It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Tax Plan will be Devestating to Seniors and Poor People

page: 12
40
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan


We already did that one under Reagan. It didn't work.

Under Reagan, I had my choice of jobs, made a good income, could afford to buy things I needed, and I had health insurance. If that's your idea of "not working," I hope and pray the tax bill passes and doesn't work!

TheRedneck


Those same policies that gave you a good income then, have been responsible for 40 years of wage stagnation and are the direct reason you can't afford health insurance now.




posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan


Page 96 of the bill, towards the bottom it defines it.

OK, there's no page numbers on the c opy I am using, but I found it in Section 1202(e):

(e) Unborn children allowed as account beneficiaries.—Section 529(e) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

    “(6) TREATMENT OF UNBORN CHILDREN.—

      “(A) IN GENERAL.—Nothing shall prevent an unborn child from being treated as a designated beneficiary or an individual under this section.

      “(B) UNBORN CHILD.—For purposes of this paragraph—
        “(i) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘unborn child’ means a child in utero.

        “(ii) CHILD IN UTERO.—The term ‘child in utero’ means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.”.

As I suspected, this does not designate an unborn child as anything except a beneficiary, and has no bearing on whether or not abortion is legal.


They're already allowed to do that.

Section 529(e) of the US Code does not specify either way, but with the present move to declare an unborn child NOT a person, I don't see how they are able to be the beneficiary of a fund.


It is, and not one they closed. In fact they opened it by allowing you to take one childs college fund and move it to another child. They also added some language so that parents can take money from it tax free.

Again, please give me the section and paragraph where this happens. So far, every single complaint you have had against the House tax bill has been directly refuted by the bill itself. I understand not wanting to sift through the entire bill, but not at the expense of expecting others to do so to answer your propaganda.

If you're going to use pundits to get your information, be prepared to spend the time necessary to vet what they say, or be prepared to be wrong most (if not all) of the time.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan


Those same policies that gave you a good income then, have been responsible for 40 years of wage stagnation and are the direct reason you can't afford health insurance now.

Wait, you're saying two Bushes, Bill Clinton, and Obama had nothing to do with the economy over a span of 28 years? This is all about a President from 28 years ago?


Are you actually listening to yourself?

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Wait, you're saying two Bushes, Bill Clinton, and Obama had nothing to do with the economy over a span of 28 years? This is all about a President from 28 years ago?


Which of those Presidents has done anything philosophically different on taxes or spending?



posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

  • George Bush Sr. implemented tax increases (remember "read my lips"?).
  • Clinton introduced a slew of new regulations on commerce.
  • Bush Jr. embroiled us in a very expensive war and implemented even more restrictions.
  • Obama oversaw the largest deficit explosion in history, by far, and introduced even more regulations on commerce.

    TheRedneck



  • posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 08:39 PM
    link   

    George Bush Sr. implemented tax increases


    The bottom 52% of Americans pay more money under the House and Senate (as it currently stands) plans. 90% of the cuts go to the top 1%. Everyone else stays where they currently are. This is a tax increase for the majority of people.


    Clinton introduced a slew of new regulations on commerce.


    Like what? Fair trade agreements?


    Bush Jr. embroiled us in a very expensive war and implemented even more restrictions.


    So a whole bunch of deficit spending? How is that any different from Trumps plan? This is a guy who proposed $18 trillion in new spending during his campaign (Bernie Sanders was $20 trillion for reference, and actually included a plan to fund it). Tax cuts alone are going to be a minimum of 1.8 trillion, nearly the same as iraq+afghanistan and that's if the economy actually performs according to the very optimistic 6% growth that dynamic scoring is assuming. Any less and it spirals way higher.


    Obama oversaw the largest deficit explosion in history, by far, and introduced even more regulations on commerce.


    What regulations? Obama cut taxes and reduced red tape.



    posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 10:49 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Aazadan


    The bottom 52% of Americans pay more money under the House and Senate (as it currently stands) plans. 90% of the cuts go to the top 1%. Everyone else stays where they currently are. This is a tax increase for the majority of people.

    Section and paragraph, please... nah, nevermind, since every other statement to that effect you made has been refuted by the tax plan itself, I'll just go ahead and call it propaganda BS.


    Like what? Fair trade agreements?

    Nope, unfair trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA.


    So a whole bunch of deficit spending? How is that any different from Trumps plan?

    Trump has a tax plan? Where?

    If you mean how is the Bush military expenditure different from the House tax plan, it's because the House plan is intended to boost the economy. Bush simply threw us into a war over nothing more than the banks' dollar-oil peg (and grabbed a little lot of surveillance power in the process.


    What regulations? Obama cut taxes and reduced red tape.


    ...

    ...

    ...

    i have some prime beach-front property in Kansas for sale...

    TheRedneck



    posted on Nov, 24 2017 @ 10:56 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Aazadan

    Like the CBO, Economist only work with numbers. That is the reason why they are wrong so often. They cannot predict human behavior, which is a huge wild card.



    posted on Nov, 25 2017 @ 09:54 AM
    link   
    a reply to: carewemust

    Dynamic scoring relies on just that prediction though, and dynamic scoring hasn't had very good accuracy over the years. It always underestimates the cost of things.



    posted on Nov, 30 2017 @ 06:25 AM
    link   
    Come on, do not listen to any "expert", it all non-sense.



    new topics

    top topics



     
    40
    << 9  10  11   >>

    log in

    join