Anonymous wrote:One big beautiful bill is going to fall apart. Too expensive for freedom caucus, too many cuts for frontliners.

But Rs still have to fix debt ceiling.

Tik tok.

Anonymous wrote:

Eliminating taxes on tips (not “executive bonuses”, as some here try to claim)

I think what people are trying to explain to you is that if you don’t carefully write the language around what a tip is and/or limit the benefit to those with an income lower than what a high earning waiter makes, executives will ABSOLUTELY get in line to use whatever verbiage ends up in the bill to redefine their bonuses so they don’t get taxed.

Also, no tax on tips will f**k servers when it comes to collecting Social Security later.

Anonymous wrote:“Some House Republicans say they won’t vote for a bill that cuts Medicaid. Others have refused to support the legislation unless it lets their constituents deduct more of their state and local taxes. Last week, one Senate Republican ruled out voting for any bill unless it pares back spending to the level before the pandemic — which would require massive additional cuts.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/05/05/trump-policy-bill-congress-red-lines/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F426ae87%2F6818e18208718a083aa5079c%2F596bc2b7ae7e8a44e7dcaab7%2F13%2F60%2F6818e18208718a083aa5079c

Anonymous wrote:“Some House Republicans say they won’t vote for a bill that cuts Medicaid. Others have refused to support the legislation unless it lets their constituents deduct more of their state and local taxes. Last week, one Senate Republican ruled out voting for any bill unless it pares back spending to the level before the pandemic — which would require massive additional cuts.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/05/05/trump-policy-bill-congress-red-lines/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F426ae87%2F6818e18208718a083aa5079c%2F596bc2b7ae7e8a44e7dcaab7%2F13%2F60%2F6818e18208718a083aa5079c

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating taxes on tips (not “executive bonuses”, as some here try to claim), taxes on overtime earnings, and allowing tax deductions for payments and interest on US-manufactured vehicles all sound like things that would benefit working class and middle class Americans, as well as spur massive growth in the US manufacturing economy, with the associated spill-over effects that would be seen in other industries connected to it.

Many DCUM posters praise themselves as champions of lower income people, so why do these same posters decry proposals like the three above?

Can one of you please explain this? Because those are the sort of ideas that seem like the type that would be supported by people who insist they are champions for lower income people. People like most of you here.

But instead, those proposals are castigated here. And I’d like to understand why so many of you feel that way?

Is it simply because Trump proposed them? Is that the only reason? Because unless there’s some other compelling reason, it seems like an absurdly childish act.


So…. why, then?

.

It depends on how the bill is written to ensure the benefit goes only to those who are intended. For example, I work for my own company. What if I pay myself a salary of $20,000/yr and then call the rest a tip? The way the GOP is crafting the bill, what I am suggesting is perfectly legal and ok. The democrats want to ensure that untaxed tips are directed to the target service workers and not the executives. So when you see "democrats are opposing tax free tips," THAT is what they are opposing.

+1 This. The more carveouts you have, the more you invite gamesmanship. No tax on tips or overtime will create a HUGE incentive to find ways to call regular income tips or overtime.

This is not about helping poor people who work low income jobs. It's another way to have a huge giveaway to people who don't need tax breaks and make some poor sap feel like they got something out of the deal too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating taxes on tips (not “executive bonuses”, as some here try to claim), taxes on overtime earnings, and allowing tax deductions for payments and interest on US-manufactured vehicles all sound like things that would benefit working class and middle class Americans, as well as spur massive growth in the US manufacturing economy, with the associated spill-over effects that would be seen in other industries connected to it.

Many DCUM posters praise themselves as champions of lower income people, so why do these same posters decry proposals like the three above?

Can one of you please explain this? Because those are the sort of ideas that seem like the type that would be supported by people who insist they are champions for lower income people. People like most of you here.

But instead, those proposals are castigated here. And I’d like to understand why so many of you feel that way?

Is it simply because Trump proposed them? Is that the only reason? Because unless there’s some other compelling reason, it seems like an absurdly childish act.


So…. why, then?

.

It depends on how the bill is written to ensure the benefit goes only to those who are intended. For example, I work for my own company. What if I pay myself a salary of $20,000/yr and then call the rest a tip? The way the GOP is crafting the bill, what I am suggesting is perfectly legal and ok. The democrats want to ensure that untaxed tips are directed to the target service workers and not the executives. So when you see "democrats are opposing tax free tips," THAT is what they are opposing.

Anonymous wrote:Eliminating taxes on tips (not “executive bonuses”, as some here try to claim), taxes on overtime earnings, and allowing tax deductions for payments and interest on US-manufactured vehicles all sound like things that would benefit working class and middle class Americans, as well as spur massive growth in the US manufacturing economy, with the associated spill-over effects that would be seen in other industries connected to it.

Many DCUM posters praise themselves as champions of lower income people, so why do these same posters decry proposals like the three above?

Can one of you please explain this? Because those are the sort of ideas that seem like the type that would be supported by people who insist they are champions for lower income people. People like most of you here.

But instead, those proposals are castigated here. And I’d like to understand why so many of you feel that way?

Is it simply because Trump proposed them? Is that the only reason? Because unless there’s some other compelling reason, it seems like an absurdly childish act.


So…. why, then?

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/04/29/congress/republicans-balk-at-new-car-fee-proposal-00317701?

“Like, are you out of your fricking mind?” Roy said Tuesday upon reviewing the proposal. “Like, the party of limited government is gonna go out and, ‘say we’re gonna have [a car tax]?’”

“You know what I was told? ‘Don’t worry about it. We’ll get rid of it later in the highway bill,’” Roy continued. He said the message he received is that the car tax is “a gimmick to pay for this, so we know that we’re not actually gonna pay for it. That’s how this town works.”