Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Which ones?

Also you are going to get smacked when the Trump tax cut expire next year. You realize these proposals are intended to help extend those cuts?

Harris is planning to let the Trump tax cuts of 2017 expire to replace them with tax hikes.

Listen to her in her own words explain how she is planning to extend the low income housing tax credit program (a Congressional allocation) to developers of her choosing who will sell homes to chosen demographics in a bid, in her own words, to hike property tax revenues nationwide. She responded this way (although with more rambling) to a recent reporter question. Google around and find it. When I saw it, it was on Sky News.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their idea of high earners isn't location specific (COL is vastly diff in diff locations) or adjusted for inflation or considers 1 income households vs 2 income households (childcare exp. etc). It's simply stupid to consider 2 income household in a VHCOL area earning 400K to be "rich" or high earner anything. Likewise their poverty line is absolutely ridiculous and out of touch. I have no issue with slamming more brackets at HHI over 1 mil or taxing capital gains beyond a certain amount (like 1 mil in passive capital gains) at higher rate. But their limits on what they consider any type of "wealth" or excess are absolutely ridiculous.

It’s $400k in taxable income. So probably $600k or so in actual income. That is a high earner even in a VHCOL area.

+1. People seem to really struggle with this concept.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Which ones?

Also you are going to get smacked when the Trump tax cut expire next year. You realize these proposals are intended to help extend those cuts?

Or, how about she just promises to extend the tax cuts? Most people have no idea the size increase in taxes they are in for when they expire. I have not seen dems promise to help the middle class by extending those. Or have I missed something?

The entire point of these proposals are to extend those tax cuts, which are unfunded past 2025. Unless you can propose spending cuts large enough to pay for those cuts (and cutting programs for the poor and education/arts won’t be enough).

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Which ones?

Also you are going to get smacked when the Trump tax cut expire next year. You realize these proposals are intended to help extend those cuts?

Or, how about she just promises to extend the tax cuts? Most people have no idea the size increase in taxes they are in for when they expire. I have not seen dems promise to help the middle class by extending those. Or have I missed something?

Anonymous wrote:I'm tired of blue states supporting red states. I am fine paying more taxes to make the world more liveable, to ensure national security, climate, abortion rights and education. I hate that red states benefit more from taxes than blue states, and yet refuse to support democrats because 'taxes.' who do they think pays for medicare, medicaid, their SSDI benefits, and other programs?


Then again pitting people against each other over federal income taxes is a great way to hide the fact that our corporations are making a killing, with ceos making in the 10s, ,100s of millions a year and not paying their share of taxes. Like, if corporations actually paid anywhere near the corporate tax rate we could cut taxes for individuals and increase spending. SO Harris increasing corporate tax rate is whatever, what really needs to happen is to enforce the tax laws that already exist.

https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0512/how-large-corporations-get-around-paying-less-in-taxes.aspx

So many in the "red states" are clueless to the fact they are actually using "socialist" programs. So many were excited to finally have healthcare in 2012---not realizing it was actually "Obamacare" that they wanted nothing to do with.
Yes, red states do not vote in their best interests. And if they really feel Abortion is the hill to die on, then they should be accepting of not getting the welfare they claim now.

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Which ones?

Also you are going to get smacked when the Trump tax cut expire next year. You realize these proposals are intended to help extend those cuts?

Anonymous wrote:Their idea of high earners isn't location specific (COL is vastly diff in diff locations) or adjusted for inflation or considers 1 income households vs 2 income households (childcare exp. etc). It's simply stupid to consider 2 income household in a VHCOL area earning 400K to be "rich" or high earner anything. Likewise their poverty line is absolutely ridiculous and out of touch. I have no issue with slamming more brackets at HHI over 1 mil or taxing capital gains beyond a certain amount (like 1 mil in passive capital gains) at higher rate. But their limits on what they consider any type of "wealth" or excess are absolutely ridiculous.

It’s $400k in taxable income. So probably $600k or so in actual income. That is a high earner even in a VHCOL area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here “libs should send money” PP, try this and show us where you would make cuts, so we can see where your priorities lie.

https://fiscalship.org/

LOL, that reminds me of lame corporate training.

Have you sent in your check to the Treasury yet?

You can’t do it can you? Because once you cut taxes, it’s actually hard to also cut spending on the things that will balance the budget. Cutting programs for poor people and arts programs won’t get you there - you also need to cut spending republicans traditionally support.

Yes, I sent my check to the Treasury. Did you? If not, stop complaining about the debt or deficit. Clearly it doesn’t really matter to you.

I didn't do it because it's childish and cartoonish.

You're the one who wants higher taxes. How much extra have you sent to the Treasury? Come on, you can afford to pay more.

Why are we going in circles? Me wanting higher taxes doesn’t equal me thinking our sole focus should be paying down the national debt.

As we both agreed, you cannot overpay your taxes. You can send the Treasury a gift to pay down the national debt.

I want higher taxes to increase social spending, invest in our environment and education for future generations and decrease the deficit. Those are my goals and I am ok with paying higher taxes as a high earner to accomplish these goals. But I cannot overpay my taxes.

You (I think?) are in favoring of reducing taxes in the wealthy, increasing taxes on the middle class (because you are ok with letting the Trump tax cuts expire without adjusting taxes or spending) and reducing the national debt. So the question isn’t what I am gifting to pay down the debt, the question is what are you gifting to do so?

I am willing to pay more money to accomplish my goals. Why aren’t you? Why are you such a hypocrite?

Their idea of high earners isn't location specific (COL is vastly diff in diff locations) or adjusted for inflation or considers 1 income households vs 2 income households (childcare exp. etc). It's simply stupid to consider 2 income household in a VHCOL area earning 400K to be "rich" or high earner anything. Likewise their poverty line is absolutely ridiculous and out of touch. I have no issue with slamming more brackets at HHI over 1 mil or taxing capital gains beyond a certain amount (like 1 mil in passive capital gains) at higher rate. But their limits on what they consider any type of "wealth" or excess are absolutely ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will vote red because of this, much as I despise the Republican social platforms. I have worked too hard for my money to support the party which seeks to take even more of it.

-High earner

Same! Enough is enough now.

Agreed. I live in a state that has ensconced the right to abortion in the state laws. The Republican social stuff isn’t my problem.

We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make all earned income subject to the social security tax and not just the first $168,600. That would fix a lot.

The reason you cannot do that is then their benefits would soar too. And if you object to THAT you just completely changed SS into a pure welfare program and any semblance of bipartisan support for it (which is already tenuous) disappears.

There is already a cap on the max you can receive in SS benefits no matter how much you pay in. They should just keep that limit and increase the wage cap, which is far too low anyway. It should be more like $200 or $250K, or not have a wage cap at all.

You do that and you completely change the social contract on SS and doom it to the dustbin of history. Of all the things, this is hands down the worst idea of them all if you are interested in preserving the program.

Because why? It makes perfect sense to have a progressive tax.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here “libs should send money” PP, try this and show us where you would make cuts, so we can see where your priorities lie.

https://fiscalship.org/

LOL, that reminds me of lame corporate training.

Have you sent in your check to the Treasury yet?

You can’t do it can you? Because once you cut taxes, it’s actually hard to also cut spending on the things that will balance the budget. Cutting programs for poor people and arts programs won’t get you there - you also need to cut spending republicans traditionally support.

Yes, I sent my check to the Treasury. Did you? If not, stop complaining about the debt or deficit. Clearly it doesn’t really matter to you.

I didn't do it because it's childish and cartoonish.

You're the one who wants higher taxes. How much extra have you sent to the Treasury? Come on, you can afford to pay more.

Anonymous wrote:I will vote red because of this, much as I despise the Republican social platforms. I have worked too hard for my money to support the party which seeks to take even more of it.

-High earner

Same! Enough is enough now.