Inflation Reduction Act of 2022

[Anonymous]

Ironic that donald trump made this climate bill happen by tanking the safe senate seats in GA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh no. Dudes making more than $400,000 are going to have to pay more in taxes. The horror! Communism!

According to analysis by the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, nearly all Americans would see increased taxes by 2023. The average tax rates would increase in nearly all income categories, according to its analysis, including lower income individuals such as those earning less than $10,000.

Federal taxes will increase by $1.9 billion on those earning between $50,000 and $75,000 and by $10.8 billion on those earning between $100,000 and $200,000 in 2023.

Overall average tax rates would increase from 20.3% to 20.6% in 2023 alone, according to the analysis.

This is all a completely misleading lie. Tax rates are NOT increasing on natural persons. I REPEAT TAX RATES ARE NOT INCREASING ON NATURAL PERSONS. You can spew all this F**King BS but expect to get called on it.

This report was requested by republicans and the conclusions above are about a POTENTIAL TAX IMPACT. Study is full of assumptions about how corporations will react to their tax increases. The US Congress did not increase taxes on these people. If people have a negative effect from these taxes, it’s because the corporations that are getting taxed reduced the person’s wages.

Again I REPEAT…natural persons aren’t getting tax increases.

SUCH F**KING BULLSH!T.

Corporations need to show profits year over year so they will charge more to offset this and cover less of their own workers. So yes this bill will cause inflation and taxes.

False. Just dead wrong. Corporations do not impose taxes on anyone. This does not increase taxes on natural persons point blank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone versed in government legislation explain why this can (or cannot) be repealed in two years? If the Republicans end up controlling both the Presidency and Senate in 2025, couldn't they roll back every climate-friendly provision in this law?

Sure. That’s democracy. Vote for Democrats if you think insulin should be affordable. Vote for Republicans if you think affordable insulin should be filibustered.

Actually, vote Democrat if you think gas should be expensive and lower and middle class people should be paying more taxes.
Because, those will be the consequences of this piece of $hit legislation.

False and I will call this out every single f**kign time I swear to god.

This bill does not increase taxes on natural persons. You POS liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone versed in government legislation explain why this can (or cannot) be repealed in two years? If the Republicans end up controlling both the Presidency and Senate in 2025, couldn't they roll back every climate-friendly provision in this law?

Sure. That’s democracy. Vote for Democrats if you think insulin should be affordable. Vote for Republicans if you think affordable insulin should be filibustered.

Actually, vote Democrat if you think gas should be expensive and lower and middle class people should be paying more taxes.
Because, those will be the consequences of this piece of $hit legislation.

Liar.

That will carry more weight if you follow up with PANTS ON FIRE

low information voter...

It is not correct to say this legislation increases taxes on natural persons. The end. So you can STFU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep.

I don't think he knows what a kleptocracy is.

[Anonymous]

Wtf are "natural persons"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m glad. The Democrats really need to do a much better job selling this landmark bill to the public. Democrats traditionally suck at messaging.

But I’m glad. It’s far from perfect but I’m old enough not to let perfect be the enemy of good.

I hope the Democrats can understand that the Senate was completely divided over this. It’s not like this thing was so obviously good that it could be supported unanimously. If we had a different administration there’d be a lot more trust this would be done right.

There’s so much division in America. It would be so crass for Democrats to take this thing and hammer Republicans who are already furious about how the Presidency was stolen from Donald Trump. Who in Arkansas is purchasing induction stovetops? Who I’m Mississippi is purchasing an electric car? Who in Tennessee is purchasing solar panels? See? All these climate things are directed to BLUE states. Because they can afford to front the money to get these things. So it’s not right to trumpet an “accomplishment” that only benefits their voters. Do better.

And they Dems condescend and patronize people in Red States. Gosh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wtf are "natural persons"?

Not PP but individuals rather than corporations. That should be obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve got a deal!! Woohoo

Lol I bet you don't say this in a year...
All extra taxes will be passed on to the consumer.
$5 gas isn't going anywhere and add another 300 a month for groceries.

You cannot print money and lower inflation.

Corporations always pass on tax increases . They raise their prices .

$5 gas is gone, dude. Average price nationally will be less than $4 tomorrow. Get better news and/or go outside and look around.

[Anonymous]

...And with the passing of this bill we see that Democrats/ Leftists don't understand economics. Rich get richer, poor get poorer, middle class is DESTROYED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see how any of this majorly addresses inflation. Just a bill with a good name that if they vote against others can claim they’re for inflation.

Oh — and what would you prefer?

Inflation control is really a job for the Federal Reserve. They can stop giving out any further stimulus payments and restart payments on the student loan program. The bill name is to make themselves look good.

They stopped giving out stimulus with the last CTC check in December 2021. And Congress needs to do something.

Not really. They simply re-named the stimulus and tied it into unemployment and welfare. There's still a LOT of free money out there for people who refuse to go back to work or have kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see how any of this majorly addresses inflation. Just a bill with a good name that if they vote against others can claim they’re for inflation.

Oh — and what would you prefer?

Inflation control is really a job for the Federal Reserve. They can stop giving out any further stimulus payments and restart payments on the student loan program. The bill name is to make themselves look good.

They stopped giving out stimulus with the last CTC check in December 2021. And Congress needs to do something.

Not really. They simply re-named the stimulus and tied it into unemployment and welfare. There's still a LOT of free money out there for people who refuse to go back to work or have kids.

Federal enhanced unemployment ended 1 year and 1 month ago. Expanded SNAP expired three months ago.

So what exactly are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve got a deal!! Woohoo

Lol I bet you don't say this in a year...
All extra taxes will be passed on to the consumer.
$5 gas isn't going anywhere and add another 300 a month for groceries.

You cannot print money and lower inflation.

Corporations always pass on tax increases . They raise their prices .

$5 gas is gone, dude. Average price nationally will be less than $4 tomorrow. Get better news and/or go outside and look around.

Actually, the reduction in pricing is only for a period of two months, based on the agreement with OPEC. Sooooo.... it IS going away, permanently unless we restart our own production and upgrade our refineries. That's something I never really understood... why do "environmentalists" object so strenuously to improving our refineries? I mean, the improvements would go a LONG way towards protecting the environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wtf are "natural persons"?

Shh shh. The grown ups are talking now, sweetie

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is awesome - 3 years of reduced ACA premiums!!

Details:

Revenue: $739b
-15% domestic corp min tax
-IRS enforcement
-Prescription drug deal
-Carried interest (Will Sinema go for it?)

Spending: $433b
-$369b on climate/energy, deets not avail yet
-ACA extension for 3 years (was 2 in most recent deal)

Info on Sinema here:

So it sounds like there’s zero roadblocks to passing this reconciliation bill as it stands? And it’s going to a vote next week - well done.

Assuming the House passes it, when does implementation start?