Jump to content

gop Scam/Plan will ultimately raise taxes on 50% of Americans, nonpartisan assessment says


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

9 minutes ago, benson13 said:

 

YOU godd'amn s'hitstains need to make up your minds. Really.

 

YOU CLAIM that under CLINTON that HIGHER TAXES was why the "Economy boomed" and that we NEED TO PAY MORE IN TAXES so that can return.

 

NOW you are whining that "people will pay higher taxes" under this plan.

 

So which are for for and against THIS time???

 

You're side is so confused and confusing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, benson13 said:

This will likely be fruitless but here we go...

 

" By 2027, that proportion would grow to 50 percent, largely because the legislation's personal tax cuts expire in 2026, "

 

I don't like this potential provision, but yeah if tax rates go back up, many of will pay more then. Unless it is made permanent.

 

"

The policy center, a joint operation of the liberal-leaning Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, found that low-earners would generally get smaller tax breaks than higher-income people.

 

In 2019, those making less than $25,000 would get an average $50 tax reduction, or 0.3 percent of their after-tax income. Middle-income earners would get average cuts of $850, while people making at least $746,000 would get average cuts of $34,000, or 2.2 percent of income."

 

People making under $25k pay little to NO federal INCOME tax already. So it stands to reason that they would not get a federal income tax cut.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, superds77 said:

This will likely be fruitless but here we go...

 

" By 2027, that proportion would grow to 50 percent, largely because the legislation's personal tax cuts expire in 2026, "

 

I don't like this potential provision, but yeah if tax rates go back up, many of will pay more then. Unless it is made permanent.

 

"

The policy center, a joint operation of the liberal-leaning Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, found that low-earners would generally get smaller tax breaks than higher-income people.

 

In 2019, those making less than $25,000 would get an average $50 tax reduction, or 0.3 percent of their after-tax income. Middle-income earners would get average cuts of $850, while people making at least $746,000 would get average cuts of $34,000, or 2.2 percent of income."

 

People making under $25k pay little to NO federal INCOME tax already. So it stands to reason that they would not get a federal income tax cut.

 

 

You have to bear in mind that beanie weenie's little "non partisan" PARTISAN analysis is designed to get these MORONS all salivating and s'hit in order to MANIPULATE THEM into a frenzy.

 

Unless they can do that, they KNOW that there is nothing they can complain about.

 

I find it AMAZING that they are OPPOSED TO PEOPLE KEEPING MORE OF THEIR OWN HARD EARNED MONEY!!


And then they wonder WHY they can't win elections!!!

 

Imagine that one if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MidnightMax said:

 

You have to bear in mind that beanie weenie's little "non partisan" PARTISAN analysis is designed to get these MORONS all salivating and s'hit in order to MANIPULATE THEM into a frenzy.

 

Unless they can do that, they KNOW that there is nothing they can complain about.

 

I find it AMAZING that they are OPPOSED TO PEOPLE KEEPING MORE OF THEIR OWN HARD EARNED MONEY!!


And then they wonder WHY they can't win elections!!!

 

Imagine that one if you can.

 

Analysis that show is you lower rates now and then go back to current rates in the future is a tax increase. Stunning!(not)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MidnightMax said:

 

YOU godd'amn s'hitstains need to make up your minds. Really.

 

YOU CLAIM that under CLINTON that HIGHER TAXES was why the "Economy boomed" and that we NEED TO PAY MORE IN TAXES so that can return.

 

NOW you are whining that "people will pay higher taxes" under this plan.

 

So which are for for and against THIS time???

 

You're side is so confused and confusing.

 

 

+1

Well said

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MidnightMax said:

 

YOU godd'amn s'hitstains need to make up your minds. Really.

 

YOU CLAIM that under CLINTON that HIGHER TAXES was why the "Economy boomed" and that we NEED TO PAY MORE IN TAXES so that can return.

 

NOW you are whining that "people will pay higher taxes" under this plan.

 

So which are for for and against THIS time???

 

You're side is so confused and confusing.

 

 

sigh! Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy only and the economy boomed so much, republicans tried to take the credit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MidnightMax said:

 

You have to bear in mind that beanie weenie's little "non partisan" PARTISAN analysis is designed to get these MORONS all salivating and s'hit in order to MANIPULATE THEM into a frenzy.

 

Unless they can do that, they KNOW that there is nothing they can complain about.

 

I find it AMAZING that they are OPPOSED TO PEOPLE KEEPING MORE OF THEIR OWN HARD EARNED MONEY!!


And then they wonder WHY they can't win elections!!!

 

Imagine that one if you can.

so tupie, since you claimed that under the gop plan corporations would pay more in taxes, how do you explain the fact that It would add $1.5 trillion to the debt?

hellllo? anyone home in there?

blink if you are in there....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, benson13 said:

Ironic how a non partisan group is academic in nature nurturing all forms of ignoring self evident results as collectively separated simultaneously here as specifically as existing reflecting upon each other spontaneously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, harryramar said:

so tupie, since you claimed that under the gop plan corporations would pay more in taxes, how do you explain the fact that It would add $1.5 trillion to the debt?

hellllo? anyone home in there?

blink if you are in there....

 

PERHAPS you should STOP USING THE BULLS'HIT that the WAPO FACT CHECKERS GAVE 4 PINOCCHIO'S TO!!!

 

AND Corporations that are paying NO TAXES NOW would indeed be paying MORE!! As would a LOT that ARE paying some now. FEWER AND FEWER "tax loopholes and special carve outs" for them AUTOMATICALLY increases the DOLLARS PAID- even at  a LOWER PERCENTAGE RATE!!!

 

Where the REAL bulk of tax breaks comes is for the SMALL BUSINESS OWNER- you know, those 3-4 person SMALL BUSINESSES where people REALLY thrive.

 

ADD TO IT, you are ASSUMING- as does ALL of the "studies" YOU LIKE TO USE - that ECONOMIC GROWTH DOESN'T HAPPEN WHEN INDEED ALL OTHER STUDIES SHOW THAT IT WOULD BOOM!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, harryramar said:

except his entire premise was wrong.

ooops!

 

Actually babytalk YELLOW COWARD, the REAL ECONOMIC GROWTH UNDER CLINTON CAME WHEN HE LOWERED TAXES ON THOSE "evil rich" YOU F'UCKERS LOVE TO BEAT UP ON!!!

 

Quote

However, with his masterful 1995 flip-flop on taxes, President Clinton took the first step toward a successful campaign for re-election and a shift in policy that produced the economic boom that occurred during his second term.

  • Welfare reform, which he signed in the summer of 1996, led to a massive reduction in the effective tax rates on the poor by ameliorating the rapid phase out of benefits associated with going to work.
  • The phased reduction in tariff and non-tariff barriers between the U.S., Mexico and Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement continued, leading to increased trade.
  • In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.
  • The 1997 tax cuts also included a phased in increase in the death tax exemption to $1 million from $600,000, and established Roth IRAs and increased the limits for deductible IRAs.
  • Annual growth in federal spending was kept to below 3%, or $57 billion.
  • The Clinton Administration also maintained its policy of a strong and stable dollar.  Over his entire second term, consumer price inflation averaged only 2.4% a year.

The boom was on.  Between the end of 1996 and the end of 2000:

  • Economic growth accelerated a full percentage point to 4.2% a year.
  • Employment growth nudged higher, to 2.1 million jobs per year as the unemployment rate fell to 4.0% from 5.4%.
  • As the tax rate on capital gains came down, real wages made their biggest advance since the implementation of the Reagan tax rate reductions in the mid 1980s.  Real average hourly earnings were (in 1982 dollars) $7.43 in 1996, $7.55 in 1997, $7.75 in 1998, $7.86 in 1999, and $7.89 in 2000.
  • Millions of Americans shared in the prosperity as the value of their 401(k)s climbed along with the stock market, which saw the price of the S&P 500 index rise 78%.
  • Revenue growth accelerated an astounding 59%, increasing on average $143 billion a year.  Combined with continued restraint on government spending, that produced a $198 billion budget surplus in 2000.

Shared prosperity indeed!  But one created not by raising tax rates on high income but not yet rich middle class families, and certainly not by raising the capital gains tax rate or by imposing the equivalent of the Buffett rule, a new alternative minimum tax of 30% on incomes over $1 million, nor by massively increasing federal spending.

Rather, it was a prosperity produced by freeing America’s poor from a punitive welfare system, lowering tariffs, reducing tax rates on the creators of wealth, limiting the growth of federal government expenditures, and providing a strong and stable dollar to businesses and families in America and throughout the world.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/07/16/the-dangerous-myth-about-the-bill-clinton-tax-increase/#968eb926e8ae

 

 

God, this is just WAY TOO EASY to put these little s'hitstains back in their little holes!!!

 

You would think that after a couple of times of getting therir heads bashed in, they would stay in hiding!!!

 

Nope. That's the "too stupid to learn" part of their mentality that keeps them STUPID and in the s'hitstain crowd!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, benson13 said:

Yes, when tax cuts expire, taxes go up.   

That's the way it works. 

 

And they aren't "planning" it that way, dumbass.    In order to pass this tax cut, they have to use reconciliation, which is only valid for 10 years. 

Why is it that liberals are all so Bad wording ignorant regarding the government they love?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MidnightMax said:

 

Actually babytalk YELLOW COWARD, the REAL ECONOMIC GROWTH UNDER CLINTON CAME WHEN HE LOWERED TAXES ON THOSE "evil rich" YOU F'UCKERS LOVE TO BEAT UP ON!!!

 

 

 

God, this is just WAY TOO EASY to put these little s'hitstains back in their little holes!!!

 

You would think that after a couple of times of getting therir heads bashed in, they would stay in hiding!!!

 

Nope. That's the "too stupid to learn" part of their mentality that keeps them STUPID and in the s'hitstain crowd!!

 

well then how come reaganomics didn't work as sold and instead created huge debt and deficits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

The economy does not boom or bust based on levels of taxation. The upswing during Clinton's time was due to newfound technology. 

Even JFK disagreed with that BS.

 

 

28 minutes ago, benson13 said:

Can you imagine Foxaganda for Idiots....has all their low class Uneducated racist rednecks believing their getting MAJOR Tax Cuts...because of the wonderful gop

Just another day with the Hate Fox News for telling the truth again.

 

 

Once you understand that Leftism is hate, everything falls into place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TBHWT said:

Even JFK disagreed with that BS.

 

 

Just another day with the Hate Fox News for telling the truth again.

Get a Bad wording life Bad word.

 

Once you understand that Leftism is hate, everything falls into place.

 

 

This should be easy for you but prove to me that the economy is SOLELY controlled by the President and his decisions i.e; Fiscal Policy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

 

This should be easy for you but prove to me that the economy is SOLELY controlled by the President and his decisions i.e; Fiscal Policy. 

It can't be proven. But I know one thing, every time I got a tax return which wasn't often, I spent it on myself one way or another, which added to the economy.  

And we already know we have some of the highest taxes on corporations in the world. 

 

And who's to say trickle down didn't work lets not forget Reagan Tax cuts, and what then came about in the 90's you talk about. Was that about an upswing in R & D that created the newfound technology?   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TBHWT said:

It can't be proven. But I know one thing, every time I got a tax return which wasn't often, I spent it on myself one way or another, which added to the economy.  

And we already know we have some of the highest taxes on corporations in the world. 

 

And who's to say trickle down didn't work lets not forget Reagan Tax cuts, and what then came about in the 90's you talk about. Was that about an upswing in R & D that created the newfound technology?   

 

 

Correlation does not equal causality. The R&D did not come about SOLELY due to tax laws/fiscal policy. The Internet and the various other elements were not created because government relaxed its tax laws. Tax cut or not, it would have came about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, harryramar said:

well then how come reaganomics didn't work as sold and instead created huge debt and deficits?

 

BECAUSE, little babytalk YELLOW COWARD s'hitstain, the DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED CONGRESS UNDER REAGAN NEVER DID REIGN IN SPENDING AS THEY PROMISED TO DO!!!

 

BUT that spending came to a HALT when REPUBLICANS took control of Congress in 1994.

 

Now that must REALLY SUCK for you, moron, to NOT KNOW THE FACTS!!!

 

ROFLMAO!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, benson13 said:

TrailerTrash

"Even JFK disagreed with that BS"

 

 

the same old gop BS....remember, JFK didn't have senile rayguns or your AWOl Oil Puppets Record Debt

Retardo go F yourself, nobody interested in your hatred of republicans and Fox News anymore AH.  Coming here everyday and reading your rants about racist republicans and Fox News is now so common it Borders on sociological cliché.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...