Two Million People (and counting) Receiving Tax Reform Bonuses

If more people die from outbreaks in shithole countries, the less they'll be a drain on the world's resources. The planet is already overpopulated.

Republican logic.

 

Actually, if you listen to the extreme left, ultra environmentalists, this is indeed their vision. Many advocate that the world population needs to decrease by a factor of 3 or 4. Of course, they never place themselves in the group of those that are 'excess', and they're usually anti-war...leaving them with little means for achieving their end state, short of a massive holocaust scenario. Or, I guess, the system employed in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (if you aren't familiar, it isn't in the first book...and it explains a LOT the stupidity we see here on Earth).

In any case, this is a view from the extreme left, not the extreme, or even moderate right....so if you think that is a bad vision, you need to be looking in the other direction.

However, it still is a viewpoint worthy of discussion. Trump et al aren't advocating that these other countries need to decrease their population. He IS advocating that their problems aren't our problems, and that we need to be more focused on directing our resources in manners that benefit us. Is that really such a terrible position? If so...why? No, I don't believe that all money spent on such things needs to be curtailed, and I get that money spent there can have a positive impact on the United States. BUT I think that far too often it is indeed spent trying to solve some global problem, without much thought given to whether or how much it benefits us. Their are many globalists who will argue that there isn't anything wrong with this, and from a humanitarian perspective it isn't a bad concept. BUT...can we really afford this, and is it really better to spend dollars there than it is to spend them here?

In keeping with this concept, and this applies to the tax cuts and upcoming infrastructure spending bill, one thing that I think the left really needs to understand: it is IMPOSSIBLE to continue with current levels of social spending, much less any increases, without a vibrant growing economy. Spending on 'business' is not mutually exclusive to spending on social issues. In fact, it is a necessary precursor.

 

That said, do you have any EVIDENCE that he was lying?

 

Have seen various figures, rom $1000 to $4000 dollars depending on various factors and current income. The so-called 'crumbs'. Personally, I am quite looking forward to my 'crumbs', and think of them more as a whole bag of cookies.

I'm curious...why do you ask? To compare with savings for the upper class? If so, I don't get why those on the left don't understand simple math (and this goes back to Bush's proposed 10% across the board tax cut being called a tax cut for the rich). In order for tax cuts to have a large value, the current taxes paid need to have a large value. Taxes paid increase as income increases, so, yes, simple math demonstrates that those who paid more in are going to get bigger cuts. Are liberals now against basic math?

Yes, the Dems did vote to extend the Bush tax cuts. Indicating fairly conclusively that a) this talk about the cuts being temporary is a bunch of malarkey. First, ten years is a long time. Second, simple enough to vote to extend them. Third, it now requires action to extend them, so if indeed these aren't having the desired impacts, they will go away on their own. and B) that all the current rhetoric against these tax cuts is also a bunch of malarkey, purely political posturing.

Why is the rhetoric so strong? Because Democratic leaders are really concerned that these cuts actually are a good thing for working people, and it came from the Republicans. That's a direct threat to their base, and all they have is rhetoric to counter it. So, they had to really crank up the volume. Particularly now, before those 'crumbs' start showing up in people's paychecks, as it will ring especially hollow once that starts happening.

 

"But can we really afford this"... While the GOP cuts tax revenue by increasing the deficit by 1.8 trillion dollars (the deficit, not the debt) over the course of ten years while ramping up our military budget while poor hopeless school districts are being underfunded because they rely on the socio-economics of the local area due to being mostly funded by property tax which throws a giant wrench at the concept of what a public school ought to accomplish...

Just so .1% of the population that already has the most accumulated wealth in human history can recieve the majoirty of tax cuts. And you wonder why people are upset about this tax bill.

But it's the foreign aid that is the problem... You are a joke.

Throwing money at the wealthiest group of humans in mankind history is less beneficial than throwing money at underfunded public high schools. In the long game the latter would benefit our economy more.

 

http://time.com/money/5071344/gop-tax-bill-middle-class/
In 2018, middle-income households — those earning $49,000 to $86,000 — will see an average tax cut of $930 on average, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Those who make a bit more but might still plausibly be called middle class — families earning $86,000 to $149,000 — will get back even more, with an average tax cut of just over $1,800.

Of course each persons' or families' case will be different and we still need more time to unpack this tax overhaul; unfortunately it didn't simplify the system but further complicated it.

Heh. That's not why I asked and I am fully aware with our American tax system that taxes come from the folks who have the most income.

This was billed as a corporate tax cut and middle class tax cut; one of those statements is prettty flaccid. Obviously, selling a middle class tax cut instead of a tax cut for the wealthy is easier.

No.... It's just not smart to raise taxes when you're in the midst of a recovery from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. When you raise or lower taxes is as important as the amount.....

The tax cuts will be beneficial in the short term as long as the stock market is up and the economy is strong. I worry about intentional increasing the deficit in a strong economy with tax reform and net increased spending. Doing all this when boomers will strain our budgets is quite bold and George Bush Jr-esque. .

 

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2018/02/02/best-buy-to-hand-out-bonuses-to-workers.html

 

So, @BigDog63 and @crash5179 and the rest of the crumb-bums, looks like S.O.T.H. and Str8 Balla Shot Calla Paul Ryan has heard your message and has taken to the Twitters to carry the flag of prosperity:



I'm pretty ashamed of myself for having pooped on your $1000 bonus.....$1.50 a week! Hot damn.

Though not quite as ashamed as Paul Ryan, since he hastily deleted the tweet after the entire Twitterverse clowned his ass.

 

Trump: Making Countries Shithole Again

 

I just want to address foreign aid. My late father, a professor and department head for over 30 years, usually spent summers heading up USAID programs in developing countries. His team of educators would instruct the faculty of the local university, college, or technical school on the latest technology and curricula, setting up labs and bringing the equipment for the labs with them, leaving it behind for the students to use. The program stayed in touch with the college to see how it progressed, and sometimes they spent more than one summer in one location. He did this over many years and in several countries, having a direct impact on thousands of students and their extended families. One of those programs was in Bangalore, India in the mid-1960's. The program, and hundreds like them, have had an important role in raising the living standards of countless people. It has produced goodwill towards the United States, and that's a good thing.

The United States can't become the turtle pulling its head into its shell, attempting to ignore the world. The time when that was even a remote possibility is long gone. There seems to be a desire among some to return to the supposedly bucolic days of the 1950's, when this was a largely White country, "a woman's place was in the home," taking care of the children and cooking the meals, and Dad busied himself around the house when he wasn't at work, mowing the lawn and wondering whether it made sense to get that second TV for the master bedroom, or to buy a set of golf clubs and learn to play. In other words, "America First." Part of the other side of that imaginary coin is the discrimination towards minorities. The "Black neighborhoods," the "Hispanic neighborhoods," and police that treated White people one way, and the rest in a different way altogether. This idea that the clock can be turned back and the country returned to an era that never really existed is a fantasy. A dangerous fantasy, in my opinion.

 

The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

 

What's that I hear from the right?

 

Embarrassing...

 

$1000 Bonus, $1.50 a week or health care, which would you choose?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/2/16936916/community-health-centers-congress


Congress has quietly created a new health care crisis for 26 million Americans
They let funding for community health centers lapse 127 days ago.

 

Three billion dollars in bonuses (if you really believe none of those bonuses would have been awarded) for a one trillion and five hundred billion dollar increase in the debt?

 

hey Steve (btw, really happy you are recovered and hope for continued good health)... can you jump on it and get me one of those bonuses? My company appears to be pocketing the tax savings and I am afraid all the bad things happening will put me further in a hole. Thanks pal...

 

Bonuses: 3 billion so far THIS YEAR.
Tax Savings: 150 million taxpayers x $750 = 112 billion THIS YEAR

Multiply by 10 years = 1.12 trillion.

That's a pretty dishonest comparision. A 1 year bonus total vs. a 10 year addition to the debt?
No mention of the actual tax savings going back to americans over those 10 years?
No mention of higher wages, future bonuses, more jobs, and on and on and on...?

SMH

 

I am sorry, getting lost in the numbers... is that the $1.12 trillion the addition to the national debt?

OK, still getting lost in all these numbers. So what in the bill guarantees higher wages, future bonuses and more jobs?

 

Do you know that there will be bonuses next year as a result of the Tax Act? Do you know how many of the claimed bonuses were going to be given anyway? Do you know how many more jobs have been created by the Tax Act? Do you know how many will? Of course you don’t.

What we know is that a Republican majority whip that is a supporter of the President is claiming 3 billion dollars in bonuses for workers (not all in the USA either) and we know the non partisan CFRB estimates loses in tax revenue being 5.5 trillion dollars over the next decade. Even Brady (A Republican) on the Means committee has the number at 1.5 trillion dollars as the net cost of the tax cuts.

Scalise conveniently leaves out that non partisan cost is estimated to be 1.5 trillion and possibly 5 trillion or more. Instead you gushes over his 3 billion dollars which is 1.5% of the yearly cost.

How conveniently deceptive.

SMH.