Anonymous wrote:Liberals love to spend as long as someone else picks up the tab!
Anonymous wrote:Geez, sorry, major iPhone typing fail.Corrected post below.
Anonymous wrote:For those wondering how Trump and the Rs tend to pay for the tax cuts (besides eliminating funding for CHIP and getting rid of the student loan interest deduction), apparently funding for domestic security is on the chopping block and feds can expect a pay freeze:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/12/14/democrats-say-trump-to-seek-federal-pay-freeze-and-cuts-to-domestic-security/?hpid=hp_local-news_davidson-745am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.6cd63b78701a
I guess the argument is that Trump is going to keep all the terrorists out so we don’t need to worry about it?
Anonymous wrote:Liberals love to spend as long as someone else picks up the tab!
Anonymous wrote:Liberals love to spend as long as someone else picks up the tab!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We are going to get killed on loosing the state and local tax deduction. Virginia’s rate is 5.75% (not even that high) which is $11,500 for a family making 200,000. $17,250 if you make $300k. And that is before mortgage interest, which is another $8-12k for most people. Guess we’ll be taking the standard. Ugh.
Why should the federal tax structure subsidize states that have ludicrously exorbitant state tax rates whether state income tax or property taxes?
If your argument is that these taxes are needed to pay for services that the state provides then you should be willing to pay for it without the federal government chipping in by providing a deduction against federal taxes.
DP... I would be happy to have a flat 10% federal tax rate across the board, then let states tax the rest. Federal government should not give ANY states ANY money. Let the states take care of its own, just like Rs want - states' rights and all that. We'll see how low tax red states fare. If KS is any indication, they won't do very well.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/06/18/kansas-tax-hike-hailed-as-fix-doesnt-quite-balance-budget.html
http://www.businessinsider.com/kansas-budget-disaster-tax-reform-repeal-gop-similar-to-trumps-2017-6
The economic growth from the tax cuts never materialized. Kansas was saddled with an almost instantaneous budget hole, leaving schools and pensions drastically underfunded. Infrastructure repairs were put on hold. And to deal with a $700 million drop in revenue — almost twice what was predicted — Kansas raised its sales tax, hurting all residents, but especially lower income Kansans.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We are going to get killed on loosing the state and local tax deduction. Virginia’s rate is 5.75% (not even that high) which is $11,500 for a family making 200,000. $17,250 if you make $300k. And that is before mortgage interest, which is another $8-12k for most people. Guess we’ll be taking the standard. Ugh.
Why should the federal tax structure subsidize states that have ludicrously exorbitant state tax rates whether state income tax or property taxes?
If your argument is that these taxes are needed to pay for services that the state provides then you should be willing to pay for it without the federal government chipping in by providing a deduction against federal taxes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We are going to get killed on loosing the state and local tax deduction. Virginia’s rate is 5.75% (not even that high) which is $11,500 for a family making 200,000. $17,250 if you make $300k. And that is before mortgage interest, which is another $8-12k for most people. Guess we’ll be taking the standard. Ugh.
Why should the federal tax structure subsidize states that have ludicrously exorbitant state tax rates whether state income tax or property taxes?
If your argument is that these taxes are needed to pay for services that the state provides then you should be willing to pay for it without the federal government chipping in by providing a deduction against federal taxes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We are going to get killed on loosing the state and local tax deduction. Virginia’s rate is 5.75% (not even that high) which is $11,500 for a family making 200,000. $17,250 if you make $300k. And that is before mortgage interest, which is another $8-12k for most people. Guess we’ll be taking the standard. Ugh.
Why should the federal tax structure subsidize states that have ludicrously exorbitant state tax rates whether state income tax or property taxes?
If your argument is that these taxes are needed to pay for services that the state provides then you should be willing to pay for it without the federal government chipping in by providing a deduction against federal taxes.
The economic growth from the tax cuts never materialized. Kansas was saddled with an almost instantaneous budget hole, leaving schools and pensions drastically underfunded. Infrastructure repairs were put on hold. And to deal with a $700 million drop in revenue — almost twice what was predicted — Kansas raised its sales tax, hurting all residents, but especially lower income Kansans.
Anonymous wrote:We are going to get killed on loosing the state and local tax deduction. Virginia’s rate is 5.75% (not even that high) which is $11,500 for a family making 200,000. $17,250 if you make $300k. And that is before mortgage interest, which is another $8-12k for most people. Guess we’ll be taking the standard. Ugh.
Anonymous wrote:I would have liked to see the tax bill give more to the middle class earners but my question is why did the Democrats not take the initiative when they had the presidency, the senate and the house under their control from 2008 to 2010. Instead of doing this they focused on ACA which is now collapsing because it was structurally unsound. They passed a $700+ billion spending stimulus and what lasting benefit did we see from that legislation? Why are Democrats always associated with tax increases and increased social spending?
Yes, the tax bill will result in an increase in the national debt if there is not increased GDP and time will tell if that happens. But Democrats are the last people who should talk about deficits given that the debt just about doubled from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight years that Obama was in office during this period.
The next thing we need is welfare reform and I'd love to see the Democrats take the initiative on this because since Clinton did it in the mid-90s - and what he did was commendable - we have not had any significant welfare reform. The same holds true regarding what will replace ACA - rather than Schumer and Pelosi saying that they are only open to fixes to ACA they should be willing to work with the Republicans to come up with something that is viable even if it bears no resemblance to ACA. If they don't do so, they can't stay aloof and then blame whatever product the Republicans come up with.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I would have liked to see the tax bill give more to the middle class earners but my question is why did the Democrats not take the initiative when they had the presidency, the senate and the house under their control from 2008 to 2010. Instead of doing this they focused on ACA which is now collapsing because it was structurally unsound. They passed a $700+ billion spending stimulus and what lasting benefit did we see from that legislation? Why are Democrats always associated with tax increases and increased social spending?
Yes, the tax bill will result in an increase in the national debt if there is not increased GDP and time will tell if that happens. But Democrats are the last people who should talk about deficits given that the debt just about doubled from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight years that Obama was in office during this period.
The next thing we need is welfare reform and I'd love to see the Democrats take the initiative on this because since Clinton did it in the mid-90s - and what he did was commendable - we have not had any significant welfare reform. The same holds true regarding what will replace ACA - rather than Schumer and Pelosi saying that they are only open to fixes to ACA they should be willing to work with the Republicans to come up with something that is viable even if it bears no resemblance to ACA. If they don't do so, they can't stay aloof and then blame whatever product the Republicans come up with.
Because tax cuts weren’t needed?
Anonymous wrote:For those wondering how Trump and the Rs tend to pay for the tax cuts (besides eliminating funding for CHIP and getting rid of the student loan interest deduction), apparently funding for domestic security is on the chopping block and feds can expect a pay freeze:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/12/14/democrats-say-trump-to-seek-federal-pay-freeze-and-cuts-to-domestic-security/?hpid=hp_local-news_davidson-745am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.6cd63b78701a
I guess the argument is that Trump is going to keep all the terrorists out so we don’t need to worry about it?