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.

 

GOP plan will ultimately raise taxes on 50% of Americans, nonpartisan assessment says

page: 3
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
Are you Taxed Enough Already? Well this should give you enough reason to take out those old TEA Party hats. Right? No? Oh it's Trump so it's ok. It's ok I guess?

Trump spoke as the Tax Policy Center said that while all income groups would see tax reductions, on average, under the Senate bill in 2019, 9 percent of taxpayers would pay higher taxes that year than under current law. By 2027, that proportion would grow to 50 percent, largely because the legislation's personal tax cuts expire in 2026, which Republicans did to curb budget deficits the bill would create.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Non-Partisan Tax Policy Center.


So which is it - are you concerned about the deficit or aren't you - because you are trying to have it both ways - you are opposed to taxes going up after 10 years on half the middle class - but you are also opposed to increasing the deficit due to the tax reductions over the next 10 years.



Further:


In 2019, those making less than $25,000 would get an average $50 tax reduction, or 0.3 percent of their after-tax income. Middle-income earners would get average cuts of $850, while people making at least $746,000 would get average cuts of $34,000, or 2.2 percent of income.

The center also said the Senate proposal would generate enough economic growth to produce additional revenue of $169 billion over a decade. That's far short of closing the near $1.5 trillion in red ink that Congress' nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation has estimated the bill would produce over that period.


So it's heavily favored to the top side of the income bracket. How predictable. Still, $169 billion in additional revenue is great for the country. That outta cover it right? What, that's $16.9 billion a year? Pocket change me thinks. Doesn't put much of a dent in the $1.5 trillion deficit this congress is set to create.


It is really hard to cut taxes on the poor when they already almost all pay nothing - 45% pay no income tax under the existing law.

That is why this bill is cuts for the middle class - you can't cut anymore for the poor - so stop saying this is cruel to the poor that is absolute horse crap - it will help the poor by causing increased wages, and providing more jobs.

As far as their prediction of $169 billion increase in tax revenue over 10 years - I think that is way lower than it will actually be. Afterall just a few months ago people were saying 3% GDP was impossible - We have already accomplished that with no tax cuts. Show me one of these estimates that has been anywhere close to correct, they just aren't. I don't think it will add a trillion to the deficit but if it did - and it accomplishes 4-5% gdp increase it will be well worth it.

As far as complaining about adding to the deficit - you do realize Obama added 9+ trillion to the deficit in 8 years which is nearly as much debt as the country accumulated in the 230+ years prior right?

Look the truth is we can't pay back our debt at this point. Neither can Europe. Neither can Japan. China's economy is a house of cards too. The name of the game right now is don't be the first country to experience economic collapse - throwing fuel on the fire is the best way to accomplish that at this point. It sure as heck beats the obama admin plan of just giving money to the banks who horded it - at least this way private citizens will get the money, and we will build some things of substance with the money that will have positive impact on the economy for years to come.



What, exactly, do you think the 'middle class' is?

What income range is it?


It's dependant on the local cost of living and vAries by location. It would be from 50k-750k probably.

In San francesco your poor at 200k, baltimore, DC, NYC, LA there are regions where the coat of living is very high. Where homes start at 500k etc.

It's all pretty dumb.

IMO the flat tax and basic income instead of entitlement system would benefit the country and provide clarity as to how much revenue the government can expect, it would greatly reduce the massive compliance costs etc..

But of course we aren't looking for solutions in Washington. Just ponzi schemes and gimmicks.

Like single payer Healthcare being the only alternative. Europe is full of other market based system with single payer in the minority. Maybe we could borrow some ideas from the Swiss, Germans, French, Danes, Dutch etc..

The problem is all the big issues are entirely rhetoric.




new topics
 
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join