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: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:05 AM
link   
I'll wait until they reconcile it and pass it for real.




posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   
And for everyone complaining about "they dumped this 500 page bill with no time to read it" that's purposefully misleading. The vast majority of those 500 pages didn't change. All they had to read were the changes. You just got lied to by the media and some of your representatives if they led you to believe they didn't know one word of those 500 pages before last night.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Yep, Im an average American householder as well, and we are going to save 4k/year from what I have surmised, plus the process doesnt appear like its going to take the entire Saturday and part of Sunday to complete, nor will we have to pay huge money for preparation software etc...

People just love to complain, the only people that benefited from Obamacare was the less fortunate, monetarily poor of the country...I literally lost around 4800 in monthly payments from that, PLUS I got taxed on top of it for choosing the best plan my work offered and paying through the nose for it so my daughter could get the work done she needed.

I hear a lot of belly aching from folks, that from my perspective...only know what they feel, not any actual information...as usual.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: nwtrucker I sure hope you are right about that. I guess either way life will go on
Well I am in San Diego and am going to sit on the beach. I will ttyl have a nice day



Enjoy!

I hope so, too. This Wash, D.C., after all. Their ability to screw it up is legendary. We shall see....
edit on 2-12-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Vector99 Have you read any of the proposal? The big corporate company's currently pay a 35% corporate tax. That number will drop to 20%. I am still reading this behemoth of a thing. And there is very little information about this out there. I doubt this plan is good for average Joe but we will see I guess.



This plan already admits it will create deficit. The only way to negate that deficit is government spending reduction. The reductions likely won't come from benefit programs, but rather trimming the fat from the steak of governmental employment, how is that bad?



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: Vector99

Nobody can say. No one has had a chance to read the whole thing. They were scribbling changes to it after midnight last night. Do YOU REALLY know what's in it? Have you read it? And how many Senators do you think read that two inch thick bill last night?



They had to pass it to see what's in it.




posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

No pain, no gain. Less taxation will initially increase increase deficit, but after that economy grows and deficit is reduced.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Vector99 Have you read any of the proposal? The big corporate company's currently pay a 35% corporate tax. That number will drop to 20%. I am still reading this behemoth of a thing. And there is very little information about this out there. I doubt this plan is good for average Joe but we will see I guess.



This plan already admits it will create deficit. The only way to negate that deficit is government spending reduction. The reductions likely won't come from benefit programs, but rather trimming the fat from the steak of governmental employment, how is that bad?


Wrong, increased jobs and wage increases tax income. It has every time personal income has been cut. From JFK to Reagan. The problem was and always has been the bastards increase the spending.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Vector99 Have you read any of the proposal? The big corporate company's currently pay a 35% corporate tax. That number will drop to 20%. I am still reading this behemoth of a thing. And there is very little information about this out there. I doubt this plan is good for average Joe but we will see I guess.



This plan already admits it will create deficit. The only way to negate that deficit is government spending reduction. The reductions likely won't come from benefit programs, but rather trimming the fat from the steak of governmental employment, how is that bad?


It's not even necessarily true that it will add to the deficit. It will only create a deficit if our GDP growth over the next 10 years averages a measly 1.9%. That's the number they used to project that increase in the debt. If we grow at 2.5 or 3%, that increase to the debt will be wiped out. 1.9% was around the average growth rate of the Obama years, and that was one of the worst averages in history. Odds are we will average better than that over the next 10 years, no matter who is President. The historical average from the last 30 years or so is higher than that.

No matter what we need to cut spending though. We're way over-budget, even though we take in about $3.5T in revenue. If you can't balance the budget on $3.5T in revenue, you need to cut spending. You can't tax your way out of that.
edit on 2 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

Less tax for the rich, more debt for everyone else.

Some 'reform'.




Might be good to look for a cheaper country to live in?

1.4 tril in 10yrs?!!!

no one remember the 10 tril obama ran up in 8 yrs?





posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Vector99 Have you read any of the proposal? The big corporate company's currently pay a 35% corporate tax. That number will drop to 20%. I am still reading this behemoth of a thing. And there is very little information about this out there. I doubt this plan is good for average Joe but we will see I guess.



This plan already admits it will create deficit. The only way to negate that deficit is government spending reduction. The reductions likely won't come from benefit programs, but rather trimming the fat from the steak of governmental employment, how is that bad?


Wrong, increased jobs and wage increases tax income. It has every time personal income has been cut. From JFK to Reagan. The problem was and always has been the bastards increase the spending.

Wait, so you mean to tell me this plan has the potential to lower Joe and Jane's Everyday's Taxes, Decrease Federal Spending, Promote Job Growth, AND Incentivize more money into actual savings accounts?

WTF? Are we in nazi germany?



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

oh oh! I remember! I remember!


no one remember the 10 tril obama ran up in 8 yrs?



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   
I have a question.

If the left's opinion that rich people and corporations dont pay taxes now is true, why would they want this tax cut?



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I have a question.

If the left's opinion that rich people and corporations dont pay taxes now is true, why would they want this tax cut?



Even better question is, if higher taxes on the rich are better for the economy, why did Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress extend the Bush tax cuts in 2010?

Answer: because we were trying to recover from a recession and they knew the increase in taxes would be bad for the economy, and they'd get the blame. They were forced to make a rational decision based on facts instead of just push rhetoric, because they were in power at the time.
edit on 2 12 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

yeah, well you make them sound more thoughtful than they actually were....they still gave us a gazillion dollar tax increase called: Obamacare



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: face23785

yeah, well you make them sound more thoughtful than they actually were....they still gave us a gazillion dollar tax increase called: Obamacare


I wasn't trying to make it sound thoughtful. All they were concerned about was they would get the blame, so they were forced to do something that was against their false rhetoric, leave tax cuts in place.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

After this tax shift passes, it's trumpcare. Obamacare will be defunded.

I don't care if the Rich get more. That's why they are Rich and powerful. I just wish they had left my taxes alone. I have five years of paying off cancer treatments for my husband didn't need this increase and loss of deductions.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

The House won't read the bill, they'll sign virtually anything that could get through the Senate.



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: BlueJacket

After this tax shift passes, it's trumpcare. Obamacare will be defunded.

I don't care if the Rich get more. That's why they are Rich and powerful. I just wish they had left my taxes alone. I have five years of paying off cancer treatments for my husband didn't need this increase and loss of deductions.


There are charities that help with this sort of thing. I tried to suggest this to you once before. Did you look into any of them to see if you qualify?



posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

There's not much difference between the Senate bill and the House bill. The Senate bill destroys Obamacare's individual mandate, which makes it easier to pass in the House compared to the original House bill.




top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join