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.

 

Poor Americans would lose billions under Senate GOP tax bill

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

explain the growth under reagen then. more money for corps. they hire more people as they expand. more workers mean more tax cash. even at tax reduction/cut in the long run its a savings. its not hard to figure out.




posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: burdman30ott6

The reason why immigrants or illegal ones, get the jobs is because the people who create the jobs don't want to pay out actual wages. It's not Chico the Mexicans fault he is willing to work for 5 dollars a day.


See, there is a disconnect here which the Left utterly fails to see thanks to their never ending infatuation with victimhood and haters. Just because I want the law enforced and the borders locked down does not mean I'm sitting here "blaming Mexicans." I understand entirely why they're here, and if I was in their shoes I'd likely be doing the same. I understand why so many people are on the dole, and I'm not expressing hatred towards them calling for that to end.

The system is broken, yes, fixing it will negatively impact some Sucks to be them, but it's nothing personal in their direction.





We the people do not benefit from illegals working jobs for below the minimum wage, the corps/government do.

That's why it's not stopped, those pulling the strings do not want this fixed, they set it up.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Oh please.

Politicians, government, and corporate greed has always been like this. Back in the first 150 years of the USA immigrants were brought in flocks for the soul purpose of votes. And then given that golden promise "the American dream".

It's the same with now days, just with jobs.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 02:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wildbob77
The bottom 50 percent of the population does not pay any taxes

How will they lose money??

Just curious


The bottom 50% do pay taxes.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 02:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Poor people do not have “billions” of dollars.

I’m poor (ish).
& I am, and always have been, a vocal advocate for the betterment of the poor.
I dislike a lot about Capitalism.

Why do I say this?


Because even I can see that this is very fake clickbait news.

I’ve also spoken out about this tax bill.
But that’s irrelevant to the point I wanted to make.

Which is that poor people do not have “billions” of dollars.


Collectively the do. A million people on 10k a year would be 10 billion.

Pretty sure there are a lot more than a million poor in the USA and that you need a lot more than 10 k a year not to be poor.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: olaru12

explain the growth under reagen then. more money for corps. they hire more people as they expand. more workers mean more tax cash. even at tax reduction/cut in the long run its a savings. its not hard to figure out.


Regan also increased federal spending and tripled the national debt to boost the economy.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 05:29 AM
link   
My mother has real disabilities and depends on her monthly disability check in order to survive.
My mom worked 40 hours or more since she was 16 till she was 55 and and couldn't physically do it anymore.

Do any of you have any idea how this tax bill is going to effect someone like her?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

They don’t care.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:12 AM
link   
OP has to be a bot right? Or a paid poster? How else can you explain this joke of a post.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
The plan is to pay for the rich peoples' tax cuts by cutting 1.5 trillion out of medicare and medicaid over ten years. Those mainly support poor and old people.

I wouldn't count on any nuance reaching anyone in this thread. You'll just hear the mantra "Poor people don't pay taxes" over and over again like that explains everything.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: scraedtosleep

They don’t care.


I can't believe that.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

They are not funding the children’s health insurance. One of the losers is my 8 yr old granddaughter. If that lets them sleep at night, what kind of heart is that? To give rich republican donors more.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
The real issue here isn't that anyone is taking money from the poor; it's that less might be given, of tax dollars, to people. There is a lot of welfare abuse in this nation. States that have instituted a work requirement have seen drastic drops in poverty rates, and decreases in welfare enrollment. Too much is given out, the way it is now. Expecting people ho can work to work, or at least actually try, isn't unreasonable. There are people who are on welfare in our area, and the local food bank is strained, but there are always, ALWAYS, openings for entry-level jobs, and they tend to not be filled, with places being short staffed as a rule. Anyone, virtually, could get these jobs. I know, because someone I knew had offers, who was far from the "ideal" job candidate. Sloppy, crass, etc, and still got offers, but the jobs remain unfilled.


Job bank style jobs don't help people though. They hurt people. They occupy a persons time, and take away the opportunity to learn something they can make a career out of.

Giving people jobs only works, when those jobs have upward mobility and lead to better jobs in the future. Entry level jobs, that one cannot move up from simply trap people in poverty.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

I'm a little older than your mom and in about the same boat. I might be wrong, but I don't think that they can touch the social security in this legislation because they are trying to do this via reconciliation since that is the only way that they can pass it without at least some dems jumping on board which isn't gonna happen.
although they might decide to review all of those on disability to weed out the ones they believe are scamming the system. in which case, I'd advise them to start with the kids that are on it instead of centering the attention on widows who are close to retirement age anyways. at least the danged kids still have a mom and dad who are bringing in some money!!



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




Possible, let's pinch it off and see if that is the case and if employers do in fact change along with the burdens on the taxpayers.



some would have to readjust their whole payroll in order to pay their lower wage employees more, which might mean that their higher paid employees might see some major pay cuts!!! either that or their investors would see some cuts. then there's the whole republican argument that is made when the issue of raising the minimum wage comes up.... and just how inflationary it is and how many jobs will be lost because of it..

which makes me think that your statement isn't really what you want or believe will happen. you just think that starvation will motivate the people to get into gear and get out there and get higher paying jobs for themselves...
which leads to two other problems...
one there isn't enough higher paying jobs for everyone who needs one
and two, if they all did manage to move up into those higher paying jobs, there would still be a need for people to do the jobs that they were doing..



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes and your point?all the poor will pool thier money together? thats highly unlikely



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes and your point?all the poor will pool thier money together? thats highly unlikely


The article in the OP was talking about the aggregate affect of the cuts.

The post I replied to said the poor don't have billions and therefore the article was wrong.

I pointed out that in total they do have billions therefore the point of the article stands.

No sure why that needed explaining as seems ludicrous obvious.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I do believe that the work requirement is within the federal laws, and the only reason why some state were able to not enforce it was because they had high unemployment.. which most states unemployment numbers have decreased to the point where they are enforcing the work requirement. which means they either have to be in a job training program, doing community service, or be disabled or a single mom with very young children...
so I am assuming you are griping about the single moms with the young kids.

so, here ya go....
when someone on total welfare goes into the workforce, they will get extra money for childcare, they will get a clothing allowance, they will get additional money, might even get a car, for transportation, they will even get a little bit extra to cover the cost of their lunch!!! and then through the magic of some mathematical formula, the amount of money that they will be earning along with all those expenses, will be plugged in and a new benefit amount will be spit out... which guess what, if you are talking about one of those entry level jobs.... they walk away with a bigger benefit amount after all is said and done!! so unless those entry level jobs can lead to much higher wages within a few years, the burden to the taxpayers are really much higher. so much higher it might be better to let those single moms stay home and raise the next generation which according the the right is their primary job anyways!!!

more than likely if you start taxing the people who are on these programs the only result will be that the programs will have to readjust their income guidelines to accommodate the fact that their paychecks don't have the spending power they used to because of the taxes..




edit on 28-11-2017 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: GuidedKill

Collectively , obviously...

Did you really think that was a counterpoint or just trolling??



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

That’s not the way it works..

The limit is set so low that basically a minimum wage job removes your eligiblity for everything except food stamps.. or close enough..

If you are in total welfare it only equates to 250$ a month plus food stamps..

Growing up in trailerpark MS and Kansas City (not quite as trailerpark but close) I have been around countless people getting assistance.

The whole propaganda about “people haveinf kids for welfare” and such are just retarded..

Welfare payments are too low to take care of ANYONE.. and once you have even a crappy job that won’t pay the bills either you basically lose any other benefit..

Food stamps is the only place where welfare actually provides all a person would need..



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join