Senate bill is looking pretty good for us now....
« prev   poltics

6
7

Senate bill is looking pretty good for us now....

By anonymous following x   2017 Dec 2, 8:39am 2,646 views   134 comments   watch   quote     share    


#poltics All the changes helped my $200k dual income family.... even though we won’t itemized anymore. Losing the SALT deduction and home equity loan interest deduction make it impossible to itemize now... but atleast the lower brackets and ability to get a $2000 tax credit for our child offset any higher taxes due to not being able to itemize.

Hopefully the house passes this thing with minimal changes since the property tax deduction survived. The house bill was horrible for upper middle class earners in blue states. This softens the blow. There’s about a $3000 difference now between the senate and house bills for us.

It’s still stupid all these tax changes and it’s basically a wash for our family all said and done. Just glad we didn’t stretch and buy a really expensive house.... those people in our income level are getting screwed if they can’t combine those interest payments with SALT for a fat deduction.

« First    « Previous     Comments 95 - 134 of 134     Last »

95   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 4, 6:03pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_3b28c says
It's telling that you have to misrepresent in order to make an argument. If you had a stronger position, you wouldn't have to.


Bullshit: I didn't misrepresent anything. This is exactly how it is: donkeys are in favor in illegal immigration and against immigration enforcement, both on the border itself and inside the country. The first is evident from their opposition to "the wall", the second - from their insistance on sanctuary policies.
96   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 5, 5:45am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Heraclitusstudent says

If you don't deport illegal, and set up 'sanctuary' cities where they won't fear to be deported, then first you are obviously in favor of illegal immigration


What a crock of shit. Cities don't deport people, immigration is federal law. Sanctuary cities just don't do ICE's job for them.

If you don't stand up and demand people hiring illegals be put in jail then you are obviously in favor of illegal immigration. No jobs, no illegals Where are the raids on the big food processors like tyson and smithfeild since trump has taken office? Where are the raids on the big agri operations? Republican lawmakers fire up the base like you about illegals but constantly block any reform that would be meaningful. You are being played by people who are laughing all the way to the bank at how gullible you are.

Bread and circus. Works every time.
97   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 5, 5:49am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

FortWayne says
It didn’t fail, it saved America in the 80s.
It was known as a great recovery. You should know your history.


America was saved in the 80's by cheap oil prices, tripling the number of women in the work force, and 70 million baby boomers moving into the workplace while becoming consumers. You should know your history.
98   anon_8f378   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 5, 7:09am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

KimJongUn says
Bullshit: I didn't misrepresent anything. This is exactly how it is: donkeys are in favor in illegal immigration and against immigration enforcement, both on the border itself and inside the country. The first is evident from their opposition to "the wall", the second - from their insistance on sanctuary policies.


Dems are against boondoggle, huge wastes of money that will do nothing to curb illegal immigration.

Like Bob said--if you want to stop illegals, take away their jobs. Which means throwing a few CEOs in jail that are hiring them. It's very simple and costs almost nothing.
99   HEYYOU   ignore (4)   2017 Dec 5, 12:53pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Dec. 5 2017, Do we have a tax increase bill yet?
100   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 5, 7:27pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Like Bob said--if you want to stop illegals, take away their jobs. Which means throwing a few CEOs in jail that are hiring them. It's very simple and costs almost nothing.


I agree.

I don't blame illegals as much as I blame their employers. The employers of illegals are the ultimate source of the problem.

We need mandatory prison time for the employers of illegals.
101   errc   ignore (2)   2017 Dec 5, 7:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Patrick says
anon_8f378 says
Like Bob said--if you want to stop illegals, take away their jobs. Which means throwing a few CEOs in jail that are hiring them. It's very simple and costs almost nothing.


I agree.

I don't blame illegals as much as I blame their employers. The employers of illegals are the ultimate source of the problem.

We need mandatory prison time for the employers of illegals.


Well with Republicans in absolute control of all levels of government, this should be very simple to implement, no?
102   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 5, 7:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_8f378 says
Like Bob said--if you want to stop illegals, take away their jobs. Which means throwing a few CEOs in jail that are hiring them. It's very simple and costs almost nothing.


Rest assured, if this starts to happen, donkeys will pass sanctuary amendment for these fucks too. As in "refuse to enforce the law" (added for the thick in the head anon fucks who take everything literally).
103   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 8:32am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

HappyGilmore says

Newsflash--trickle down has been tried already. And it failed.


Trickle down worked just fine, it just trickled down to China, India, Mexico, etc. due to our free trade policies.
104   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 8:34am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

HappyGilmore says
Again, so we're clear. You advocate that ones' career opportunities are substantially based on the birth lottery. That is not unusual for Republicans.

I advocate for a merit based system where the best and brightest have the opportunity to get ahead even if they are born into a poor family.


There is no birth lottery. That's an excuse socialist use for trying to redistribute other people's wealth, it's what the Soviet Union used as an excuse to implement Communism and it lead to 100,000,000+ dead people in the 20th century. You're literally advocating for death, I advocate for life.

There is a giant capitalist market out there where anyone can make it just fine if they 1) Graduate high school, 2) Get a job, and 3) Don't have kids before marriage. The data proves that's all anyone has to do to make it in America. Just make good sound decisions.
106   anon_4f8fe   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 2:06pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Goran_K says
There is no birth lottery.


OK, then I take full credit for being smarter than you.

FP
107   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 3:47pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Goran_K says

There is no birth lottery. That's an excuse socialist use for trying to redistribute other people's wealth, it's what the Soviet Union used as an excuse to implement Communism and it lead to 100,000,000+ dead people in the 20th century. You're literally advocating for death, I advocate for life.


No, there absolutely is a birth lottery. Anyone who says otherwise is either very naïve or purposely disingenuous. I'll let others decide which you are.

Do you have any links or source material backing up your claim that the Soviet Union used birth lottery as an excuse to implement communism?
108   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 3:55pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Try that again HappyGilmore, without the personal attack.
109   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 4:00pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
Try that again HappyGilmore, without the personal attack.


There was no personal attack there. Just a moderator that is completely biased and suppressing free speech

Please point out what you consider a personal attack
111   anon_3b28c   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 4:20pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Goran_K says

There is no birth lottery. That's an excuse socialist use for trying to redistribute other people's wealth, it's what the Soviet Union used as an excuse to implement Communism and it lead to 100,000,000+ dead people in the 20th century. You're literally advocating for death, I advocate for life.


No, there absolutely is a birth lottery. Anyone who says otherwise is either very naïve or purposely disingenuous.

Do you have any links or source material backing up your claim that the Soviet Union used birth lottery as an excuse to implement communism?
112   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 4:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

So, just because someone pays "nothing" in taxes, they have no voice in how our progressive tax system is implemented, and where the money to fund the government comes from?
113   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 4:24pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Goran_K says
Try that again HappyGilmore, without the personal attack.


So an accusation that you are misinformed or have some other overriding belief/agenda is jail worthy?

Or was it the part where Happy asked you to back up your claims with sources? :)
114   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 4:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
So, just because someone pays "nothing" in taxes, they have no voice in how our progressive tax system is implemented, and where the money to fund the government comes from?


Why should they?

Why should someone who contributes nothing to the tax system have a say in how the money is spent?

They don't let 10 year olds vote on laws or vote for politicians.
115   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 4:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
So an accusation that you are misinformed or have some other overriding belief/agenda is jail worthy?

Or was it the part where Happy asked you to back up your claims with sources? :)


The asking for facts part was fine, the "anyone who thinks this is very naïve or purposely disingenuous, I'll let others judge which you are" is a personal attack.

Rules are pretty simple to follow IMO.
116   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 4:39pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
The asking for facts part was fine, the "anyone who thinks this is very naïve or purposely disingenuous, I'll let others judge which you are" is a personal attack.


How is that a personal attack?? Ridiculous.
117   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 4:40pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
Why should they?

Why should someone who contributes nothing to the tax system have a say in how the money is spent?


Because of the Constitution? Ever heard of it?
118   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 6, 4:41pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Still waiting for the sources on Russia.
119   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 4:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Goran_K says
They don't let 10 year olds vote on laws or vote for politicians.


Anyone eligible to vote has a voice on anything up for debate.

Or shall we apply your logic out further to abortion and birth control?

She, the "zero tax payer" (who I guarantee is paying taxes of some form) absolutely gets a say. It influences all the people, community, and culture around her. (edit: I missed the big one, "It's the economy stupid". (disclaimer, that's an actual quote, not a slight at Moderator in Chief Goran))
120   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 5:06pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

HappyGilmore says
Because of the Constitution? Ever heard of it?


Sure.

But I'm talking on a purely water cooler level. Does it seem fair that people who contribute nothing to the system get to vote on how money is spent? Seems pretty unfair.
121   Goran_K   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 5:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
Anyone eligible to vote has a voice on anything up for debate.

Or shall we apply your logic out further to abortion and birth control?

She, the "zero tax payer" (who I guarantee is paying taxes of some form) absolutely gets a say. It influences all the people, community, and culture around her. (edit: I missed the big one, "It's the economy stupid". (disclaimer, that's an actual quote, not a slight at Moderator in Chief Goran))


Sure, I've always agreed that women have a right to kill their babies. I've only ever argued with the pseudo-science claim that it's "not a baby, just a clump of cells".
122   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 5:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
Goran_K says
They don't let 10 year olds vote on laws or vote for politicians.


Anyone eligible to vote has a voice on anything up for debate.


And everybody else can give their assessment regarding the value of her opinion.
123   anon_c8b23   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 9:05pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

@Patrick,

It looks like this Goran guy is running rampant censoring people left and right... to the point that the jailed comments are now more interesting to read. Not good for the site.

FP
124   Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 9:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I disagree. Maybe there are a few edge cases that are hard to classify, but think Goran is very fair.

Note that you can now actually see which user jailed any comment in jail. It's in the header line of the comment.
125   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 6, 9:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

anon_c8b23 says
... to the point that the jailed comments are now more interesting to read. Not good for the site.


I noticed some fascinating reads there as well.

KimJongUn says
And everybody else can give their assessment regarding the value of her opinion.


Absolutely, but she still gets to vote, and you can never take that away because she is poor, or doesn't pay to be able to vote.

I know less fortunate people than I, who are far better with money than I am, because they have to be. I want their opinions and votes on taxes, far more than I want some trust fund baby's voice anywhere near government.

Goran_K says
Sure, I've always agreed that women have a right to kill their babies.


And so your argument is what, you have to pay taxes to be able to vote? How much do you have to pay? What's the threshold? Do you get more than one vote if you pay more?
Do you have to pay taxes to be able to ... oh, I dunno ... be President too?
What about run for any office?

I don't think a Plutocracy is what is intended for the US, and I think your ideas would poll in single digits with the American public.

The Dems are elitist? Hah!
126   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 7, 9:49am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
But I'm talking on a purely water cooler level. Does it seem fair that people who contribute nothing to the system get to vote on how money is spent? Seems pretty unfair.


Like Rew said--it's a meaningless exercise because everyone pays taxes of some form.

But, I think it's very much against the ideals of those that formed this nation to imply that someone's "value" to society is measured in $$ and cents.
127   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 7, 9:56am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Goran_K says
Rules are pretty simple to follow IMO.


Except when they are applied in a completely arbitrary way. Actually, I take that back--they aren't applied arbitrarily at all--they are applied with extreme bias.
128   HappyGilmore   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 7, 9:57am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

HappyGilmore says
Still waiting for the sources on Russia.


@Goran--

Still waiting for any source stating Russian used birth lottery as an excuse to redistribute peoples' wealth. Or do you care to rethink that statement?
129   LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 9, 11:52am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Goran_K says
ou were lying when you said "Goran proposed eliminating college loans." This isn't an opinion, it's a fact, you lied.


Just quoting this to show Goran's complete bias.
130   Fucking White Male   ignore (2)   2017 Dec 9, 12:02pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

LeonDurham says
Goran_K says
ou were lying when you said "Goran proposed eliminating college loans." This isn't an opinion, it's a fact, you lied.


Just quoting this to show Goran's complete bias.


What is this supposed to prove?
Is there a poster here who is not biased?
131   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Dec 9, 1:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

LeonDurham says
Goran_K says
ou were lying when you said "Goran proposed eliminating college loans." This isn't an opinion, it's a fact, you lied.


Just quoting this to show Goran's complete bias.


Go open a special thread about moderation and another one about Goran's moral flaws. Stop shitting in this thread.
132   anon_3b28c   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 9, 3:12pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

KimJongUn says


Go open a special thread about moderation and another one about Goran's moral flaws. Stop shitting in this thread.


Fair enough. I will do it.
133   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Dec 9, 5:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Goran_K says
HappyGilmore says
Because of the Constitution? Ever heard of it?


Sure.

But I'm talking on a purely water cooler level. Does it seem fair that people who contribute nothing to the system get to vote on how money is spent? Seems pretty unfair.


I wasn't aware we had switched to a referendum system for the federal budget. I didn't get the memo. As far as I knew no one but congress gets to vote how the money is spent, although lobbyists get to write a lot of stuff in to be voted on. People get to vote for their representatives to congress. Something all American citizens SHOULD know.

How can anyone contribute nothing? That's absurd. They pay fica, they buy things from business that pay taxes, they pay fees, they pay sales taxes, they pay property taxes, gasoline taxes, etc., etc..
134   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Dec 9, 5:56pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
How can anyone contribute nothing? That's absurd. They pay fica, they buy things from business that pay taxes, they pay fees, they pay sales taxes, they pay property taxes, gasoline taxes, etc., etc..


The whole discussion on the tax bills concerns FEDERAL taxes, not all the other taxes. It would be beneficial to read and not to jump in at the end of a thread.

« First    « Previous     Comments 95 - 134 of 134     Last »


Comment as anon_9bcb5 or log in at top of page: