Suckers! Trump Era Tax Cuts Are Set To Expire — Here’s How Much More You’ll Pay

[Moonglow]

Why didn't Piglosi answer Schumer do it?

I'll tell ya.....they would rather tell their mindless cult ORANGE MAN BAD than actually do something.

And the cult chants ORANGE MAN BAD.

There was no reason to do anything to the tax legislation.

 

[Lisa558]

Whore for the wealthy, like the other DC whores, sucking for shekels.

Subtle antisemitic remark didn’t go past me.

 

[westwall]

Why are you snickering at a tax cut that benefited yourself as well?

Because he's stupid. With a capital S.

 

[MisterBeale]

Tax cuts won't be extended.

The deficit needs to be reduced and the budget balanced

That $34T Debt means every American owes $100,000. That is what our elected reps have been doing in DC.

. . . hmmmmmm

It sounds to me, if Trump gets elected, you'd like to see Dave Ramsey as Secretary of Treasury.

 

[Nostra]

There was no reason to do anything to the tax legislation.

So why are you Dimtards whining about it now, vermin?

 

[Independent thinker]

He made the tax cuts to end in 2025 because he thought he would get a second term. But now they about about to end.

When 2025 draws to a close, so will many of the sweeping Trump-era GOP tax breaks established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017. While the legislation made some tax cuts to corporate profit permanent, lowered individual tax rates will expire on Dec. 31, 2025, and will revert to pre-TCJA levels.

MSN

www.msn.com

What you rubes don't get is that the tax cuts benefitted everyone who paid taxes, not just the rich. It will be interesting when the lowest on the totem poll find out they are going to have to start paying taxes or more taxes while the left keep on saying the tax cuts only benefited the rich.

 

[MisterBeale]

He gets the Reparation deduction

I know this was tongue in cheek. . . but there was actually an idea in the late 70's, early 80's proposed by Milton Friedman, and supported by Thomas Sowell.

IN some ways, it is a revolutionary idea, with much foresight geared toward dismantling BIG GOVERNMENT, encouraging personal responsibility, while also providing a social safety net in the face of increasing social destabilizing forces of technological innovations and social dislocations . . . .

Not exactly a "UBI," that is proposed by some today, but similar. I was shocked that they foresaw the type of problems we are seeing today with AI and automation, all the way back then, but wanted to set up a system that would replace dependence on direct government assistance, entitlement programs, and the massive buracracy that grows up around that to administer them . . .

Negative Income tax? Have you ever heard of such an idea? I hadn't, till I ran across it last year, in the archives.

Government Shutdown October 1st! Yay Republicans!

None, I just want to know WHY MTG, LB, and MG voted Nay. You seem to call (D) haters of the Military for voting Nay, so what do you say about MTG, LB, and MG voting Nay? You are too afraid to answer, aren't you. C'mon big Reb ......why do those 3 (R) get a pass from you? None is not a link...

www.usmessageboard.com

"Domestic Spending Waste & Corruption.​

There seems to be a lot of discussion and debate in the past several years with the advent of AI, increased efficiency, decreased employment opportunity and demands for equity, from the independent and far left, for ideas like guaranteed minimum income/UBI (universal basic income,) or reparations. Conservatives and libertarians shudder at this, because they envision more debt added to the budget, both in more entitlement payments, and more bureaucracy to administer it.

But what if we could satisfy the left's demands for UBI/reparations where needed, while also decreasing the size of the welfare bureaucracy?

Just a curious idea, film and discussion from forty/fifty years ago. . . perhaps an idea ahead of its time, coming from the right. Presented by Milton Freidman, featuring Thomas Sowell in discussion, the idea of negative income tax. . .

Could that be a start, to solve the massive entitlement side of the equation?

Negative income tax​

Negative income tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Free To Choose - Milton Friedman on The Welfare System (1978) | Thomas Sowell​

776,023 views Sep 16, 2019
"Milton Freidman, in the fourth segment of the series, shows why he believes government-run welfare programs do not help the people they are intended to help or achieve the ends they are intended to achieve, and why the "welfare state" leads to loss of initiative, independence, and personal liberty. Friedman compares slum areas and luxury apartments of New York City, visits two families on welfare, one in Harlem and one in Britain, and argues in favor of the negative income tax. Featuring Thomas Sowell.

Shared for historical purposes. I do not own the rights.. . . "

 

[kyzr]

Subtle antisemitic remark didn’t go past me.

How is that antisemetic? As _____ said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and the truth is just the truth.

 

[kyzr]

. . . hmmmmmm

It sounds to me, if Trump gets elected, you'd like to see Dave Ramsey as Secretary of Treasury.

The Treasury Secretary doesn't do much about the Debt.

I need the House and Senate to cut the Budget back to 2019 levels, and fix entitlements.

 

[IM2]

The corporate tax is a thinly veiled sales tax. If you think business don't pass that cost to the consumer you are a moron.

I do understand business and I also understand weak excuses, because trump lovers cheered when trump put tarriffs on China while ignoring how businesses were passing THAT cost to American consumers.

 

[IM2]

The Treasury Secretary doesn't do much about the Debt.

I need the House and senate to cut the Budget back to 2019 levels, and fix entitlements.

Trump spent like crazy, so cutting the budget to 2019 levels probably is not wise. And exactly whhat "entitlments do you want cut?

What we should be cutting is the defense budgets and law enforcement budgets. Police departments don't need tanks.

 

[IM2]

Don't forget that when the Bush tax cuts were supposed to end, Obama extended most of them.

Yeah, that irritated me about Obama. He was too soft on the right.

 

[pknopp]

Yeah, that irritated me about Obama. He was too soft on the right.

For the most part he was the right.

Taxes, wall street, corporations, wars.......he took the "right" position on all of them.

 

[IM2]

Odd endorsement for re-electing Trump and making the cuts permanent.

Nah. Because trump won't mmake them permanent. He coulld have done it the ffirst time.

 

[Thinker101]

Yeah, that irritated me about Obama. He was too soft on the right.

So you're suggesting the Bush tax cuts were only for righties....how fricken stupid can ya get.

 

[MisterBeale]

The Treasury Secretary doesn't do much about the Debt.

I need the House and senate to cut the Budget back to 2019 levels, and fix entitlements.

I understand.

But the budget still needs to be submitted, AND approved by the administration.

. . . that is, after all, why we sometimes, year after year, get these budget standoffs.

 

[IM2]

For the most part he was the right.

Not about continuing the Bush cuts. And he never should have been soft on the people who opposed everything he tried initiating.

 

[MisterBeale]

Trump spent like crazy, so cutting the budget to 2019 levels probably is not wise. And exactly whhat "entitlments do you want cut?

What we should be cutting is the defense budgets and law enforcement budgets. Police departments don't need tanks.

 

[IM2]

Didn't Dimwingers control everything the first two years of Tater's regime? Why didn't they make them permanent?

Because they were worthless. Democrats had a different and better plan.

 

[MisterBeale]

For the most part he was the right.

Taxes, wall street, corporations, wars.......he took the "right" position on all of them.

Bullshit. He was fucking warmonger.

He was a tool of the establishment and a liar.