(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:34 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  What you guys that think this tax bill is so great don't seem to recognize is that the bill is a huge corporate tax cut.

Best part of the bill.

The left sees "corporate" and suddenly thinks of Halliburton and Lockheed Martin. I don't think they realize that their car mechanic, HVAC company, dry cleaners, kids sports leagues, accounting firm, home builder/rennovator, doctors office, lawyer, and electrician are all likely incorporated.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:34 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  What you guys that think this tax bill is so great don't seem to recognize is that the bill is a huge corporate tax cut.

Best part of the bill.

The left sees "corporate" and suddenly thinks of Halliburton and Lockheed Martin. I don't think they realize that their car mechanic, HVAC company, dry cleaners, kids sports leagues, accounting firm, home builder/rennovator, doctors office, lawyer, and electrician are all likely incorporated.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The bill is nearly 1,100 pages long. There is a lot more in it than a change in the rate. If that is all there was it would have only taken a page or two.

All kinds of housing pops up around factories and business. Right now we have houses and all the factories are gone. Combine a good Federal tax system with a good State tax system, add some direct insentives then poof!
Black folk and other minorities have a house worth save’n!
No more watches out a trench coat!

Opa Barkley Style!

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:34 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Best part of the bill.

The left sees "corporate" and suddenly thinks of Halliburton and Lockheed Martin. I don't think they realize that their car mechanic, HVAC company, dry cleaners, kids sports leagues, accounting firm, home builder/rennovator, doctors office, lawyer, and electrician are all likely incorporated.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

(12-23-2017 08:21 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

Whining is misspelled. FIFY
[/quote]

https://www.google.com/search?q=whinging...e&ie=UTF-8

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:34 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:52 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 11:32 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  What you guys that think this tax bill is so great don't seem to recognize is that the bill is a huge corporate tax cut.

Best part of the bill.

The left sees "corporate" and suddenly thinks of Halliburton and Lockheed Martin. I don't think they realize that their car mechanic, HVAC company, dry cleaners, kids sports leagues, accounting firm, home builder/rennovator, doctors office, lawyer, and electrician are all likely incorporated.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

I had the owner of my gym tell me that because of this tax relief he was planning to extend gym hours, open on Sunday afternoon and hire another employee. He is a small business owner. It is going to be interesting how all of this works out.

(12-24-2017 12:46 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 11:42 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 07:15 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  You guys are easily bought off. It is a corporate tax bill. I've acknowledged earlier that there is a good argument for lowering the tax rate. Just don't pretend this is something it isn't.

Who essentially pays the corporate tax bill?

On the other hand, do you really think the savings from the tax changes are going to be passed along to the consumers? I doubt it. The shareholders certainly, but not the consumers.

If we believe in the basics of economics and capitalism?...Yes. When overhead is reduced it does one of two things...increases margin(profit) or provides an opportunity to drop prices in an attempt to gain market share from competitors. It only takes one competitor attempting to grab market share or one new entrant into the market with lower prices to make the rest follow suit or lose market share. Im betting on competition. I believe this tax cut will lead to deflation. You can bet your life that Walmart is going to hammer the hell out of its vendors to lower prices after this.

(12-24-2017 01:41 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 08:21 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

Whining is misspelled. FIFY

https://www.google.com/search?q=whinging...e&ie=UTF-8
[/quote]

I guess there's always two ways to skin a cat...or spell whining. I used Merriam Websters dictionary.

(12-23-2017 01:20 AM)cb4029 Wrote:  http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12...t_home_pop

Quote:"They say it's gonna trickle down," the Alabama native and Auburn basketball star said on TNT's "Inside the NBA" Wednesday. "I'm gonna trickle my fat ass down to the jewelry store and get me a new Rolex. I'm not going to pass it to nobody," Barkley said.

Trickle down...lol

I guess Economics is another thing Charles should keep quiet about. LOL

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:34 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The left sees "corporate" and suddenly thinks of Halliburton and Lockheed Martin. I don't think they realize that their car mechanic, HVAC company, dry cleaners, kids sports leagues, accounting firm, home builder/rennovator, doctors office, lawyer, and electrician are all likely incorporated.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:16 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  The vast majority of the benefits from the bill are to large corporations not mom and pops.

False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

If the result is meeting growth and inflation targets, it pays for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:18 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  False, the benefit is the same. The corporate tax rate and cut is applied equally.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

Interesting how NOW leftest complain about borrowing money. Money repatriated from overseas will actually be a good thing. Corps using previous money set aside for taxes using that money for employee raises and investing in communities are good things. No idea why the left disagrees.

Attacking the POTUS for simply because the other side lost is simply asinine. People need to learn to think for themselves. I didn't vote for Trump; however, due to the left's nonsense since the election, I find myself actually defending him. Is this tax plan perfect, no. However, it's a good start. The left would still hate it if it increased the corp tax rate and gave more free money to people simply because Trump. It's
mental.

(12-25-2017 11:21 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

If the result is meeting growth and inflation targets, it pays for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That would be great but we shouldn't bet our children's futures on meeting targets that are considered highly inflated / overly optimistic.

(12-25-2017 11:26 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:21 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

If the result is meeting growth and inflation targets, it pays for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That would be great but we shouldn't bet our children's futures on meeting targets that are considered highly inflated / overly optimistic.

Anyone else see the irony in this statement? None of that mattered during the past administration.

(12-25-2017 11:26 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  But the MSM says the tax cut is only for BIG business. So, yeah, that must be true.

Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

Interesting how NOW leftest complain about borrowing money. Money repatriated from overseas will actually be a good thing. Corps using previous money set aside for taxes using that money for employee raises and investing in communities are good things. No idea why the left disagrees.

Attacking the POTUS for simply because the other side lost is simply asinine. People need to learn to think for themselves. I didn't vote for Trump; however, due to the left's nonsense since the election, I find myself actually defending him. Is this tax plan perfect, no. However, it's a good start. The left would still hate it if it increased the corp tax rate and gave more free money to people simply because Trump. It's
mental.

First you need to explain your use of the term, "leftist." I don't think I would fall into that category unless you use it to define anyone that wouldn't be considered a conservative, though these terms are outdated and often times highly inaccurate.

Deficit spending is sometimes appropriate. When we are in a period of high employment, a record setting stock market, and record corporate profits we should be trying to pay down / shore up, not borrow.

Rather than the usual arguing back and forth I'd like to suggest what I think would be a much better approach.

I do think the statutory corporate tax rate should be lowered. But it needs to be revenue neutral. Remember the effective tax rate, (what they actually pay after deductions, loopholes etc.) averages about 18.5%.

I think the individual tax cuts should skew more towards the working and middle class. Those making $25k or less are only getting a 0.4% (about $60) cut in the current bill. Cut them by a higher %, say 4, and every dollar they save on their taxes will be pumped back in to the economy. Those making between $50k and $150k are only getting a 1.6-1.9% (between $900-$1,800) cut. Raise their % to 4%. These changes will result in more spending and stimulate the economy much more that cuts to the higher end. Those making between $300k and $730k are currently getting a 4.1% cut. Reduce their percentage down to 2% and they still save about 8k! Do the save thing with the above $730k who are currently getting a 3.4% cut ($51k savings). In other words reverse the cut % so that those that are more likely to pump the savings back into the economy get more. I'm not saying to hell with the wealthy. They should get a cut too, but they are much more likely to not put the money saved back into circulation.

(12-25-2017 11:26 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:21 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

If the result is meeting growth and inflation targets, it pays for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That would be great but we shouldn't bet our children's futures on meeting targets that are considered highly inflated / overly optimistic.

Yea, we cant be betting our childrens future on a better economy and growth. We should, however, bet our childrens future on cash for clunkers and padding the wallets of political cronies at Solyndra and all the other busted solar companies. Oh, and lets bet their future on shovel ready jobs that arent shovel ready.

(12-25-2017 12:15 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:26 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 01:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Then ask the economists how they read it.

I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

Interesting how NOW leftest complain about borrowing money. Money repatriated from overseas will actually be a good thing. Corps using previous money set aside for taxes using that money for employee raises and investing in communities are good things. No idea why the left disagrees.
Attacking the POTUS for simply because the other side lost is simply asinine. People need to learn to think for themselves. I didn't vote for Trump; however, due to the left's nonsense since the election, I find myself actually defending him. Is this tax plan perfect, no. However, it's a good start. The left would still hate it if it increased the corp tax rate and gave more free money to people simply because Trump. It's
mental.

First you need to explain your use of the term, "leftist." I don't think I would fall into that category unless you use it to define anyone that wouldn't be considered a conservative, though these terms are outdated and often times highly inaccurate.
Deficit spending is sometimes appropriate. When we are in a period of high employment, a record setting stock market, and record corporate profits we should be trying to pay down / shore up, not borrow.
Rather than the usual arguing back and forth I'd like to suggest what I think would be a much better approach.
I do think the statutory corporate tax rate should be lowered. But it needs to be revenue neutral. Remember the effective tax rate, (what they actually pay after deductions, loopholes etc.) averages about 18.5%.
I think the individual tax cuts should skew more towards the working and middle class. Those making $25k or less are only getting a 0.4% (about $60) cut in the current bill. Cut them by a higher %, say 4, and every dollar they save on their taxes will be pumped back in to the economy. Those making between $50k and $150k are only getting a 1.6-1.9% (between $900-$1,800) cut. Raise their % to 4%. These changes will result in more spending and stimulate the economy much more that cuts to the higher end. Those making between $300k and $730k are currently getting a 4.1% cut. Reduce their percentage down to 2% and they still save about 8k! Do the save thing with the above $730k who are currently getting a 3.4% cut ($51k savings). In other words reverse the cut % so that those that are more likely to pump the savings back into the economy get more. I'm not saying to hell with the wealthy. They should get a cut too, but they are much more likely to not put the money saved back into circulation.

This whole meme about the “wealthy” not putting their money back into circulation needs to get lost. They don’t bury it in tomato cans. The question is how they put it into circulation—consumption or investment. What we need now is more investment.

The only way to have a competitive income tax structure that can attract investment, while providing a reasonable safety net and maintaining national security is to have a consumption tax and not intervene in every internal affair of every other country.

(12-25-2017 12:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 12:15 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:26 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 11:18 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 08:11 AM)VA49er Wrote:  I've freaking read the highlights and I can even tell it's not ONLY for big business. Of course, I choose to read for myself and not just listen to MSM. Yes, a big part of it is corporate related, and that's a good thing. You won't hear the MSM mention that though. It's to be expected as it doesn't flow with the talking points directed toward its minions.

Borrowing money to pay for a tax cut isn't good policy.
Attacking the media is simply gaslighting.

Interesting how NOW leftest complain about borrowing money. Money repatriated from overseas will actually be a good thing. Corps using previous money set aside for taxes using that money for employee raises and investing in communities are good things. No idea why the left disagrees.
Attacking the POTUS for simply because the other side lost is simply asinine. People need to learn to think for themselves. I didn't vote for Trump; however, due to the left's nonsense since the election, I find myself actually defending him. Is this tax plan perfect, no. However, it's a good start. The left would still hate it if it increased the corp tax rate and gave more free money to people simply because Trump. It's
mental.

First you need to explain your use of the term, "leftist." I don't think I would fall into that category unless you use it to define anyone that wouldn't be considered a conservative, though these terms are outdated and often times highly inaccurate.
Deficit spending is sometimes appropriate. When we are in a period of high employment, a record setting stock market, and record corporate profits we should be trying to pay down / shore up, not borrow.
Rather than the usual arguing back and forth I'd like to suggest what I think would be a much better approach.
I do think the statutory corporate tax rate should be lowered. But it needs to be revenue neutral. Remember the effective tax rate, (what they actually pay after deductions, loopholes etc.) averages about 18.5%.
I think the individual tax cuts should skew more towards the working and middle class. Those making $25k or less are only getting a 0.4% (about $60) cut in the current bill. Cut them by a higher %, say 4, and every dollar they save on their taxes will be pumped back in to the economy. Those making between $50k and $150k are only getting a 1.6-1.9% (between $900-$1,800) cut. Raise their % to 4%. These changes will result in more spending and stimulate the economy much more that cuts to the higher end. Those making between $300k and $730k are currently getting a 4.1% cut. Reduce their percentage down to 2% and they still save about 8k! Do the save thing with the above $730k who are currently getting a 3.4% cut ($51k savings). In other words reverse the cut % so that those that are more likely to pump the savings back into the economy get more. I'm not saying to hell with the wealthy. They should get a cut too, but they are much more likely to not put the money saved back into circulation.

This whole men about the “wealthy” not putting their money back into circulation needs to get lost. They don’t bury it in tomato cans. The question is how they put it into circulation—consumption or investment. What we need now is more investment.

Given the vitality of the Stock Market over the last year do you feel the need is greater for additional investment or consumption? What is your opinion on my suggestion regarding the increased % for the working and middle class?

We actually tax the “rich” more and the middle class relatively less, than other developed countries. How they make up for it is with more comprehensive health and welfare programs that don’t go away if you make too much money. In UK the guy living under the bridge and Sir Richard Branson Both get the same NHS benefits, for example.

As far as the individual tax cuts, I’m pretty much “meh” about what they did. I would have preferred lower and flatter rates and get rid of all itemized deductions. With a consumption tax, you could lower the top individual rate to zero. I’d be fine with that.

But I think it was worth it to get the corporate rate cut. If the “Bush tax cuts” had done something for corporate taxes, they just might have worked a lot better.