How 'Bout That New Tax Adjustment?

Got my first taste of the Trump Tax Rollback. My paycheck was $117 heavier. Let's call that an extra $235 per month.

What am I going to do with those extra dollars now? I can buy me a new set of tires for my truck this Summer (and I damn sure need those). I can buy another set of re-loading dies. I can buy more bullets and powder. Hoarding those dollars in a savings account ain't gonna keep the economy going. And, if the banks fail (as we all know they're going to) I'd rather have goods in-hand than lose it all for no good reason. I would like to spend this extra money on goods that are staying right here in the good ol' US of A. #MAGA

What I am starting to get is why Nancy 'cold-heart' Pelosi was none too happy about this. It was her constituents who were Hoovering up all these tax dollars. Much better that they wound up back in my wallet, back in your wallet/purse, back in our neighbor's wallets. It's funny that not even one entitlement rat showed up on TV to say, "Good for you guys. I'm glad you're keeping some more of that money you're working hard for every day."

Happy Friday folks!!

a reply to: Deplorable

Let's call that an extra $235 per month.

Whats that 2500 a year?

Out here, thats not even one months rent.

80 % of the tax 'breaks' went to the Rich.

a reply to: Deplorable

Good for you!


Though it is just crumbs to the "better people", there are those of us who value having more of our own money.

a reply to: Deplorable

If you are ok with CHUMP CHANGE while the tax bill give Don the Con's billionaire buddies tens of millions in tax break you really need a reality check.

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: Deplorable

If you are ok with CHUMP CHANGE while the tax bill give Don the Con's billionaire buddies tens of millions in tax break you really need a reality check.

You call it "chump change" but the asstard leftists wouldn't even do that.

I guess you'll send any extra money back to the government because you don't need it.

Works out to about $50 extra a month for us. That's honestly not even noticeable for us despite being lower MC for where we live.

originally posted by: intrptr
Whats that 2500 a year?

2500 more of the man's own earnings than he was allowed to keep for himself under the previous administration's tax policy.

The top 20% of earners paid 95% of net tax revenue last year... of course they're going to see a larger chunk of dollars left in their possession under any fair tax plan. I mean, really... it's not even difficult math to understand there, man.

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: Deplorable

If you are ok with CHUMP CHANGE while the tax bill give Don the Con's billionaire buddies tens of millions in tax break you really need a reality check.

OMG no!!! The people paying hundreds of millions in taxes are getting 10s of millions in tax breaks while I sit here making tens of thousands and getting singles of thousands in tax breaks!!! Where's my tens of millions?

Seriously, the numbers work out in favor of a concept known as fairness. If someone throws a party, buys all the food, buys all the drink, pays for the club, pays the DJ, and then hands out gift bags to all the guests, you're literally looking at people complaining because they walked into the club wearing jeans and a t-shirt and weren't gifted enough to walk out in an Armani suit like the host wore.

I asked my daughter, no change. She makes about $2500 per month.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: Deplorable

If you are ok with CHUMP CHANGE while the tax bill give Don the Con's billionaire buddies tens of millions in tax break you really need a reality check.

OMG no!!! The people paying hundreds of millions in taxes are getting 10s of millions in tax breaks while I sit here making tens of thousands and getting singles of thousands in tax breaks!!! Where's my tens of millions?

Seriously, the numbers work out in favor of a concept known as fairness. If someone throws a party, buys all the food, buys all the drink, pays for the club, pays the DJ, and then hands out gift bags to all the guests, you're literally looking at people complaining because they walked into the club wearing jeans and a t-shirt and weren't gifted enough to walk out in an Armani suit like the host wore.

HA! Ahahahaha!

Bro.

Fairness would be closing all corporate welfare loopholes the ultra-rich getting nice shiny, new tax breaks already take advantage of. That's where the "fairness" crap gets very lopsided.

originally posted by: Nyiah
Works out to about $50 extra a month for us. That's honestly not even noticeable for us despite being lower MC for where we live.

Perhaps, but I'm fairly sure if you were suddenly saddled with a $50 a month increase in your grocery bill and read where the store's CEO got a nice bonus we'd never hear the end of it from you. As for me? I'm seeing more of the money I exchange my time and talents for coming home with me today, ready for me to use in whatever way my wife and I choose to use our own money. It's a beautiful, glorious, fair thing be it $1 or $100... it's a good feeling.

a reply to: Deplorable

being in the dollar is actually about to become a good place to be if the Fed really does raise interests rates and it doesn't crash the economy.

a reply to: Nyiah

47% of earners pay zero dollars in net income taxes and actually saw more money in IRS rebates paid to them than they paid to the IRS last year... your idea of what is and what is not "fair" isn't sustainable.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Nyiah

47% of earners pay zero dollars in net income taxes and actually saw more money in IRS rebates paid to them than they paid to the IRS last year... your idea of what is and what is not "fair" isn't sustainable.

So, you ARE all for corporate welfare, because poor people?

Thanks for sharing that twisted logic, I guess.

a reply to: MOMof3

Depending on deductions, marital status, and children, someone making $30,000 a year could see a huge cut if they have kids or see a very small cut if they are single and childless. She should have seen some change (like $20 extra with no kids or spouse) and if it was truly "unchanged" then something else is going on there. Perhaps her employer didn't get the new rates in their system yet? There is no mechanism by which she wouldn't have seen some sort of change if the new system is up and running in her company's HR program.

a reply to: Nyiah

No, I'm not for corporate welfare, but what you too frequently complain about isn't corporate welfare. Taking less from an entity (individual tax payer or corporation) in taxes is in no way "welfare." I am opposed to kickbacks, subsidies, and TARP was an abomination... I have zero beef with Uncle Sam stealing less money from anyone who earned it, however.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Nyiah

No, I'm not for corporate welfare, but what you too frequently complain about isn't corporate welfare. Taking less from an entity (individual tax payer or corporation) in taxes is in no way "welfare." I am opposed to kickbacks, subsidies, and TARP was an abomination... I have zero beef with Uncle Sam stealing less money from anyone who earned it, however.

The kickbacks, subsidies and TARP garbage is what I mean here, straight up. It's a highly slanted field they're gaming to reap the most buck they can between CW & tax cuts. A poor family getting back a couple grand is peanuts next to that poker hand.

Edit: And technically speaking, certain...overly advantageous tax cuts are considered CW also, so depending on who you ask, tax cuts of any kind to an excessive amount can be construed as corporate welfare.

a reply to: Deplorable

If I may be boring but practical, buy the tyres. I had to literally dump a car because I couldn't get it through the yearly government vehicle certification because all the tyres were bald and they wanted 400 dollars or thereabouts for 4 new ones. The car itself was worth about that too, an old banger but the engine was sound. First car I ever had (I'm almost 50) and probably the last one I'll ever have too. It was a gift from someone too sick to drive themselves, I could never afford a car on my own.

Happy Friday!

a reply to: Nyiah

Let's set the table here a bit, Nyiah.
If we are going to have income tax (and sadly, we almost certainly are stuck with this debacle forever), then EVERYONE who earns money should be required to pay tax on their earnings, period, no deductions, no rebates, no special pandering, nothing. Across the board, everyone should have skin in the game. It is only by having skin in the game that we have a voter base which will make good decisions. As it stands now, we have far too many voters who only show up when there's freebies and pandering dowries to be had "whore your vote to me in exchange for more of those wealthy jerks' money!" would not be possible under a system by which you get what you put in to this life and only what you put in, being allowed to properly succeed of fail by your own merits and veracity, alone.

A poor family receiving a couple grand above and beyond what they paid in is peanuts... but when you realize there's upwards of 35 million of them doing it... well, at $2k per pop (a tragically underestimation, but makes for quick maths) now we're at $70 Billion a year. My God, the TARP funds (which were paid back) by the big banks were less than that for even the largest recipients... and as I stated, that was the part of TARP which was repaid and represented a zero interest loan, NOT a welfare payout. If you want to talk about the portion of TARP the tax payers took it in the ass over, then let's talk the $187 Billion Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac screwed the People for. How did they manage to get in that position? Oh, that's right... Fannie and Freddie were the brainchild of the welfare state that came out of the Great Depression. So you're rip roaring angry about TARP? Good, you should be, and your ire should be directed at the US government circa 1938, particularly at FDR, for meddling in private business affairs to such a degree that it cost this country BILLIONS of dollars just to keep the whole mess from sinking.

a reply to: Deplorable
Thing is, that money on tires helps to pay for the next persons’ raise, in theory.