(09-28-2017 10:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

You mistakenly think a tax cut is a cost. It's a SAVINGS.

Savings to those who get a tax cut sure, but tax cuts mean less money coming into the federal government. That needs offset by spending cuts or the deficit and debt explode.

That's what paying for it means and you know this because it's the Republicans line for several years now.

C'mon guys. Stop it.

(09-28-2017 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:50 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

^Assumes money belongs to the government.

No. He's asking the question Republicans have been asking in recent years when the Dems proposed something. Everything had to be paid for. Remember?

Try harder.

Dems proposed more programs that required appropriation of funds. This isn't that.

Try harder.

(09-28-2017 10:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

You mistakenly think a tax cut is a cost. It's a SAVINGS.

Savings to those who get a tax cut sure, but tax cuts mean less money coming into the federal government. That needs offset by spending cuts or the deficit and debt explode.

That's what paying for it means and you know this because it's the Republicans line for several years now.

C'mon guys. Stop it.

And if you pay attention you'll see that we've REPEATEDLY asked to stop spending here.

(09-28-2017 10:28 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 08:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:47 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 02:44 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  The debt will go up anyway. I'd rather have a more robust economy and keep what I earn.

If only there were a guarantee reducing corporate taxes would improve the economy. See Kansas.

Each time we reduce the corporate tax rate more revenue flows into the federal government. Explain that.

I can't explain it because I don't believe it's ever happened. I suppose you have a link to back this up?

You know what, I did have that confused with the capital gains tax rate, so my apologies.

However a lower corporate tax rate would absolutely create more jobs and companies will begin to expand.

Not necessarily. Corporations (and most businesses) only hire employees when they have a product to sell and demand for it. Corporate tax cuts in no way guarantee that because the corporation still has an obligation to their shareholders to make as much money as possible. They are under no obligation to just charitably increase salaries or hire more workers just to hire them.

(09-28-2017 09:41 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:27 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Can someone elaborate how this doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

Are you suggesting that the tax plan is only legitimate if it doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

That's what I don't get. I don't care how much it benefits the rich if it benefits me also.

(09-28-2017 10:31 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

You mistakenly think a tax cut is a cost. It's a SAVINGS.

Savings to those who get a tax cut sure, but tax cuts mean less money coming into the federal government. That needs offset by spending cuts or the deficit and debt explode.

That's what paying for it means and you know this because it's the Republicans line for several years now.

C'mon guys. Stop it.

And if you pay attention you'll see that we've REPEATEDLY asked to stop spending here.

As have I. But that's not going to happen without a plan for it. We need to see the plan to cut spending, or it won't happen. I don't trust them, do you?

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

Who is this we you speak of?

(09-28-2017 10:32 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:41 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:27 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Can someone elaborate how this doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

Are you suggesting that the tax plan is only legitimate if it doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

That's what I don't get. I don't care how much it benefits the rich if it benefits me also.

Do you care what it does to the debt and deficit?

(09-28-2017 10:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

You mistakenly think a tax cut is a cost. It's a SAVINGS.

Savings to those who get a tax cut sure, but tax cuts mean less money coming into the federal government. That needs offset by spending cuts or the deficit and debt explode.

That's what paying for it means and you know this because it's the Republicans line for several years now.

C'mon guys. Stop it.

C'mon dems, how about some of those promised spending cuts? I know it's hard to get elected when don't promise to give away more and more taxpayer money.

Bottom line answer is just too damned simple. SPEND LESS

(09-28-2017 10:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:32 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:41 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:27 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Can someone elaborate how this doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

Are you suggesting that the tax plan is only legitimate if it doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

That's what I don't get. I don't care how much it benefits the rich if it benefits me also.

Do you care what it does to the debt and deficit?

Controlling spending will take care of that.

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

Wrong. It's our money to begin with. The real question is how will the fed gov't reallocate their spending plans by taking a small share of our money?

(09-28-2017 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:31 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:01 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

You mistakenly think a tax cut is a cost. It's a SAVINGS.

Savings to those who get a tax cut sure, but tax cuts mean less money coming into the federal government. That needs offset by spending cuts or the deficit and debt explode.

That's what paying for it means and you know this because it's the Republicans line for several years now.

C'mon guys. Stop it.

And if you pay attention you'll see that we've REPEATEDLY asked to stop spending here.

As have I. But that's not going to happen without a plan for it. We need to see the plan to cut spending, or it won't happen. I don't trust them, do you?

I don't trust either party, no. I'm more concerned with my bank account though. If it helps me that's better than nothing. Almost every nation on earth owes somebody else. It's a world wide ponzi scheme.

(09-28-2017 10:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:28 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 08:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:47 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If only there were a guarantee reducing corporate taxes would improve the economy. See Kansas.

Each time we reduce the corporate tax rate more revenue flows into the federal government. Explain that.

I can't explain it because I don't believe it's ever happened. I suppose you have a link to back this up?

You know what, I did have that confused with the capital gains tax rate, so my apologies.

However a lower corporate tax rate would absolutely create more jobs and companies will begin to expand.

Not necessarily. Corporations (and most businesses) only hire employees when they have a product to sell and demand for it. Corporate tax cuts in no way guarantee that because the corporation still has an obligation to their shareholders to make as much money as possible. They are under no obligation to just charitably increase salaries or hire more workers just to hire them.

You miss the part of the equation where lowering corporate tax rates would entice companies to move to the US and thereby increasing tax revenues.

(09-28-2017 09:52 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:50 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

^Assumes money belongs to the government.

How does this reduce the federal debt?

The Fed gov't needs to spend less.

(09-28-2017 10:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:32 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:41 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:27 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Can someone elaborate how this doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

Are you suggesting that the tax plan is only legitimate if it doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

That's what I don't get. I don't care how much it benefits the rich if it benefits me also.

Do you care what it does to the debt and deficit?

SPEND LESS

(09-28-2017 10:28 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 08:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:47 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 03:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 02:44 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  The debt will go up anyway. I'd rather have a more robust economy and keep what I earn.

If only there were a guarantee reducing corporate taxes would improve the economy. See Kansas.

Each time we reduce the corporate tax rate more revenue flows into the federal government. Explain that.

I can't explain it because I don't believe it's ever happened. I suppose you have a link to back this up?

You know what, I did have that confused with the capital gains tax rate, so my apologies.

However a lower corporate tax rate would absolutely create more jobs and companies will begin to expand.

And without the punitive penalties they'd assume - as it stands now - for repatriating the trillions off-shored won't they be able to bring those monies back home where they belong. Without the punitive marginal tax rates maybe they will bring their operations home? Won't a decrease in the cost of doing business spur production here and enable an increase in jobs and hiring?

(09-28-2017 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:50 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:49 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  How are we going to pay for it.

^Assumes money belongs to the government.

No. He's asking the question Republicans have been asking in recent years when the Dems proposed something. Everything had to be paid for. Remember?

Try harder.

The Dems proposed spending initiatives, which are outflows. We're talking about a tax cut, which MIGHT lower an inflow. A lower tax rate CAN result in greater economic activity which would increase revenue for everyone.

(09-28-2017 10:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:32 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:41 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:27 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Can someone elaborate how this doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

Are you suggesting that the tax plan is only legitimate if it doesn't benefit Trump and his family?

That's what I don't get. I don't care how much it benefits the rich if it benefits me also.

Do you care what it does to the debt and deficit?

Sure I do, I also care that spending cuts are a requisite action to negate the need for higher debt ceilings and deficit increases. Perhaps it's beyond time to reduce entitlement spending where most of that occurs? TN just took a great step towards that by requiring that SNAP recipients either work at least 20 hours a week or perform community services to that effect. Working adds to the tax base while community service has the potential to reduce costs to the state.

I don't see why folks are arguing over this.

It isn't as if this reform is some sweeping change.

Increasing the standard deduction is a big help for lower to middle class folks and doesn't mean much of anything to anybody making more than $250k per year. It means an awful lot to folks make $50k per year.

My guess is in negotiation there will be a 4th tax bracket added on the rich, reduces the tax cut by 1-2 trillion. That's not even with CBO scoring yet. GDP growth will help pay for cut. After that, focus on cutting spending in virtually everything.