By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations. (In the CBO table below, negative signs mean people in those income brackets pay less in taxes).

I see no one is going to touch this one with a ten foot pole.

No wonder the GOP is trying to ram it through.

Can you explain how someone who makes less than $10K in taxes is going to pay more in federal taxes going forward? Thats a very simple question, that should have a very simple answer. Go for it.

(11-29-2017 12:02 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  


By 2019, Americans earning less than $30,000 a year would be worse off under the Senate bill, CBO found. By 2021, Americans earning $40,000 or less would be net losers, and by 2027, most people earning less than $75,000 a year would be worse off. On the flip side, millionaires and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations. (In the CBO table below, negative signs mean people in those income brackets pay less in taxes).

Um, your chart doesn't explain anything. It is hard to respond to nothing.

(11-29-2017 02:37 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Can you explain how someone who makes less than $10K in taxes is going to pay more in federal taxes going forward? Thats a very simple question, that should have a very simple answer. Go for it.

they don't pay anything in the first place. it means that they are awarded less free money that formerly belonged to other people.

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Of course, to hurt the poor, the CBO has to assume that they will choose, on their own, not to get insurance and therefore the insurance companies won't get the subsidies (which the CBO scores to the poor).

There's data without assumed "spending" mixed in with the cutting.

Yes. People who don't work get hit harder by less handouts.

(11-29-2017 03:09 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Yes. People who don't work get hit harder by less handouts.

Dems leave that little nugget out of the talking points.

(11-29-2017 03:09 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Yes. People who don't work get hit harder by less handouts.

as it should be

This is the kind of fake news that is the epitome of "why" Trump.

(11-29-2017 03:09 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Yes. People who don't work get hit harder by less handouts.

Why do you hate poor people!

(11-29-2017 03:37 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  This is the kind of fake news that is the epitome of "why" Trump.

Yep, and it's a perfect example of how the Dems prey on the weak minded. Those in power pray those they feed this stuff to do not understand it, that way they can just tell their followers what it means and be 100% certain they'll take it as a talking point and be on their way, etc.

(11-29-2017 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Thankfully, everyone on this forum is independently wealth so we don't have to worry about it.

From the left... yes, this is a real life fake news story

The Senate tax bill would cause *3,100* more alcohol-related deaths over the next two years

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/...x-increase

(11-29-2017 03:40 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 03:09 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Yes. People who don't work get hit harder by less handouts.

Why do you hate poor people!

one burned my fries yesterday. that was pretty annoying.

(11-29-2017 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Thankfully, everyone on this forum is independently wealth so we don't have to worry about it.

Next time you're in town we'll take the boat out, check out the ladies at Big Island, and the beers on me.....

(11-29-2017 04:15 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Thankfully, everyone on this forum is independently wealth so we don't have to worry about it.

Next time you're in town we'll take the boat out, check out the ladies at Big Island, and the beers on me.....

I'm down.

(11-29-2017 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Thankfully, everyone on this forum is independently wealth so we don't have to worry about it.

I'm middle class and the past 8 years have been the hardest I've been through. I'm looking forward to seeing how the next 8 impacts me.

I'm guessing it can't be any worse.

(11-29-2017 04:24 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 02:55 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

Quote:and those earning $100,000 to $500,000 would be big beneficiaries, according to the CBO’s calculations.

That's great news! What should I do with the windfall?

Thankfully, everyone on this forum is independently wealth so we don't have to worry about it.

I'm middle class and the past 8 years have been the hardest I've been through. I'm looking forward to seeing how the next 8 impacts me.

I'm guessing it can't be any worse.

Wow that's amazing.

I make about 10k less than I did 8 years ago and I also had another baby. I've been doing great compared to 8 years ago.

8 years ago, we were a family of three and I was making 10k more and we were barely making it.