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.

 

Senate passes tax reform bill

page: 16
22
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
You're the problem. You're the reason people are so dismissive of programs that are there to help people who need it. Even when you make it, even when you are financially sitting on top of the world compared to others, you still complain because someone else might actually see a benefit.


That's just it. People will not see a benefit.
thehill.com...

At best you'll get lower taxes for a couple years, at the expense of very inflationary policies.


originally posted by: TheRedneck
You assume much. I WAS CEO of a major firm in my industry... the one that was putting all the others out of business. I did that for ten years. And we were heading national, within a year of unveiling a new revolution in the industry that allowed that; I established it as an S-Corp so that it could happen. I created that business, and I revolutionized the industry.


You are not a major firm unless you're international, you weren't even national. Your invention clearly didn't work, because you're not in that business anymore.
edit on 3-12-2017 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

What part of the the Hill not writing the bill are you having trouble with, exactly? Try reading it for yourself. You are capable of doing that, right?

I wasn't national, but you haven't done squat except complain. Where does that leave you?

Oh, that's right... crying about things that don't exist...

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Where have I complained? Displeasure and dislike is not complaining. On the other hand, I have a preference for bills that actually help people.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: TheRedneck
You're the problem. You're the reason people are so dismissive of programs that are there to help people who need it. Even when you make it, even when you are financially sitting on top of the world compared to others, you still complain because someone else might actually see a benefit.


That's just it. People will not see a benefit.
thehill.com...

At best you'll get lower taxes for a couple years, at the expense of very inflationary policies.



This is false. The article admits some companies did say they will reinvest the money into hiring more workers and raising wages. The companies that don't will recapitalize and reward shareholders, which helps anyone who has investments in the stock market. You did say you've been saving for retirement, didn't you? Do you have any market investments? A lot of middle class families do, and they will see benefit from that. So either way, people will see benefit from that. That's a fact you cannot change. Then there's the part the article completely neglects to talk about, which is that lowering the corporate rate will entice more companies to move here and less to leave, which is beneficial to everyone.

And many of us will see benefit from the individual tax changes. So you're wrong on pretty much every front here.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Yes, I conceded the point that shareholders would see a gain. That's typically in the form of investment accounts though. It doesn't help retail spending which is the real driver of local economic activity.

I think this bill will be great for people with investments. The majority of working Americans do not have savings accounts though, and most don't even have retirement accounts. They will not see a benefit.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: UKTruth
If you like you can keep lying - your choice. You can even say 'again' each time you lie if you like. Your lies won't matter thought when middle-class people all over America start seeing more money in their pockets each month.
The biggest personal cuts are for the middle class.


thehill.com...

The middle class will not benefit.


The article is no more than an opinion piece because it lumps together a number of areas that could affect actual take-home pay but are forecasts. Don't fall for that. Read the actual bill. You can work out exactly the difference in take-home pay today vs the new bill. Unless maths now no longer applies - the middle class are getting a very large tax cut and it's the majority of the middle class.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: face23785

Yes, I conceded the point that shareholders would see a gain. That's typically in the form of investment accounts though. It doesn't help retail spending which is the real driver of local economic activity.

I think this bill will be great for people with investments. The majority of working Americans do not have savings accounts though, and most don't even have retirement accounts. They will not see a benefit.


You really should research before you post. Literally every post I see from you is wrong.


According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32% of Americans are saving for retirement in a 401(k). Granted, that owes partly to the fact that 401(k)s are employer-dependent, and not every company offers one.


32% sounds like a small number, but that's around 100 million Americans if they meant 32% of the entire population. They probably actually meant 32% of the working age population, that's around 77 million people with 401ks. And at least 25.8 million people have IRAs, since there was a study done on them. That adds up to about half the working population (there's some overlap, since some people have both). But there's also likely IRAs that weren't studied. If I had the time I'm sure I could find an overall number. And rich people generally don't use 401k and IRAs because they have better options. About 50% of Americans are middle class. So by default these numbers have to include the majority of middle class Americans having retirement accounts, the exact opposite of what you said.

Lots of middle class people will benefit even if no companies use the corporate tax cuts to hire more workers and raise wages. And some have already said they will, so that's even more middle class benefit.

The idea that this will only benefit the rich is demonstrably false. This has been shown to you over and over in this thread. You now know you're pushing a lie. Stop pushing a lie.


edit on 3 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: UKTruth
If you like you can keep lying - your choice. You can even say 'again' each time you lie if you like. Your lies won't matter thought when middle-class people all over America start seeing more money in their pockets each month.
The biggest personal cuts are for the middle class.


thehill.com...

The middle class will not benefit.


The article is no more than an opinion piece because it lumps together a number of areas that could affect actual take-home pay but are forecasts. Don't fall for that. Read the actual bill. You can work out exactly the difference in take-home pay today vs the new bill. Unless maths now no longer applies - the middle class are getting a very large tax cut and it's the majority of the middle class.


This is the problem. Most of the people complaining don't know how their taxes work, so they're dependent upon pundits to tell them if they will benefit. And their chosen pundits are lying to them. They don't care though, they just want to be told what to think.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: nwtrucker

Well it’s never happening now after giving away a trillion and half.


That Trillion and a half doesn't disappear. It's energy. It produces more energy.

Check the increase in the federal coffers after both the JFK and Reagan tax cuts. LOOK.

It isn't debatable.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Saving in a 401k is a bit misleading. Of those who are saving, most put very little into the account. Only 10% of participants actually max out a 401k each year.

www.businessinsider.com...

Of those that do save, the average amount is 5% per year, which is only $2700.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan


Where have I complained?

Every single post you have made on this subject.


Displeasure and dislike is not complaining.

Yes it is. That's exactly what it is.


On the other hand, I have a preference for bills that actually help people.

No, you don't. You've made that clear. You have a preference for bills that help YOU. Other people are just out of luck. Too bad, so sad.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: face23785

Saving in a 401k is a bit misleading. Of those who are saving, most put very little into the account. Only 10% of participants actually max out a 401k each year.

www.businessinsider.com...

Of those that do save, the average amount is 5% per year, which is only $2700.

www.youtube.com...


Many financial planners recommend that you save 10-15% of your pay for retirement. So 5% is actually much better than it sounds. The fact that you don't know this shows an alarming lack of even basic knowledge to be engaging in discussion on this subject.

And you've still been shown to be wrong that most working class don't save for retirement. You've been shown to be wrong about a lot of things in this thread. Care to make any more baseless claims we can debunk in 5 minutes on Google? It's actually getting amusing at this point. Or would you care to save yourself some embarrassment and do some basic research?
edit on 3 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan


Saving in a 401k is a bit misleading. Of those who are saving, most put very little into the account. Only 10% of participants actually max out a 401k each year.

...

Of those that do save, the average amount is 5% per year, which is only $2700.

So you think everyone should max out their 401k, or they aren't doing their part? And saving 5% of income isn't sufficient?

Boy, oh, boy, are you really that clueless?

401k retirement accounts are long-range accounts, which use small investment amounts over a long time to achieve enough income for retirement. As long as the investor has 30-40 years to contribute, that 5% is quite sufficient, probably over-sufficient even. Only someone with absolutely no concept of the time value of money would ever consider making such a statement.

Do you understand what investment means, even? Are you capable of doing your own taxes?

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

A few pages back he claimed he studied something to do with finance in college. I'd love to know at which college so I can tell anyone interested in finance where not to go to school. He doesn't even have the basics down.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Heck, at my school, one has to take Engineering Economy. It's a 'hit-the-high-points' beginner level economics class tailored to engineering analysis techniques (to keep us nerds interested, I guess). One week in, everything he has said was disproved by that one low-level course.

Of course, my AAS (Computer Systems) also included quite a few business courses, and I indulged my curiosity about accounting... so I had a head start.

The dude is in for some serious awakening. Tech industries do normally require a degree, but that's to get the interview... nothing else. Once you get through that interview and get the job, you are expected to be capable of producing whatever is needed, and if you can't... it's time to go so someone else can. Part of that is knowledge from school, yes, but a larger part is experience and the ability to apply that knowledge, neither of which he has.

And I'm a soft-hearted fool that I even care.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Low level college courses is being generous. Most of what he thinks is disproved in high school economics classes.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

They teach those?


TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

And whose fault is that?

It certainly isn't the fault of anyone passing the measure. If you have the ability to do it and you aren't, that's your fault and no one else's.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: face23785

They teach those?


TheRedneck


When I was in high school they did. Judging from the complete lack of understanding some of these kids seem to have about who pays back their student loans, maybe they removed said classes.



posted on Dec, 3 2017 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Aazadan

And whose fault is that?

It certainly isn't the fault of anyone passing the measure. If you have the ability to do it and you aren't, that's your fault and no one else's.


That's the whole point. Financial education in the US is horrible. An even bigger problem than that though, is that people don't have the opportunity to save. Even with rents on a decline right now, the average rent is $1350/month, which is typically 37% of income. Throw in utilities and you're approaching 45%. When nearly half of ones income just goes to shelter, how can people be expected to save anything?




top topics



 
22
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join