Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: New Republican budget proposal


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: New Republican budget proposal Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 12:36:07 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
It is not a budget until it tells us what loophoels are being closed and what each one raised. He refused to answer this question because everyone who has a mortgage will not enjoy the answer.


And that's some tough shit if they don't like it. If people want loopholes closed, then close the loopholes. That's the only truly fair way to do it. Close all the loopholes and let there be 2 tax brackets.

But, hey, I have to give you credit for actually accepting that there are going to be loopholes closed. At least you're not blowing smoke all over the place about how it's just a tax break for the rich


The problem is there is no goal for the value of these "closed loopholes" and it is extremely unlikely that the loopholes that would bring in the most revenue from those who can afford it will be targeted, carried interest for instance.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 12:56:39 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
It is not a budget until it tells us what loophoels are being closed and what each one raised. He refused to answer this question because everyone who has a mortgage will not enjoy the answer.

And that's some tough shit if they don't like it. If people want loopholes closed, then close the loopholes. That's the only truly fair way to do it. Close all the loopholes and let there be 2 tax brackets.
But, hey, I have to give you credit for actually accepting that there are going to be loopholes closed. At least you're not blowing smoke all over the place about how it's just a tax break for the rich

The problem is there is no goal for the value of these "closed loopholes" and it is extremely unlikely that the loopholes that would bring in the most revenue from those who can afford it will be targeted, carried interest for instance.


Actually, I think they are talking about closing all the loopholes. No more carve-outs for this group or that group.

But, do go on and offer up nothing more than ideological rhetoric.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 1:05:13 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		And you are offering up more than ideological rhetoric somehow, with the I think?

If it aint in the bill, it aint about to happen.

And it aint gonna happen anyway.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 2:05:03 PM   
PatrickG38


Posts: 338
Joined: 10/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
It is not a budget until it tells us what loophoels are being closed and what each one raised. He refused to answer this question because everyone who has a mortgage will not enjoy the answer.

And that's some tough shit if they don't like it. If people want loopholes closed, then close the loopholes. That's the only truly fair way to do it. Close all the loopholes and let there be 2 tax brackets.
But, hey, I have to give you credit for actually accepting that there are going to be loopholes closed. At least you're not blowing smoke all over the place about how it's just a tax break for the rich

The problem is there is no goal for the value of these "closed loopholes" and it is extremely unlikely that the loopholes that would bring in the most revenue from those who can afford it will be targeted, carried interest for instance.


Actually, I think they are talking about closing all the loopholes. No more carve-outs for this group or that group.

But, do go on and offer up nothing more than ideological rhetoric.


It's not tough shit if people do not like it, it is a new Congress (which is fine). What the people think is still of some importance in a democracy. He was asked point blank on the Sunday news shows and adamantly refused to answer. Certainly an argument can be made for reducing or eliminating the mortgage tax deduction for high earners, but at this time, it would completely end a very weak recovery in the housing market which would have very deleterious effects.

But you are missing the point of this document which is to crush Romney and leave 2016 open. It is very simple, if Mr. Ryan is serious, let him show the numbers.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 5:15:21 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
It is not a budget until it tells us what loophoels are being closed and what each one raised. He refused to answer this question because everyone who has a mortgage will not enjoy the answer.

And that's some tough shit if they don't like it. If people want loopholes closed, then close the loopholes. That's the only truly fair way to do it. Close all the loopholes and let there be 2 tax brackets.
But, hey, I have to give you credit for actually accepting that there are going to be loopholes closed. At least you're not blowing smoke all over the place about how it's just a tax break for the rich

The problem is there is no goal for the value of these "closed loopholes" and it is extremely unlikely that the loopholes that would bring in the most revenue from those who can afford it will be targeted, carried interest for instance.


Actually, I think they are talking about closing all the loopholes. No more carve-outs for this group or that group.

But, do go on and offer up nothing more than ideological rhetoric.

If they meant to close all loopholes why be coy? Ryan won't name which loopholes precisely because he has no intention of closing the ones that benefit the 1% the most but instead intends to shift even more of the tax burden onto the rest of us.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 7:12:49 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If they meant to close all loopholes why be coy? Ryan won't name which loopholes precisely because he has no intention of closing the ones that benefit the 1% the most but instead intends to shift even more of the tax burden onto the rest of us.


http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=8514

    quote:

    Provides individual income tax payers a choice of how to pay their taxes – through existing law, or through a highly
    simplified code that fits on a postcard with just two rates and virtually no special tax deductions, credits, or exclusions (except the health care tax credit).


His plan also increases the standard exemption rate, too.

Yeah, no way an increase in standard deductions and exemptions helps anyone but the 1%...the dirty bastards....





_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 8:10:31 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If they meant to close all loopholes why be coy? Ryan won't name which loopholes precisely because he has no intention of closing the ones that benefit the 1% the most but instead intends to shift even more of the tax burden onto the rest of us.


http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=8514

    quote:

    Provides individual income tax payers a choice of how to pay their taxes – through existing law, or through a highly
    simplified code that fits on a postcard with just two rates and virtually no special tax deductions, credits, or exclusions (except the health care tax credit).


His plan also increases the standard exemption rate, too.

Yeah, no way an increase in standard deductions and exemptions helps anyone but the 1%...the dirty bastards....

You missed the part where he makes clear he isn't actually closing the big money loopholes
quote:

eliminating taxes on interest, capital gains, and dividends


reducing the top marginal to 25%. eliminating the mortgage deduction and all cap gains taxes. IOW soak the middle class and poor and give a huge tax break to the wealthy.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/3/2012 8:52:34 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Eliminating the mortgage deduction in exchange for a larger standard deduction is a good move. The mortgage deduction essentially subsidizes expensive houses, allowing you to buy that million dollar home when otherwise you could only afford the $600,000 one.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 7:42:55 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If they meant to close all loopholes why be coy? Ryan won't name which loopholes precisely because he has no intention of closing the ones that benefit the 1% the most but instead intends to shift even more of the tax burden onto the rest of us.

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=8514
    quote:

    Provides individual income tax payers a choice of how to pay their taxes – through existing law, or through a highly
    simplified code that fits on a postcard with just two rates and virtually no special tax deductions, credits, or exclusions (except the health care tax credit).

His plan also increases the standard exemption rate, too.
Yeah, no way an increase in standard deductions and exemptions helps anyone but the 1%...the dirty bastards....

You missed the part where he makes clear he isn't actually closing the big money loopholes
quote:

eliminating taxes on interest, capital gains, and dividends

reducing the top marginal to 25%. eliminating the mortgage deduction and all cap gains taxes. IOW soak the middle class and poor and give a huge tax break to the wealthy.


Ken, what is the definition of "Middle Class?" What top earning is in that Class?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 7:54:32 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Middle class isn't an earnings term--it refers to those between "ruling classes" and "working classes."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class

Earning wise, we look at quintiles typically, and at wealth, not income--though we can look at earners too, but wealth and income are substantially different. So I think you're probably asking about income distribution really.

To be in the top ten percent takes only about $115,000/year. To be in the top 25% takes just under $70,000.

Roughly half the U.S. population earns more than $35,000.




(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 12:22:10 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If they meant to close all loopholes why be coy? Ryan won't name which loopholes precisely because he has no intention of closing the ones that benefit the 1% the most but instead intends to shift even more of the tax burden onto the rest of us.

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=8514
    quote:

    Provides individual income tax payers a choice of how to pay their taxes – through existing law, or through a highly
    simplified code that fits on a postcard with just two rates and virtually no special tax deductions, credits, or exclusions (except the health care tax credit).

His plan also increases the standard exemption rate, too.
Yeah, no way an increase in standard deductions and exemptions helps anyone but the 1%...the dirty bastards....

You missed the part where he makes clear he isn't actually closing the big money loopholes
quote:

eliminating taxes on interest, capital gains, and dividends

reducing the top marginal to 25%. eliminating the mortgage deduction and all cap gains taxes. IOW soak the middle class and poor and give a huge tax break to the wealthy.


Ken, what is the definition of "Middle Class?" What top earning is in that Class?

I'd go with the middle 50% in either wealth or earnings. People quite throughly screwed by Ryan's proposal.

BTW are you now dropping the claim that Ryan had any intention of closing the big upper class tax loopholes?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 1:12:19 PM   
PatrickG38


Posts: 338
Joined: 10/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Eliminating the mortgage deduction in exchange for a larger standard deduction is a good move. The mortgage deduction essentially subsidizes expensive houses, allowing you to buy that million dollar home when otherwise you could only afford the $600,000 one.


I generally am sympathetic to that, but the housing market (and therefore national economy) could not bear it and it would have to be gradual as people have budgeted over the medium term based on its existence. At heart, I am pragmatic.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 1:52:48 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Why, if the increase in the standard deduction offsets it?

(in reply to PatrickG38)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 4:38:40 PM   
PatrickG38


Posts: 338
Joined: 10/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Why, if the increase in the standard deduction offsets it?



If it offsets it, where is the revenue coming from? Also it serves a very important purpose of adjusting taxation to cost of living (although I'd prefer to figure out a better way). After all 60k a year is very different in NY than Kansas primarily because of housing costs, yet the income tax rate is the same (the deduct-ability of state taxes also serves this purpose since the higher cost of living states tend to have higher state taxes). I think we all agree the tax code as a whole should be looked at both to encourage wider income distribution and greater efficiency, but that is not Rep. Ryan's goal.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 5:39:39 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline 		Here is an idea, no tax cuts until the budget is balanced and the national debt is paid off!
Also, no renewal of temporary tax cuts until the same.
Heck, we could get really crazy and drop all the inflation adjustments, let the tax rates move down into the folks that the republicans claim don't pay their fair share? Course, taxing the folks who earn $20,000 a year is kinda like trying to get blood from a turnip, but hey... Do that for a year and Republicans would never again get the poor to vote for tax cuts for the rich.

Oh, and BTW, until I see all the jobs that the Bush tax cuts were supposed to give us, I'm not buying the "cutting taxes creates jobs," argument. Now if someone is willing to take me up on the 1099 plan, then we can talk.

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to PatrickG38)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 6:56:28 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
reducing the top marginal to 25%. eliminating the mortgage deduction and all cap gains taxes. IOW soak the middle class and poor and give a huge tax break to the wealthy.
quote:


Ken, what is the definition of "Middle Class?" What top earning is in that Class?

I'd go with the middle 50% in either wealth or earnings. People quite throughly screwed by Ryan's proposal.
BTW are you now dropping the claim that Ryan had any intention of closing the big upper class tax loopholes?


Answer: No.

The Middle 50%. According to musicmystery's post, anyone with an AGI of about $70k will be in the top 25%. So, let's use that as the topmost AGI for the Middle class. The standard deductions and exemptions for a family of 4 total to about $39k. So, to be in the "Middle Class" according to your definition, you'd be able to make $109k for a family of 4. And your tax liability will be 10% of your AGI, or $7k. How ridiculous is that? Make only $50k for a family of 4? Your liability will a deadly $1100 on your AGI of $11k. The bottom 50% currently have AGI's of <$33k. Increasing the standard deduction also means those AGI's will be lower, or, better yet, for someone to get an AGI of $33k, they'd have to be making $72k/year.

I don't know what you make/year or what your taxes currently are. But, if you're not making over $39k, you won't have a Federal income tax liability under the Ryan plan (unless you have less than a family of 4).

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 6:59:32 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
If it offsets it, where is the revenue coming from? Also it serves a very important purpose of adjusting taxation to cost of living (although I'd prefer to figure out a better way). After all 60k a year is very different in NY than Kansas primarily because of housing costs, yet the income tax rate is the same (the deduct-ability of state taxes also serves this purpose since the higher cost of living states tend to have higher state taxes). I think we all agree the tax code as a whole should be looked at both to encourage wider income distribution and greater efficiency, but that is not Rep. Ryan's goal.


Please explain what you mean in the bolded section. I want to make sure I understand what you're saying.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to PatrickG38)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 7:00:53 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds
Oh, and BTW, until I see all the jobs that the Bush tax cuts were supposed to give us, I'm not buying the "cutting taxes creates jobs," argument. Now if someone is willing to take me up on the 1099 plan, then we can talk.


Wasn't the unemployment rate around 5% under Bush?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to SoftBonds)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 9:09:33 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PatrickG38
If it offsets it, where is the revenue coming from? Also it serves a very important purpose of adjusting taxation to cost of living (although I'd prefer to figure out a better way). After all 60k a year is very different in NY than Kansas primarily because of housing costs, yet the income tax rate is the same (the deduct-ability of state taxes also serves this purpose since the higher cost of living states tend to have higher state taxes). I think we all agree the tax code as a whole should be looked at both to encourage wider income distribution and greater efficiency, but that is not Rep. Ryan's goal.


Please explain what you mean in the bolded section. I want to make sure I understand what you're saying.


I think it is pretty clear. He's pointing out that since the cost of living in New York and California is higher than the cost of living in Kansas, those folks pay a higher percentage of taxes on the same real income (as expressed in amount of goods and services that can be purchased).

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: New Republican budget proposal - 4/4/2012 9:11:22 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds
Oh, and BTW, until I see all the jobs that the Bush tax cuts were supposed to give us, I'm not buying the "cutting taxes creates jobs," argument. Now if someone is willing to take me up on the 1099 plan, then we can talk.


Wasn't the unemployment rate around 5% under Bush?


Wait, so when the economy was doing swimmingly under Clinton, it was actually Bush Sr's policies, cause fiscal policies don't take effect until 4-8 years later, but when it kept humming (for a few years) under Bush Jr he gets to take full credit? How does that work again?
Oh, and what was the unemployment rate at the END of Bush Jr's term?

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: New Republican budget proposal Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.156