The TRUMP Tax Plan

Under democrats my taxes sucked... under republicans my taxes will suck..

it is astonishing to me that some people still believe there is any difference between the two...the only difference I have found is which side claims they will use lube before they screw me... either way I still get screwed!

The only way we are going to be able to reduce the tax burden on the general public is to raise taxes for the "1%".

Let's forget about income tax rates for the super-rich and credits for oil companies so they don't pay tax.
We can talk ourselves blue in the face all day and not make any traction on this area - it's too politically volitile.

ONE THING WE NEED TO DO - take the salary cap off SSA & Medicare payments.
Tax EVERYONE equally for SSA & Medicare without limits.

Paying your fair share isn't just 7% of the first hundred thousand or so (haven't checked limit lately) - it's paying 7% on [b]all[/b] the hundreds of thousands or millions of salary dollars.

When I started working, the USA was a tax haven compared to the UK - we only had a maximum tax rate in the 70% area while UK had marginal tax rates of 95% (listen to the Beatles tune "Tax Man").

ganjoa

Reduce the cost of childcare by allowing families to fully deduct the average cost of childcare from their taxes, including stay-at-home parents

The Trump Plan will increase the standard deduction for joint filers to $30,000, from $12,600, and the standard deduction for single filers will be $15,000

In addition, the Trump Plan will cap itemized deductions at $200,000 for Married-Joint filers or $100,000 for Single filers.

If you make minimum wage and work 40 hours a week you will pay no income tax, that sounds fair to me.

Get ready for $ 5.50 a gal gasoline. Trumps new Energy Sec. will demand it.

Sales taxes will skyrocket. There will be no increase in discretionary spending monies for the common worker; infact the common man will do worse under a Trump administration. Big business will get preferential treatment in the form of subsidies and tax rebate increases.

Nothing for you. And don't whine!

originally posted by: MOMof3

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: yuppa

I think the state itself determines it's tax rate.

And that is why property taxes will get outrageous. When these cuts trickle down to state level, that is how they make it up or close schools and homeless shelters.

Yep. And our sales tax is already 9%. We will pay the state come hell or high water.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Problem is , I see no source
Is this your charts ? or some made up crap ?
I vote the latter
Put up or shut up time

No problem

LINK

The republicans have been talking about this since Bush was elected- raising taxes on the poor so the rich can get big cuts they don't need.

Thanks a lot Trump voters. You have to be idiots to believe that a celebrity billionaire gives a damn about you.

Interesting so then the tax rate is irrelevant to those making up to 15K/30K a year because of the planned deduction ?


If a person worked a minimum wage job in Texas, there rate is $7.25/hr that is a yearly salary of $15,080.00.
Would they be taxed at 12% on the $80 or the whole $15080.00 ?

The number of people in each category need to be shown too.

,,,and of course deductions need to be accounted for in any comparison. From your source:

The graph does not take into account other aspects of the Trump tax plan not directly related to the changes to income tax bands, such as the increase of standard deductions and a cap on itemized deductions, although of course these would also have an impact on net incomes

This afterthought in the article tells me this chart, which is doing the rounds on many sites, is more fake news/propaganda. People only care about how much they get NET now vs. how much under the Trump govt. That is the only comparison that matters.

Also, tax cuts for richer people is the only model that makes any sense. The goal of any tax plan should not be to give more to the poor, it should be to stimulate the economy and offer people the chance to move up the ladder.

Why is it that people still believe trickle down economics works? The belief that filling the rich's tables so full that eventually something has to fall off for the rest of us is asinine.

originally posted by: underwerks
Why is it that people still believe trickle down economics works? The belief that filling the rich's tables so full that eventually something has to fall off for the rest of us is asinine.

Why is it that people still insist on using labels and defining them as good or bad to define complex issues? It's asinine.

a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

No, it's because you can't explain it, which is not that much of a surprise.
Neither can econometricians reach consensus. For every one that says stimulus for the rich fails, another says it works.
It's easy though, and asinine, to parrot liberal talking points.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

No, it's because you can't explain it, which is not that much of a surprise.
Neither can econometricians reach consensus. For every one that says stimulus for the rich fails, another says it works.
It's easy though, and asinine, to parrot liberal talking points.

Do you really need a refresher course on basic economic theory? I'm good over here.



Labeling something "liberal talking points" and dismissing it out of hand is very asinine of you.

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Yeah, was looking forward to having our taxes go lower, but 'oops' hubby just received a raise! Dangnabbit! Frustrating since now his raise actually will cost us more in taxes annually than what it actually is monetarily. Sigh. My husband has actually stated he should just refuse the raise!

I imagine it will be frustrating for a few who fall in that tax border zone between 12% and 25% taxation. I guess I will have a year to get creative with our finances and plan on how to jump through some more deductible loopholes to try and lower our future taxable income. It is what it is.

Edit add: here's hoping maxing out our 401k contributions will offset our adjusted balance, otherwise I am going to have save medical expense/charity/etc. receipts and actually use them! Ugh. In the past, it really was more work than it was worth...but if our taxes double up...well, obviously, it will need to be done.

We're in the same position. Keep getting bonuses and raises for hard work but it shoves us into a higher tax bracket so we see very little of it. The sad part is the extra taxes I pay would have gone back into the community. I'm remodeling a couple of rooms in my home but doing it myself where before I would have paid someone.

I love doing it but it takes all my weekends and what would normally take weeks takes months. Not worth my time to do it anymore working long hours at my job. I would rather have it completed so I can enjoy the little time I have off.

And where do those taxes go? They go into a bottomless pit. People in my community never see it.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

No, it's because you can't explain it, which is not that much of a surprise.
Neither can econometricians reach consensus. For every one that says stimulus for the rich fails, another says it works.
It's easy though, and asinine, to parrot liberal talking points.

Do you really need a refresher course on basic economic theory? I'm good over here.

Labeling something "liberal talking points" and dismissing it out of hand is very asinine of you.

No thanks, it wasn't a question. It was a fact.
There is no econometrician now or ever who has been able to accurately model an economy for a given time, population and prevailing circumstance such that they can define success or failure in a broad brush, asinine, way as you did.
Seems you need some refresher courses.

Besides all of that - it's now a moot point. You will live under Trump's administration and if and when he gets his tax plan through congress, that will be your reality. Then we will see what it does and we can dispense with the asinine predictions of failure based on no sound methodology.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

No, it's because you can't explain it, which is not that much of a surprise.
Neither can econometricians reach consensus. For every one that says stimulus for the rich fails, another says it works.
It's easy though, and asinine, to parrot liberal talking points.

Do you really need a refresher course on basic economic theory? I'm good over here.

Labeling something "liberal talking points" and dismissing it out of hand is very asinine of you.

No thanks, it wasn't a question. It was a fact.
There is no econometrician now or ever who has been able to accurately model an economy for a given time, population and prevailing circumstance such that they can define success or failure in a broad brush, asinine, way as you did.
Seems you need some refresher courses.

Besides all of that - it's now a moot point. You will live under Trump's administration and if and when he gets his tax plan through congress, that will be your reality. Then we will see what it does and we can dispense with the asinine predictions of failure based on no sound methodology.

Your "facts" are very relative to your viewpoint. Trickle down economics has never helped the lower classes. Your ideology is getting in the way of objective thinking.

Me personally, I can't wait for Trump to get into office.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: UKTruth
Explaining it in complex language doesn't take away the basic tenets of it. Thinking like that is the definition of asinine.

No, it's because you can't explain it, which is not that much of a surprise.
Neither can econometricians reach consensus. For every one that says stimulus for the rich fails, another says it works.
It's easy though, and asinine, to parrot liberal talking points.

Do you really need a refresher course on basic economic theory? I'm good over here.

Labeling something "liberal talking points" and dismissing it out of hand is very asinine of you.

No thanks, it wasn't a question. It was a fact.
There is no econometrician now or ever who has been able to accurately model an economy for a given time, population and prevailing circumstance such that they can define success or failure in a broad brush, asinine, way as you did.
Seems you need some refresher courses.

Besides all of that - it's now a moot point. You will live under Trump's administration and if and when he gets his tax plan through congress, that will be your reality. Then we will see what it does and we can dispense with the asinine predictions of failure based on no sound methodology.

Your "facts" are very relative to your viewpoint. Trickle down economics has never helped the lower classes. Your ideology is getting in the way of objective thinking.

Me personally, I can't wait for Trump to get into office.

Actually no, its just a fact. You can refute it if you can find an economist (or anyone else) who can predict the future and get it right all the time. Good luck with that.

Anyway, here is a good article for you to read to get some perspective. I don't actually agree with everything this guy says but he nails the 'trickle down economics' label and how it has been used for political purposes. That label has fooled many as their political affiliations get in the way of their brains.

Our language is loaded with phrases that lead people into false beliefs and harmful actions, but the one I would nominate as the worst and most destructive of all is “trickle-down economics.” It was devised by Democrats in the 1980s as a way to attack President Reagan’s economic policy combination of tax rate cuts and some relaxation of federal regulations. They needed a catchy, easy-to-remember zinger to fire at Reagan; a line that would keep their voting base angry. Sneering that Reagan’s policies amounted to cutting taxes on the rich in hopes that some small amount of that money would eventually trickle down into the pockets of workers was perfect. It painted Reagan and other advocates of tax reduction as friends of the rich who would cruelly deprive the government of the money it needed to help the poor and middle class. As a political slogan, it was a brilliant stroke.

www.forbes.com...

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

If I had voted for him I would now be kicking myself in the ass. Now I wonder how many of his fan base are happily saying, good job Don, good job, glad to contribute.

originally posted by: UKTruth


Also, tax cuts for richer people is the only model that makes any sense. The goal of any tax plan should not be to give more to the poor, it should be to ..

Take more from the poor! Naturally.