out of that.

And who knows if there isn’t more going behind the scenes. Trump is playing 4D chess right now and out maneuvering everyone, spinning circles around them.

Hopefully you’ll come around. Stay away from mainstream media and you’ll start to see, people are feeling a lot better. And before you site “hiz mainstream media approval ratings r lowe”, those are baked too, just like the election result polls.


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.

GDP never hit as high as it has under Obama.

i have a feeling now that there is a future for the country, more people ie ones who actually pay taxes, might start having children now.

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


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.



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.



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



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.



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

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.....
 
If Trump keeps going like this, he might audit and end the fed. That would also be a huge win for people.

Then the economy would become massively volatile and would be unable to recover in situations like 2008. That you think eliminating the central bank is a good idea goes a long way to show how much of a neophyte you are in this sort of thing.

What they need to do now is massively cut spending. If they do that, they can hopefully grow enough of the economy to at least pay on debt.

If they did that, the economy would tank rather quickly. They know this. That's why they aren't doing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I don’t understand why you think we need a centralized private bank that artificially lowers and raises intrest rates while making a profit. The US economy worked just fine without it before.

And I would imagine it would tank the economy. Similar to how if a drug junkie’s supplier ended up getting arrested, the junkie wouldn’t get his fix and would go through withdrawal. But in the long run it’s good for that person.


Then the economy would become massively volatile and would be unable to recover in situations like 2008. That you think eliminating the central bank is a good idea goes a long way to show how much of a neophyte you are in this sort of thing.



If they did that, the economy would tank rather quickly. They know this. That's why they aren't doing it.
 
I don’t understand why you think we need a centralized private bank that artificially lowers and raises intrest rates while making a profit. The US economy worked just fine without it before.

And I would imagine it would tank the economy. Similar to how if a drug junkie’s supplier ended up getting arrested, the junkie wouldn’t get his fix and would go through withdrawal. But in the long run it’s good for that person.

You are triggering so many people, watch out.

:corny:
 
I don’t understand why you think we need a centralized private bank that artificially lowers and raises intrest rates while making a profit. The US economy worked just fine without it before.

And I would imagine it would tank the economy. Similar to how if a drug junkie’s supplier ended up getting arrested, the junkie wouldn’t get his fix and would go through withdrawal. But in the long run it’s good for that person.

Yeah. The vast (vaaaast) majority of the central banks profits are refunded back to the treasury. It's like 98% or something. The US economy most certainly did not work fine before it. Volatility was markedly worse.

Stop reading whatever website it is that has you believing this nonsense.
 
I don’t understand why you think we need a centralized private bank that artificially lowers and raises intrest rates while making a profit. The US economy worked just fine without it before.

And I would imagine it would tank the economy. Similar to how if a drug junkie’s supplier ended up getting arrested, the junkie wouldn’t get his fix and would go through withdrawal. But in the long run it’s good for that person.

Educate yourself before posting something silly - read up on history of federal reserve act of 1913 and the issues leading up to its creation.. also look up difference between fiscal and monetary policy and Fed's role.. happy reading neophyte
 
Members don't see this ad :)
You are triggering so many people, watch out.

:corny:

Dude, he doesn't know WTF he's talking about and clearly you don't either. This is the typical "look at me, I'm in my 20s and read a bunch of nonsense on a ****** libertarian website that I'm regurgitating on a web forum" silliness you see all the time that I get to roll my eyes at.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I don't know anything about TPP, but people in my Facebook feed are complaining that Trump really didn't kill TPP, he is just burying the provisions of it in other bills, so it's going to be passed without people knowing it's going to be passed.
 
Dude, he doesn't know WTF he's talking about and clearly you don't either. This is the typical "look at me, I'm in my 20s and read a bunch of nonsense on a ****** libertarian website that I'm regurgitating on a web forum" silliness you see all the time that I get to roll my eyes at.

Don't mind me I'm just being entertained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree that these are good things for the country, I don't think it's the governments job to reward and penalize certain behaviors; it's not freedom.

To a large extent, that is exactly the government's job. It also hits on why most people don't really like government, but most people also recognize it's the price we pay for living in a civilized society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
And I would imagine it would tank the economy. Similar to how if a drug junkie’s supplier ended up getting arrested, the junkie wouldn’t get his fix and would go through withdrawal. But in the long run it’s good for that person.

Unless, of course, they die from starvation after the economy tanks. Or in the case of your analogy, they die as a result of status epilepticus before they get a chance to recover from withdrawal. Maybe not so good for that person in the long run.

Also, I'm not so sure being addicted to things like not having rat feces mixed up with my breakfast cereal is such a bad thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Previously the state income tax could be deducted from federal. So effectively the whole country was subsidizing high tax states because people living in these states were not actually paying more than anyone else. So I'm not complaining.

Same thing with property tax and dependents. Why should a single person who rents have to subsidize a family who buys a home? These deductions only existed to encourage people to have children and own a house. While I agree that these are good things for the country, I don't think it's the governments job to reward and penalize certain behaviors; it's not freedom.

The states that are getting hit the worst by the salt reduction are also the states that send more money to the fed government. New york, Nj and California drive the economy.
 
Dude, Time magazine is bias. The whole media is bias against him, save two news anchors on Fox News. When the whole media hates you, you know you are doing something right. He is an existential threat to the swamp.

And that Obama unemployment statistic is so baked. First, it doesn’t include people who gave up looking for employment because of the horrible economy. So you have less unemployment there. Next, it counted jobs in total, so you had people who had full time work get laid off, and then had to take up 2-3 part time jobs. Yay, more jobs!

And my folks are middle class and work really hard for their money. They are going to save about 2k with this tax bill.

So, people can be doubting Davids all they want, but Trump has done the most and delivered on the most promises of any president I can ever remember. He is going to win realection if he keeps winning like this.


The way unemployment statistics are calculated has not been changed from when obama was president. So you cant claim that the rate counts for trump and doesnt count for obama.
Pointing out all the lies and issues with the trump presidency is not bias-its the job of the media to do this.
 
Ah yes. A classical leftist tactic to name call. I assume you do it because you don’t have the brainpower to come up with logical arguments, so you resort to name calling like neophyte or mysoginist. Might as well rapid fire out the insults while you can, make yourself seem big and smart. I recommend racist or bigot, usually gets results from low energy left wing drones.

The federal reserve was passed in the dead of night right before Christmas, nobody could oppose it because of the break. It is a privately own bank that creates money out of thin air. Yes, nothing nefarious here. Y’all have any more of that Kool-aid you sell in the pharmacy? Sounds like a lot of y’all are drinking it up

Educate yourself before posting something silly - read up on history of federal reserve act of 1913 and the issues leading up to its creation.. also look up difference between fiscal and monetary policy and Fed's role.. happy reading neophyte
 
Ah yes. A classical leftist tactic to name call. I assume you do it because you don’t have the brainpower to come up with logical arguments, so you resort to name calling like neophyte or mysoginist. Might as well rapid fire out the insults while you can, make yourself seem big and smart.

The federal reserve was passed in the dead of night right before Christmas, no nobody opposed it. It is a privately own bank that creates money out of thin air. Yes, nothing nefarious here. Y’all have any more of that Kool-aid you sell in the pharmacy? Sounds like a lot of y’all are drinking it up

Not a lefty, but I know my history and how the economy works.. but this reply clearly suggests you don't
 
“TPP is actually an amazing thing”

Uh, it would have given all of our authority, sovereignty, and bargaining power away. It was so unpopular that even the muppet Bernie Sanders opposed it. It was widely known to be a horrible agreement.

Paris climate was just anouther tax, while other countries are exempt, many which use more Carbon dioxide than us. Bravo on Trump for pulling Americans out of that.

And who knows if there isn’t more going behind the scenes. Trump is playing 4D chess right now and out maneuvering everyone, spinning circles around them.

Hopefully you’ll come around. Stay away from mainstream media and you’ll start to see, people are feeling a lot better. And before you site “hiz mainstream media approval ratings r lowe”, those are baked too, just like the election result polls.

Only if you think tactically and not Strategically. The best way to blunt and contain China is to be a force in that part of the world both economically and militarily. TPP was strategic foreign policy decision not a short term trade decision. The last thing I want is China exerting influence over these countries instead of us........ You really didn't read anything I said. It's not that Trump and Sanders are wrong about TPP from a trade point of view. It's just right in the long term interests of the United States if you want to the Pacific Power. I"d prefer that and trade imbalance over a trade surplus and increased Chinese influence over Pacific democracies...... Don't just spout taking points, I could pull ****e from Bernie Sanders Websiite and give you Left Wing BS. I'm not interested in BS. There are reasons things are done and you need to look under the surface and look at what we were trying to do with TPP, which was to strengthen ourselves at the expense of China. It's sort of what Amazon does. Come into a region and make less money in order to dominate the market. Some times it' better to make a 30% GM on 90% of the market than it is to make 60% on 10% of the market..... National power is projected Militarily, Economically, and Diplomatically and Trump does not understand any of that and it appears neither do you.......
 
Do people really think Trump comes up with these things on his own?
 
Previously the state income tax could be deducted from federal. So effectively the whole country was subsidizing high tax states because people living in these states were not actually paying more than anyone else. So I'm not complaining.

Same thing with property tax and dependents. Why should a single person who rents have to subsidize a family who buys a home? These deductions only existed to encourage people to have children and own a house. While I agree that these are good things for the country, I don't think it's the governments job to reward and penalize certain behaviors; it's not freedom.

What are you talking about? California has always put more money into the federal hands, not the other way around. We are subsidizing states like Alabama, Mississippi.

Should we also get rid of 401 k because some people can afford to contribute more than others? How about the child credit? I can go on, on and on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
A
The federal reserve was passed in the dead of night right before Christmas, nobody could oppose it because of the break. It is a privately own bank that creates money out of thin air. Yes, nothing nefarious here. Y’all have any more of that Kool-aid you sell in the pharmacy? Sounds like a lot of y’all are drinking it up

The Federal Reserve act took several months to get through both congressional committees, both houses, and to Wilson's desk. It passed by over 200 votes in the house and 20 votes in the senate. Fiat money is by definition issued "out of thin air." It's a promissory note. The banks are privately owned, but the profits are all refunded back to the US treasury and all actions are controlled by a Federal Reserve Board, whose members are majority controlled by representatives placed by the executive branch, with the oversight of the US congress.
 
It is a privately own bank that creates money out of thin air. Yes, nothing nefarious here. Y’all have any more of that Kool-aid you sell in the pharmacy? Sounds like a lot of y’all are drinking it up

So you’re looking to return to the gold standard?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The way I've calculated things I'll save 3k a year in Fed taxes. I'll take what I can get. This is the first piece of major legislation in my voting life that I'm happy about and think will be a good thing for America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Let’s get back on to a personal level. How do you guys feel this will affect California’s housing market?
 
Coming from a rural area, I personally like the huge melting pot that is California... not the traffic and high cost tho, hate those.

I too love extreme costs of living that mean the person that busses your table has to commute over an hour to reach the restaurant they work in.

Gentrification:
For when you want Diversity, but you don't want to look at it
 
The vast majority of hard workers save money with this plan but somehow this is a problem to people?
 
I too love extreme costs of living that mean the person that busses your table has to commute over an hour to reach the restaurant they work in.

Gentrification:
For when you want Diversity, but you don't want to look at it

It's called the Free Market. Something you can relate to, I assume...
 
It's called the Free Market. Something you can relate to, I assume...

Oh duh, I keep forgetting that predatory property tax policies meant to prop up incredibly stupid social programs are what a free market is.

Whoops
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I too love extreme costs of living that mean the person that busses your table has to commute over an hour to reach the restaurant they work in.

Gentrification:
For when you want Diversity, but you don't want to look at it

Are you saying Texas is immune from gentrification? I mean unless you are part of the top 1%, you are going to be priced out of certain areas. I don’t see how this is a knock on California in particular.

Commuting an hour during the morning rush in LA is actually pretty normal btw
 
Are you saying Texas is immune from gentrification? I mean unless you are part of the top 1%, you are going to be priced out of certain areas. I don’t see how this is a knock on California in particular.
Commuting an hour during the morning rush in LA is actually pretty normal btw
... Guess which state has people fleeing, caused gentrification in Austin, Denver, and Portland.
I'll give you one guess.

I bought a house in South Austin before things got nuts, luckily.
 
Previously the state income tax could be deducted from federal. So effectively the whole country was subsidizing high tax states because people living in these states were not actually paying more than anyone else. So I'm not complaining.

Same thing with property tax and dependents. Why should a single person who rents have to subsidize a family who buys a home? These deductions only existed to encourage people to have children and own a house. While I agree that these are good things for the country, I don't think it's the governments job to reward and penalize certain behaviors; it's not freedom.
Deducting state income tax does not reduce your federal taxes by the same amount. Say you pay $5,000 in state income tax and deduct that on your federal tax return. It would only reduce your federal taxes by 28% (or whatever your marginal tax rate is) = $1,400. So if you live in a state without income taxes, say you would pay around $20,000 in federal taxes on $100k income. But in a state with income tax, after the deduction you pay $18,600 federal + $5,000 state = $23,600, which is still more than a state without income tax.

You also have to take into account the standard deduction that everyone starts off with, even if you rent and don't have any property taxes or mortgage interest to deduct. You only benefit when these deductions exceed the standard deduction, and start to itemize. Itemizing is going to become less common with the new tax plan because the standard deduction was increased to $12,000 single/$24,000 married, they removed the $4,050 personal exemptions, and they limited state and local tax deductions to $10,000 (state income tax and property taxes). So for example, a couple who deducts the $10k SALT limit would have to exceed $14k in mortgage interest, donations, etc before they will benefit from itemizing. Otherwise, they should just use the $24k standard deduction. Compare this to a couple that lives in a no income tax state, and rents. They also get the same $24k standard deduction.
 
What are you talking about? California has always put more money into the federal hands, not the other way around. We are subsidizing states like Alabama, Mississippi.

Should we also get rid of 401 k because some people can afford to contribute more than others? How about the child credit? I can go on, on and on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would hope so considering California has how many more people than Alabama and Mississippi?

Why should I pay more taxes (relatively speaking) for not having children? The government is financially penalizing me for a personal decision. If instead of giving a child tax credit, they gave a non-child tax penalty, it wouldn't be well received... but effectively that's what already exists. Don't get me wrong, I wan't lower taxes for everyone, but I don't want to essentially pay for other people's children in a round about way.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.
 
Last edited:
I would hope so considering California has how many more people than Alabama and Mississippi?

Why should I pay more taxes (relatively speaking) for not having children? The government is financially penalizing me for a personal decision. If instead of giving a child tax credit, they gave a non-child tax penalty, it wouldn't be well received... but effectively that's what already exists. Don't get me wrong, I wan't lower taxes for everyone, but I don't want to essentially pay for other people's children in a round about way.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.
Idiot, you are wrong about 401k’s having no benefit with a flat tax. Dont believe, do the math for yourself.
 
I would hope so considering California has how many more people than Alabama and Mississippi?

Why should I pay more taxes (relatively speaking) for not having children? The government is financially penalizing me for a personal decision. If instead of giving a child tax credit, they gave a non-child tax penalty, it wouldn't be well received... but effectively that's what already exists. Don't get me wrong, I wan't lower taxes for everyone, but I don't want to essentially pay for other people's children in a round about way.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.

Because the government is encouraging natives to have children. Otherwise, it becomes a further problem. And yes, you are paying for those children, but actually the enactment of those funding streams was a Republican matter (I know, because I helped with the numbers). Think of it as a subsidy to LDS and Catholic families if you don't want to think about the welfare implications.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.

But politicians can't hide schemes in a flat rate tax! I would as well, but it would not be progressive enough in the financial sense for me (the flat tax on people would be set around 28-32% because the vast majority of taxes are paid for by the fourth and fifth bracket). That higher rate on the poor would be usurious to the point of the gabelle and would definitely cause rebellion. I am willing to pay higher taxes to avoid my social lessers from coming to the conclusion that they have no choice but for the Great Leveler, violence, as a way to get out of how unfair a flat tax would be to the poor. Progressive taxation is actually a reform from that system of flat tax.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I would hope so considering California has how many more people than Alabama and Mississippi?

Why should I pay more taxes (relatively speaking) for not having children? The government is financially penalizing me for a personal decision. If instead of giving a child tax credit, they gave a non-child tax penalty, it wouldn't be well received... but effectively that's what already exists. Don't get me wrong, I wan't lower taxes for everyone, but I don't want to essentially pay for other people's children in a round about way.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.

When they are paying our social security in 30 years, it all comes full circle.

Don't forget...when we are 65 years old...we will need someone at Fogo de Chao to carry the meat poles around for us...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Because the government is encouraging natives to have children. Otherwise, it becomes a further problem. And yes, you are paying for those children, but actually the enactment of those funding streams was a Republican matter (I know, because I helped with the numbers). Think of it as a subsidy to LDS and Catholic families if you don't want to think about the welfare implications.

I think we should just have a flat tax rate. With a flat tax rate 401k's would have no purpose so we can get rid of those too.

But politicians can't hide schemes in a flat rate tax! I would as well, but it would not be progressive enough in the financial sense for me (the flat tax on people would be set around 28-32% because the vast majority of taxes are paid for by the fourth and fifth bracket). That higher rate on the poor would be usurious to the point of the gabelle and would definitely cause rebellion. I am willing to pay higher taxes to avoid my social lessers from coming to the conclusion that they have no choice but for the Great Leveler, violence, as a way to get out of how unfair a flat tax would be to the poor. Progressive taxation is actually a reform from that system of flat tax.
agreed, was SMH when Ben Carson was pushing for flat tax. That would double, triple, quadruple the effective tax rate for most americans
 
When they are paying our social security in 30 years, it all comes full circle.

Don't forget...when we are 65 years old...we will need someone at Fogo de Chao to carry the meat poles around for us...

Fogo is trash. Texas de Brazil all day.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
agreed, was SMH when Ben Carson was pushing for flat tax. That would double, triple, quadruple the effective tax rate for most americans
As close to half have no effective federal income tax rate, that would be fine.

A flat rate would help all tax payers feel the burden of a bloated govt and hopefully pressure it to shrink
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top