Hey Libs...why do tax cuts for our most productive suck?

[BrokeLoser]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

 

[Maxdeath]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

 

[Wry Catcher]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

You ought to study and learn the facts on issues before you post. Your ignorance continues to amaze.

You are echoing the meme income tax cannot be cut for those who earn too little, and the Callous Conservative set complains that the working poor are scofflaws. The working poor do pay taxes:

"In 2017 for example, if you are under age 65 and single, you must file a tax return if you earn $10,400 or more, which is the sum of the 2017 standard deduction for a single taxpayer plus one exemption."

Of course the working poor work must pay for gas - federal and state taxes apply - or public transportation if they don't live close enough to walk. they may not be able to afford housing close to their work place, or they may work two or three jobs, adding to their transportation needs. The may not have enough income to buy health insurance or enough food, and thus must rely on local government to provide aid.

Yet people like you think they have it easy and are too lazy to improve their skills to get a good paying job with benefits. Hence I've coined the phrase Callous Conservative, which describes every person who votes for a Republican.

 

[BrokeLoser]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

You ought to study and learn the facts on issues before you post. Your ignorance continues to amaze.

You are echoing the meme income tax cannot be cut for those who earn too little, and the Callous Conservative set complains that the working poor are scofflaws. The working poor do pay taxes:

"In 2017 for example, if you are under age 65 and single, you must file a tax return if you earn $10,400 or more, which is the sum of the 2017 standard deduction for a single taxpayer plus one exemption."

Of course the working poor work must pay for gas - federal and state taxes apply - or public transportation if they don't live close enough to walk. they may not be able to afford housing close to their work place, or they may work two or three jobs, adding to their transportation needs. The may not have enough income to buy health insurance or enough food, and thus must rely on local government to provide aid.

Yet people like you think they have it easy and are too lazy to improve their skills to get a good paying job with benefits. Hence I've coined the phrase Callous Conservative, which describes every person who votes for a Republican.

As usual, you’re spinning and caught in your own whirlwind.
The facts are....the vast majority of the “working poor” have an effective tax rate of 0%....how does Father Government cut anything from zero?
I never said the working poor have it easy”...they have exactly what they chose to have....you know, through FREEDOM & LIBERTY...those things you hate.

 

[BrokeLoser]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

You ought to study and learn the facts on issues before you post. Your ignorance continues to amaze.

You are echoing the meme income tax cannot be cut for those who earn too little, and the Callous Conservative set complains that the working poor are scofflaws. The working poor do pay taxes:

"In 2017 for example, if you are under age 65 and single, you must file a tax return if you earn $10,400 or more, which is the sum of the 2017 standard deduction for a single taxpayer plus one exemption."

Of course the working poor work must pay for gas - federal and state taxes apply - or public transportation if they don't live close enough to walk. they may not be able to afford housing close to their work place, or they may work two or three jobs, adding to their transportation needs. The may not have enough income to buy health insurance or enough food, and thus must rely on local government to provide aid.

Yet people like you think they have it easy and are too lazy to improve their skills to get a good paying job with benefits. Hence I've coined the phrase Callous Conservative, which describes every person who votes for a Republican.

Damnit...I scared everyone away with too much logic and reason?

 

[Wry Catcher]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.

The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.

The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.

Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.

 

[Vandalshandle]

No need to fret about the tax cuts for the rich. The money is being replaced by the poor and middle class through tariffs. Trumpettes are happy, because they do not know that the word "tariff" is another word for "tax".

 

[BrokeLoser]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.

The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.

The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.

Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.

I call BULLSHIT right now.
A licensed Loan Officer is in fact a Fiduciary. He/she is regulated by the Department Of Real Estate and is required to adhere to all legal mandates set forth by the DRE.
Further, you’re doing exactly what Lefties do...deflect blame and self accountability.
You wackos will never change.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No need to fret about the tax cuts for the rich. The money is being replaced by the poor and middle class through tariffs. Trumpettes are happy, because they do not know that the word "tariff" is another word for "tax".

Hey bud you’re way to transparent...you have to disguise the lying bullshit you’re trying to sell atleast a little bit.
So only the poor and middle class buy consumer goods?

 

[Vandalshandle]

No need to fret about the tax cuts for the rich. The money is being replaced by the poor and middle class through tariffs. Trumpettes are happy, because they do not know that the word "tariff" is another word for "tax".

Hey bud you’re way to transparent...you have to disguise the lying bullshit you’re trying to sell atleast a little bit.
So only the poor and middle class buy consumer goods?

98% of the American people are the poor and the middle class. So, in answer to your question, unless Trump buys as many cars as the 98%, then, yes, the poor and middle class are paying for more corporate welfare.

 

[Wry Catcher]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.

The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.

The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.

Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.

I call BULLSHIT right now.
A licensed Loan Officer is in fact a Fiduciary. He/she is regulated by the Department Of Real Estate and is required to adhere to all legal mandates set forth by the DRE.
Further, you’re doing exactly what Lefties do...deflect blame and self accountability.
You wackos will never change.

I've bought several houses, and sat through the process many times. No where does the loan officer explain anything a fiduciary provides, such as the example in my post.

The outcome of this may not be an illegal act, but it is a moral obligation ignored, since the loan itself is the goal of the bank and loan officer.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No need to fret about the tax cuts for the rich. The money is being replaced by the poor and middle class through tariffs. Trumpettes are happy, because they do not know that the word "tariff" is another word for "tax".

Hey bud you’re way to transparent...you have to disguise the lying bullshit you’re trying to sell atleast a little bit.
So only the poor and middle class buy consumer goods?

98% of the American people are the poor and the middle class. So, in answer to your question, unless Trump buys as many cars as the 98%, then, yes, the poor and middle class are paying for more corporate welfare.

What you’re saying makes zero sense bud...let me school you for free. If “corporate welfare” is paid by the treasury and the top 1% pay 43% of all income tax, then how are the poor and middle class funding said “corporate welfare”.
Remember, 45% of Americans do not pay income taxes.
What else can I teach you?

 

[BrokeLoser]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.

The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.

The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.

Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.

I call BULLSHIT right now.
A licensed Loan Officer is in fact a Fiduciary. He/she is regulated by the Department Of Real Estate and is required to adhere to all legal mandates set forth by the DRE.
Further, you’re doing exactly what Lefties do...deflect blame and self accountability.
You wackos will never change.

I've bought several houses, and sat through the process many times. No where does the loan officer explain anything a fiduciary provides, such as the example in my post.

The outcome of this may not be an illegal act, but it is a moral obligation ignored, since the loan itself is the goal of the bank and loan officer.

A licensed Loan Officer is legally obligated and required by DRE mandate to thoroughly explain the details and guidelines of a mortgage loan.
Obtaining the loan is the goal of the borrower more so than the LO and or the bank...no? After all, the borrower probably originated said loan with an initial inquiry.

 

[BluesLegend]

I can't wait until next April when all these high tax blue states have to cough up their fair share of Federal income taxes. The SALT caps are going to hammer them.

 

[bripat9643]

Apparently you believe we should just accept it since it's a "fact of life."

Well, it's simply a fact that you can't have a society without some common things that everybody needs and everybody has to share (like roads, drinking water, a police force, fire department) and those have to be paid for so that implies taxes

It's not a fact that only government can provide roads, drinking water, policing or fire protection. Private companies have supplied all of these services at one time or another.

 

[bripat9643]

Tax cuts when the annual deficit is in the billions and the national dept is in the Trillions is stupid. Targeted tax cuts to the middle classes and working poor make sense. Cutting taxes to billion dollar corporations, some of which hire thousands of workers who need food stamps to get by is asinine.

Tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes makes sense? Only in the snowflake la-la land.

Idiot-gram ^^^,

How so?
How exactly does Father Government “cut taxes” for those paying no taxes to begin with?

You ought to study and learn the facts on issues before you post. Your ignorance continues to amaze.

You are echoing the meme income tax cannot be cut for those who earn too little, and the Callous Conservative set complains that the working poor are scofflaws. The working poor do pay taxes:

"In 2017 for example, if you are under age 65 and single, you must file a tax return if you earn $10,400 or more, which is the sum of the 2017 standard deduction for a single taxpayer plus one exemption."

Of course the working poor work must pay for gas - federal and state taxes apply - or public transportation if they don't live close enough to walk. they may not be able to afford housing close to their work place, or they may work two or three jobs, adding to their transportation needs. The may not have enough income to buy health insurance or enough food, and thus must rely on local government to provide aid.

Yet people like you think they have it easy and are too lazy to improve their skills to get a good paying job with benefits. Hence I've coined the phrase Callous Conservative, which describes every person who votes for a Republican.

Damnit...I scared everyone away with too much logic and reason?

Leftwingers recoil from logic and facts like vampires recoil from garlic or sunlight.

 

[justinacolmena]

Hey Libs...why do tax cuts for our most productive suck?
It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

Tax cuts for the most productive suck because in America's sick labor-union-driven economy, it is definitely not the most productive who are earning the most money.

Wages are DOE. You are fired if you work too hard or do your job too well or make the next guy look bad. Notice I said "guy." Women need not apply. The "guys" expect pussy-on-demand to be available for their union-boy DOE wages.

Women don't get "experience" under the DOE system. They just get "old."

 

[forkup]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

In fact what you are saying is, that it's not the con artists fault that people get duped but rather the fault of the victims of con artists that they get duped. And the 2008 bank crisis was a con. It was a legal pyramid scheme that wiped out billions of dollars and forced the government to spent tax's payers money to prevent a total collapse of the financial system. Rather then acknowledge that, I see people blaming the victims for it, while bank executives made, and continue to make millions in bonuses with little to no accountability when they screw everybody.

 

[Tax Man]

It seems there’s still lots of whining going on with regard to the tax cuts.
I’m curious, why do tax cuts suck?

What tax cuts? And who is supposed to get them?

 

[forkup]

During the recession my bankruptcy business was booming with people losing homes.

I have to say, in most cases they did it to themselves. Once someone starts using their homes as an atm, its iver. The borrowing against equity caused values to rise setting of a new round of borrowing. After the new furniture is purchased, the vacations taken, the silly investments failed, the properties were refinanced just to make the huge new mortgage payments. That's just about the time the value gets tapped out and the refinance money train stops. Naturally the loss of the home is going to be a disaster.

Or one could question the lack of regulation that allows banks to give out mortgage loans to people without enough income to sustain them? The way I see it, if a bank gives people a chance to own a house in the knowledge that they will get in financial trouble down the line in an effort to pay for that house it is the bank that is at fault. Not for nothing I'm European, my wife is American and in 2007 I personally saw her best friend being capable of borrowing over 200k when she was in a financial situation that would have caused her to be laughed out of my bank in Europe if she would have asked for that kind of money. So who's fault is it that she goes bankrupt? Hers or the fault of a system that allows borrowing like that?

If you are stupid enough to borrow more then you can comfortably pay back? Then you are the one at fault. Even a six year old can understand that you can not pay someone two dollars if you only have one.

The bank can foreclose and sell the house. If you are older then six then do you really feel that you need someone to hold your hand all the time?

The big difference is between a Broker and a Fiduciary. The Broker is a salesperson who wins when s/he makes a sale, even if the product purchased by the buyer is likely not to his or her benefit.

The bank is the broker, and they will make a loan without full disclosure to the buyer. A fiduciary would not omit telling the buyer that real estate is not a sure thing, and the balloon payment due in 5 years might not be able to be payed off if the home has gone underwater.

The bank then will bundle all the likely failures to payoff the balloon payment and sell them, they they profit twice, and screw both the buyer and those who bought the bundle.

Everyone who has purchased a home, and signed the loan papers signs a large number of documents with large amount of fine print, and is rushed to sign them even when they are not sure; and trust the loan officer who is a broker, not a fiduciary.

I call BULLSHIT right now.
A licensed Loan Officer is in fact a Fiduciary. He/she is regulated by the Department Of Real Estate and is required to adhere to all legal mandates set forth by the DRE.
Further, you’re doing exactly what Lefties do...deflect blame and self accountability.
You wackos will never change.

What is better for a society. the government putting out rules that prevent mortgage loans being issued to people who can't pay for it? Or not doing so and having to pay out billions of tax payers money when the system goes bust?