(12-20-2017 01:37 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Remember the Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin commissions that were formed to find ways to reduce or eliminate the budget deficit? Go back and look at their tax proposals. Compare them to this tax bill. Basically, the difference is that this tax bill keeps more itemized deductions than they did, and the individual rates for high incomes are not reduced nearly as much. And that was their idea of how to INCREASE revenues in order to DECREASE the budget deficit.

I still wish republicans had passed Bismarck health care and a universal basic income and either Bowles-Simpson or Domenici-Rivlin as soon as they regained control of the house in 2011. That would have shaped the debate very differently in the last few years. But they didn't. And until they wake up, I think we are in deep kimchee.

I wouldnt mind having a new thread started in the new forum on this. I would like to see us get to a consumption based tax. I do believe we would have to edge into it over time as to not severely impact certain people near retirement who, after paying federal payroll taxes their entire lives, then get hit with a consumption tax in retirement.

I would totally support this. Can I be a conservative now?

(12-20-2017 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:37 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Remember the Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin commissions that were formed to find ways to reduce or eliminate the budget deficit? Go back and look at their tax proposals. Compare them to this tax bill. Basically, the difference is that this tax bill keeps more itemized deductions than they did, and the individual rates for high incomes are not reduced nearly as much. And that was their idea of how to INCREASE revenues in order to DECREASE the budget deficit.

I still wish republicans had passed Bismarck health care and a universal basic income and either Bowles-Simpson or Domenici-Rivlin as soon as they regained control of the house in 2011. That would have shaped the debate very differently in the last few years. But they didn't. And until they wake up, I think we are in deep kimchee.

I wouldnt mind having a new thread started in the new forum on this. I would like to see us get to a consumption based tax. I do believe we would have to edge into it over time as to not severely impact certain people near retirement who, after paying federal payroll taxes their entire lives, then get hit with a consumption tax in retirement.

I would totally support this. Can I be a conservative now?

you're scaring me

What percentage of a ta would we impose.

Japan tried this and they quickly fell into recession.

(12-20-2017 01:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What percentage of a tax would we impose.
Japan tried this and they quickly fell into recession.

It's been done in 30 countries, most of them at rates significantly higher than Japan's. So Japan fell into a recession, caused mostly by other factors. And the recession lasted, probably because they tried "stimulus." How many others?

(12-20-2017 01:53 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What percentage of a tax would we impose.
Japan tried this and they quickly fell into recession.

It's been done in 30 countries, most of them at rates significantly higher than Japan's. So Japan fell into a recession, caused mostly by other factors. And the recession lasted, probably because they tried "stimulus." How many others?

I don't know of any others.

What about food and grocery? Would this be included in your consumption tax?

(12-20-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:53 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What percentage of a tax would we impose.
Japan tried this and they quickly fell into recession.

It's been done in 30 countries, most of them at rates significantly higher than Japan's. So Japan fell into a recession, caused mostly by other factors. And the recession lasted, probably because they tried "stimulus." How many others?

I don't know of any others.
What about food and grocery? Would this be included in your consumption tax?

Try every other developed country in the world.

The prebate/prefund would take care of taxing necessities.

Well we are going to get to figure out if real wages are going to rise with the massive corporate tax cuts or not. I’m skeptical but I’m more than willing to wait and see.

Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet how those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

My buddy that works at AT&T just literally texted me this! MAGA!!!

(12-20-2017 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Technically that isn't a raise in wages. That's just a bonus. In other words it s a one time thing.

(12-20-2017 02:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Technically that isn't a raise in wages. That's just a bonus. In other words it s a one time thing.

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

(12-20-2017 02:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Technically that isn't a raise in wages. That's just a bonus. In other words it s a one time thing.

It's ok to enjoy winning. Relax.

(12-20-2017 02:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Technically that isn't a raise in wages. That's just a bonus. In other words it s a one time thing.

In other words, you are butthurt that they are receiving $1000 now, instead if $38 per pay period over the next year? I wonder how the ATT employees feel about that?

(12-20-2017 02:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:31 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 02:29 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Steve Kopack‏Verified account
@SteveKopack


NEW -- AT&T announces it will "pay a special $1,000 bonus to more than 200,000 AT&T U.S. employees" because of the tax reform passage and will also increase US capital spending by $1 billion

So that took roughly 15 minutes. Lol. Wanna bet who those 200,000 people will vote. D or R?

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Technically that isn't a raise in wages. That's just a bonus. In other words it s a one time thing.

Good start. Despite me being completely against GOP social policy I am much more aligned with their fiscal policy. The key isn’t going to be 1 time bonuses though, it’s gonna be sustained job growth and real growth outpacing inflation in wages. If those things happen this really will be a watershed moment, and I hope they do.

(12-21-2017 07:50 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Good start. Despite me being completely against GOP social policy I am much more aligned with their fiscal policy. The key isn’t going to be 1 time bonuses though, it’s gonna be sustained job growth and real growth outpacing inflation in wages. If those things happen this really will be a watershed moment, and I hope they do.

if only more on the left took that position.....

there are many keys to this plan....eliminating the 0care penalty and taxing the over inflated housing market in key areas is a monster to begin looking at true reform both federally and state wide.....

you have to start somewhere.....hem and haw can kiss my lily white one....

Interesting perspective from Germany. If this happens, and I think it will, and in other countries too, then tax reform will be a success.

http://www.zew.de/en/presse/pressearchiv...46de2fb167

I find it particularly that Germans seem to understand what the American left can't grasp in their zeal to complain about "tax cuts for the wealthy."

(12-20-2017 01:37 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(12-20-2017 01:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Remember the Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin commissions that were formed to find ways to reduce or eliminate the budget deficit? Go back and look at their tax proposals. Compare them to this tax bill. Basically, the difference is that this tax bill keeps more itemized deductions than they did, and the individual rates for high incomes are not reduced nearly as much. And that was their idea of how to INCREASE revenues in order to DECREASE the budget deficit.

I still wish republicans had passed Bismarck health care and a universal basic income and either Bowles-Simpson or Domenici-Rivlin as soon as they regained control of the house in 2011. That would have shaped the debate very differently in the last few years. But they didn't. And until they wake up, I think we are in deep kimchee.

I wouldnt mind having a new thread started in the new forum on this. I would like to see us get to a consumption based tax. I do believe we would have to edge into it over time as to not severely impact certain people near retirement who, after paying federal payroll taxes their entire lives, then get hit with a consumption tax in retirement.

I hate to shatter your new fiscally liberal worldview, but a consumption tax will hit people in retirement. A consumption tax is not in any way a payroll tax, so you'll be hitting the pocketbooks of the very people you're trying to exempt from the CT. You should've figured that out when you got Fit, who's never seen a tax he didn't like, on board.