Seems we are at a moment of definition for Republicans,

A

archives

Verified User
"Three new analysis of the Senate's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act all delivered bad news for Republican leaders."

"The Tax Policy Center found that more than 50% of Americans would see a tax increase in 2027 under the bill."

"Only one out of 42 economists surveyed by the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business said the bill would increase economic growth substantially."

"The Penn-Wharton Budget Model found that the bill would blow a hole in the federal deficit."

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-analysis-reviews-text-2017-11

Are the Republican so desperate for any measure they can claim was an accomplishment that they will actually pass what is not only a mistake but also directly contradicts the economic principles they have been proclaiming for decade?
 
Oh, how utterly unexpected. Partisan analysts "project" that a tax reform proposal that they oppose will turn out badly.

This has all the elements of surprise, doesn't it, anchovies? :rofl2:
 
cawacko said:
LOL. A poll asking people what the media has told them? Well done think progress
Click to expand...

Are you saying your belief is that the proposed GOP tax reform is a good thing? If so, what do you base that on? A degree in economics, or what the media told you? ;~)

I think it's safe to say that any time you 1) decrease revenue, and/or 2) decrease personal/corporate income, you're not going to do well financially.

If this bill does indeed decrease corporate tax rates, it will also decrease revenue, yes? Will this revenue be offset by the increase in taxes that lower- to middle-income taxpayers will shell out? If this is true, are you okay with that?

This article is over a year old, but still accurate:

"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.

"Only profitable firms were included in the analysis since firms that lost money - like many energy companies - wouldn't be expected to pay taxes."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...-profitable-companies-paid-no-taxes/81399094/
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Are you saying your belief is that the proposed GOP tax reform is a good thing? If so, what do you base that on? A degree in economics, or what the media told you? ;~)

I think it's safe to say that any time you 1) decrease revenue, and/or 2) decrease personal/corporate income, you're not going to do well financially.

If this bill does indeed decrease corporate tax rates, it will also decrease revenue, yes? Will this revenue be offset by the increase in taxes that lower- to middle-income taxpayers will shell out? If this is true, are you okay with that?

This article is over a year old, but still accurate:

"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.

"Only profitable firms were included in the analysis since firms that lost money - like many energy companies - wouldn't be expected to pay taxes."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...-profitable-companies-paid-no-taxes/81399094/
Click to expand...

In this case by media I was thinking more what the media says the politicians say. I've read up on the House and Senate proposals, sat through a real estate conference that got into good detail on it and I still don't know most of what's in the proposal. So not to say I should be some barometer because I shouldn't but I know most people haven't read deeply into all that is being proposed. So articles like this don't say much imo.

I know from a real estate perspective people on the commercial side of the industry like it a lot more than those on the residential side. Groups like the National Association of Realtors have a very powerful lobbying arm and they cut across the right and left political spectrum and they aren't happy.
 
cawacko said:
In this case by media I was thinking more what the media says the politicians say. I've read up on the House and Senate proposals, sat through a real estate conference that got into good detail on it and I still don't know most of what's in the proposal. So not to say I should be some barometer because I shouldn't but I know most people haven't read deeply into all that is being proposed. So articles like this don't say much imo.

I know from a real estate perspective people on the commercial side of the industry like it a lot more than those on the residential side. Groups like the National Association of Realtors have a very powerful lobbying arm and they cut across the right and left political spectrum and they aren't happy.
Click to expand...

Thanks for providing that viewpoint. I hope that the Realtors Assn. can bring some sense to these idiots in DC. I know that AARP is also extremely unhappy with the cuts to Medicare/Medicaid, as is the AMA. But will their power be enough to defeat the biggest power of all -- $$?

I am definitely in favor of cutting taxes for small businesses. I'm going to arbitrarily, for the sake of this, say that I would define a "small business" as one that nets <$1M/annually and/or employs <100 employees. I'm no economist though, so this is only my personal opinion. I worked for 9 years for a business that was privately-owned and this pretty much describes it. When business was good, they were hiring and buying new equipment; the CEO didn't put the profits into his own pocket. When business was poor in one sector (they were a dual publishing and bar-code manufacturing firm), rather than laying off people if at all possible, they moved ppl from the sad sector into the glad sector.

OTOH if you look at a typical huge American corporation now, the CEO is taking home on the order of 300x* more than the average employee. So giving large corps. a tax break is just going to put extra $$ in the pockets of already fabulously-wealthy individuals, and is not going to do a damn thing for us worker bees..... or for our shared economy.

* http://fortune.com/2015/06/22/ceo-vs-worker-pay/
 
archives said:
"Three new analysis of the Senate's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act all delivered bad news for Republican leaders."

"The Tax Policy Center found that more than 50% of Americans would see a tax increase in 2027 under the bill."

"Only one out of 42 economists surveyed by the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business said the bill would increase economic growth substantially."

"The Penn-Wharton Budget Model found that the bill would blow a hole in the federal deficit."

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-analysis-reviews-text-2017-11

Are the Republican so desperate for any measure they can claim was an accomplishment that they will actually pass what is not only a mistake but also directly contradicts the economic principles they have been proclaiming for decade?
Click to expand...

2027?

Seriously? You actually believe that mess?
 
I'll understand if no liberal on JPP ever gives Trump any credit if the reforms are passed and things turn out well for this country.

I'll also understand if no liberal on JPP refuses to accept a tax cut, and insists on donating any money they save to the Treasury.
 
Teflon Don said:
2027?

Seriously? You actually believe that mess?
Click to expand...

She foolishly thinks that corporations don't pass on their overhead - including taxes - in the form of price hikes that impact us all.

She foolishly thinks that CEOs don't deserve the pay and perks the board of directors choose to give them because it's "300X more" than someone else earns.

She foolishly thinks that corporations aren't owned by individual members of the public and institutional shareholders like mutual funds, unions and pension funds.

Yes, she IS that stupid and repugnant.
 
archives said:
"The Tax Policy Center found that more than 50% of Americans would see a tax increase in 2027 under the bill."
Click to expand...

lol.....because it expires in ten years and the tax cuts that 50% of Americans would see from 2017 till 2027 would go away......how fucking stupid can lib'ruls be?......

"The Penn-Wharton Budget Model found that the bill would blow a hole in the federal deficit."
Click to expand...

this would be the hole that is one tenth the size of the whole hole Obama blew in the federal deficit........
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol.....because it expires in ten years and the tax cuts that 50% of Americans would see from 2017 till 2027 would go away......how fucking stupid can lib'ruls be?......
Click to expand...

Pretty dumb.

Remember when lib'ruls thought Trump's tax proposals were great when someone told them they came from Bernie and Hillary?

 
God bless America said:
I'll understand if no liberal on JPP ever gives Trump any credit if the reforms are passed and things turn out well for this country.

I'll also understand if no liberal on JPP refuses to accept a tax cut, and insists on donating any money they save to the Treasury.
Click to expand...

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot so,ebony and I wouldn't lose voters"

He saw the likes of emoji before emoji even knew it
 
anchovies said:
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot so,ebony and I wouldn't lose voters" He saw the likes of emoji before emoji even knew it
Click to expand...

Get back to me if Trump's proposals make it into law and America suffers as a result, anchovies.

We all saw liberal projections fail last year. Some of us learned from that. Obviously you didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top