The GOP tax plan will...raise taxes for the rich?

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: links234
You are joking right? Giving away money is what reduces debt?

It does. Poor people who get 'free' money spend that money on goods and services which, in turn, increases demand requiring an increase in supply. Every dollar spent in cash given to poor people becomes $1.47 put into the economy.

It costs the government less money to just hand out cash to the poor than it does to subsidize payments on goods like food and housing.

The US at one time was the leader in technology and innovation.

You mean when we had a top marginal tax rate of 91%?

Yep . I am on the borderline...if I turn down a little of the voluntary overtime , I will be getting a very nice tax break...

a reply to: links234

a reply to: matafuchs

Does it get rid of the home mortgage deduction?

If yes, then it sucks.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: intrepid
I read about this this morning. If you're talking about citizens then yes. Include the very rich, ie: corporations then no. They get the biggest break. It will also add 1.5 trillion to the debt over 10 years. And you know who ends up paying that. The middle class. Fancy magicians handwork.

American corporate taxes are some of the highest, if not the highest, on the entire planet.

20% of big companies pay 0 tax

Prior to 2012, the GAO estimated that 24% of profitable large corporations owed no income tax in 2011, 22% owed nothing in 2010 and 21% owed nothing in 2009.

Tell me again about the taxes for large successful corporations...

There are 27 companies in the Standard & Poor's 500, including telecom firm Level 3 Communications (LVLT), airline United Continental (UAL) and automaker General Motors (GM), that reported paying no income tax expense in 2015 despite reporting pre-tax profits, according to a USA TODAY analysis of data from S&P Global Market Intelligence.

source

1. General Electric Co., International Paper Co., Priceline Group, and Pacific Gas & Electric Co. were among the companies that the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy says had no net tax liability at all over the period.

source

So you only pay tax until you are a successful large corporation, and then you find holes in the tax code and just "opt out" right?

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: matafuchs

It's still an idiotic way to tax a citizenry...if you are successful, you are punished. The more successful that you are, the more you will be punished.

Our bracketed tax system and all of its loopholes and write-offs and rebates and everything else is a design obviously intended for clandestine activity.

We need something more simple.

Successful at what, exactly?
Keeping more money for themselves?

Entrepreneurial hero Steve Jobs, for example...

Bushnell offered the bonus because he disliked how new Atari games required 150 to 170 chips; he knew that Jobs' friend Steve Wozniak, an employee of Hewlett-Packard, had designed a version of Pong that used about 30 chips. Jobs had little specialized knowledge of circuit board design but knew Wozniak was capable of producing designs with a small number of chips. He convinced Wozniak to work with him, promising to split the fee evenly between them if Wozniak could minimize the number of chips. Wozniak had no sketches and instead interpreted the game from its description. To save parts, he had "tricky little designs" difficult to understand for most engineers. Near the end of development, Wozniak considered moving the high score to the screen's top, but Jobs claimed Bushnell wanted it at the bottom; Wozniak was unaware of any truth to his claims. The original deadline was met after Wozniak worked at Atari four nights straight, doing some additional designs while at his day job at Hewlett-Packard. This equated to a bonus of $5,000, which Jobs kept secret from Wozniak. Wozniak has stated he only received payment of $350; he believed for years that Atari had promised $700 for a design using fewer than 50 chips, and $1000 for fewer than 40, stating in 1984 "We only got 700 bucks for it." Wozniak was the engineer, and Jobs was the breadboarder and tester. Wozniak's original design used 42 chips; the final, working breadboard he and Jobs delivered to Atari used 44, but Wozniak said, "We were so tired we couldn't cut it down."

An good salesman doesn't let on that he's neither truthful nor fair.

Welfare mentality. That is what you have. Robbing Peter to pay Paul does not work. So a 'poor person' should get free money collected on the backs on the middle class family who also could use 700 in EBT but does not qualify but pays taxes.

There should be no subsidies. There should be no handouts. Welfare was created to help you get back on your feet not live.

You are describing a Socialist/Communist Nation. Take a look and tell me where in the last 2 centuries that has worked out.

a reply to: dfnj2015

The change to the mortgage interest deduction drew immediate attention Thursday. Under current tax law, Americans can deduct interest payments made on their first $1 million worth of home loans. The bill would allow existing mortgages to keep the current rules, but for new mortgages, home buyers would be able to deduct interest payments made only on their first $500,000 worth of loans.

Again, this is for the middle class....

originally posted by: Greven
Successful at what, exactly?
Keeping more money for themselves?

What business is it of yours what other people do with their own earning?

That's a serious question, because income is a direct reflection of what you put in to something (in general). It is compensation for your skill, time, effort, knowledge, experience, and myriad other things unique to and only available through you. Those whose compensation is more than mine can do whatever they want to with it, as far as I'm concerned, within the confines of the law.

As for Steve Jobs, I don't care about anecdotal stories. There are also many stories that I could post about millionaires and billionaires being extraordinarily philanthropic.

I would argue, though, that Jobs did something illegal in your little unlinked story, so it wouldn't fall under my definition. But, if Wozniak never pursued it, that's on him. There will always be untrustworthy people in our world. We must do our own due diligence.