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.

 

Argh !!! Those Damn Tax Cuts are TERRIBLE FOR AMERICANS !!!

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

How is the tax cut going to be paid for? Estimates vary but it could add as much as $20T to the debt.
The answer ding, dong is estimated increased revenues from the tax cut come far short so it will be borrowed. Fiscally conservative republicans no longer exist and you dipsticks continue to prove the only people you care about is yourselves and your rich buddies.




posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

The tax bills may not add debt. But the lack of revenue for spending and unpredictable global events is what does.

Everyone who cuts taxes has said the same and since Reagan they have all added debt and required tax increases.

Reagan evendors had a congress that worked bipartisan.


Less revenue for public sectors services, but it grows the private sector because corporations have massive increase in profit because of lower corporate tax. The overall economy may not change much, but the private sector is far more efficient than the public sector due to competition.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: Outlier13

How is the tax cut going to be paid for? Estimates vary but it could add as much as $20T to the debt.
The answer ding, dong is estimated increased revenues from the tax cut come far short so it will be borrowed. Fiscally conservative republicans no longer exist and you dipsticks continue to prove the only people you care about is yourselves and your rich buddies.



Yup. They don't care about slaughtering people overseas. Buying fighter jets like crazy even though they cost hundreds of millions each. Killing people in Syria. Bombing people in Iran. Bunch of bastards. That's why I hoped Gary Johnson or Jill Stein win election, but Americans are too foolish to vote the right candidates.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: pv1984

It is not that simple. If you have to borrow to buy defense equipment to protect commerce it is what it is.

If you can't pay for a solid primary education you loose an edge in innovation.

It's a balancing act. Usually extreme points of view don't work.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I understand all of that, and that's why I have always noted in these discussions that the next necessary step is to reduce the spending to which our government in addicted.

Start with the "penny plan" this year, but a true penny plan--not reducing the rate of increase in the budget, but actually taking 1% off of everything across the board from last year's budget.

We need to cut, but we need to do it slowly, and we need to audit EVERY agency and see what the hell is truly going on with our spending.

It's no big secret that I'm a federal employee, and I watch every year at budget time people scrambling to purchase things in order to prove that they "need" at least the same budget as last year, if not an increase for the next year. And the money often gets spent on things that are unnecessary and just sit and gather dust. It may not seem to be a big thing in just one section, but when you realize that there are thousands and thousands of sections under different agencies, it really adds up to a LOT of tax dollars that do not need to be spent.

And it's been happening this way since I joined up and served in the military in 1998--the same cycle of rushing to buy non-essentials because they want a better budget the following year.

There is a ton of money that could be axed from the federal budget, but no one is willing to do it, and it's probably the biggest failure of our government.

ETA: And I'm proud to say that I call Mr. Paul my senator and vote for him ever time his name is on the ballot. I don't agree with everything, but his hawkish nature on government spending is plenty for me.
edit on 5-1-2018 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pv1984

It is not that simple. If you have to borrow to buy defense equipment to protect commerce it is what it is.

If you can't pay for a solid primary education you loose an edge in innovation.

It's a balancing act. Usually extreme points of view don't work.


Education is from state budget. Has nothing to do with federal budget. Public schools suck compared to private schools. No competition. Less efficient.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Everyone rejoicing in these tax cuts better be putting any extra money away for retirement and healthcare. That is because these tax cuts will be used as an excuse to gut social security and medicare. You look at it on a lifetime basis and the tax cuts will mean that each average American will have less to spend overall.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Paul is a nut according to the conservative press for even suggesting a freeze in spending. Not a cut. A freeze for the future balance of the budget...

They have begun proposing already a deficit budget...

So it's probably a good idea to be a little skeptical this tax cut will pan out the way it's been sold.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

It's not an opinion: A tax cut is not an expenditure by the federal government, it is a possible reduction in revenue intake.

That's not the same thing.

If I got a pay cut, that would not be the same thing as me spending money.

I can't make it much more simple than that to understand. But, if you're okay with a hypothetical 90% tax rate, it's probable that you and I will not see eye-to-eye on taxes at all.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
Everyone rejoicing in these tax cuts better be putting any extra money away for retirement and healthcare. That is because these tax cuts will be used as an excuse to gut social security and medicare. You look at it on a lifetime basis and the tax cuts will mean that each average American will have less to spend overall.


Want free healthcare? Go to Canada. They are hiring.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Paul is a nut according to the conservative press for even suggesting a freeze in spending. Not a cut. A freeze for the future balance of the budget...

They have begun proposing already a deficit budget...

So it's probably a good idea to be a little skeptical this tax cut will pan out the way it's been sold.

Skepticism is fine, but I haven't argued anything about the way that it will pan out, I'm just arguing that it's not an expenditure by the federal government.

And who cares what establishment Republicans say--I'm convinced that very few, if any, actually employ critical thinking before they open their mouths. Same goes with establishment Democrats.

Hell, same goes for most establishment people



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: pv1984

Yes and no...many states particularly red states in the deep south require federal money to operate their budgets. Several states get federal educational aid..



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I care. They control the budget. At least democrats don't pretend to be conservative.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

You were talking about the conservative press...that's who I was calling "establishment Republicans." I wasn't talking about Congress in that comment.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Ahh..well they are one in the same imo..



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: richapau

You don't "pay for" a tax cut. It isn't the governments' money, it's the earners' money. Semantics aside, you spend less.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Semantics aside it's money you owe the government to have commerce structure to begin with.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

No we will never agree on taxes. We are a country with massive borders to protect. Not to mention the trillion dollar meddling we do outside our borders. If Trump wants a Wall, now he has to raise taxes, like Reagan did. And if the historical pattern holds, expect a recession. But it’s all good, the rich are ready for it.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

The tax bills may not add debt. But the lack of revenue for spending and unpredictable global events is what does.

Everyone who cuts taxes has said the same and since Reagan they have all added debt and required tax increases.

Reagan evendors had a congress that worked bipartisan.


That's actually addressed in the source I linked to. Read and get informed. It's not gonna increase the deficit.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: Outlier13

How is the tax cut going to be paid for? Estimates vary but it could add as much as $20T to the debt.
The answer ding, dong is estimated increased revenues from the tax cut come far short so it will be borrowed. Fiscally conservative republicans no longer exist and you dipsticks continue to prove the only people you care about is yourselves and your rich buddies.



Adds $20T? Whoever told you that lied to you.
edit on 5 1 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join