Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Photo

The new tax reform proposal


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#41 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:24 PM

I wish they were putting money back into corporation but they do not. Trickle down huge failure in Kansas

It worked very well in some states, especially Indiana so I don't know why it didn't in Kansas.  On a national scale, which we're confronting here, the two best examples are the Reagan tax cuts and the Kennedy tax cuts.  In both cases, government revenues went UP.  I suspect that liberals oppose tax cuts because they have more government control with higher and more complicated taxes.  If they were honest and used dynamic scoring, they would at least have credibility in optimal rate debates.


  • mex likes this

#42 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:31 PM

Why not try something new for the first time and initiate a flat tax. Then initiate a balanced budget amendment and make them operate just as you and I do? Try something different than this same cycle we've been doing the last 100 years.

 

I've proposed that for years.  Why not have a huge standard deduction to exempt the necessities of the average family and have a flat rate on all income above that.  Liberals should be happy because a lot of folks at the lower end of the income scale wouldn't pay anything.  Moderates and conservatives should be happy because folks aren't additionally penalized for increasing their productivity.  The only losers would be the politicians who love to manipulate and control through tax policy.  Tax rules are too often used to extract campaign donations and pad the bank accounts of congress.  Harry Reid and family would be the poster children for this.


  • azchief21 likes this

#43 wilkie

wilkie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,818 posts
  • LocationShagri La

Posted 28 September 2017 - 05:35 PM

Agree, but tax relief doesn't mean mortgage deductions.  My real problem with this issue is that government shouldn't be manipulating social policy via the tax code. 

What then would you say about charitable deductions? Would folks donate as much without the tax break?

#44 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 06:01 PM

What then would you say about charitable deductions? Would folks donate as much without the tax break?

Good question and I have no data to draw on.  For myself and wife, we probably would donate the same regardless of tax laws, but I can't speak for everyone.  Americans a very generous people and it's not all because of tax incentives.  For those getting benefits from tax cuts, some probably would be more charitable with more money in pocket.  Giving comes from the heart, not tax savings.  All that being said, we are downsizing and every room of furniture and article of clothing we give away, we'll deduct next April.  



#45 BroncoStud

BroncoStud

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,759 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:05 PM

What then would you say about charitable deductions? Would folks donate as much without the tax break?

My guess is no.  Same principle with mortgage deduction - clearly it exists to compel home-buying.



#46 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,269 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 07:26 PM

Agree, but tax relief doesn't mean mortgage deductions.  My real problem with this issue is that government shouldn't be manipulating social policy via the tax code.  If it's in our best interest to make housing more affordable, then there are way to do it without complicating and distorting the tax laws.  Taxes should be for raising revenue, not dictating behavior.  And yes, I think tax relief is good in any form.  Taxes have never been the problem, spending is.

 include tax deductions for children as well?

 

for the record I'm still a proponent of a consumer tax (fair tax)



#47 Mloe68

Mloe68

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 272 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 08:03 PM

It worked very well in some states, especially Indiana so I don't know why it didn't in Kansas.  On a national scale, which we're confronting here, the two best examples are the Reagan tax cuts and the Kennedy tax cuts.  In both cases, government revenues went UP.  I suspect that liberals oppose tax cuts because they have more government control with higher and more complicated taxes.  If they were honest and used dynamic scoring, they would at least have credibility in optimal rate debates.

Unfortunately the Reagan tax cuts also came with massive spending increases and resulted in crushing deficits. Deficits that are going to crush this country and still are not being addressed. 


  • BroncoStud likes this

#48 BroncoStud

BroncoStud

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,759 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 08:56 PM

Deficits that are going to crush this country and still are not being addressed. 

YEP. ^^^



#49 wilkie

wilkie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,818 posts
  • LocationShagri La

Posted 28 September 2017 - 09:24 PM

Good question and I have no data to draw on.  For myself and wife, we probably would donate the same regardless of tax laws, but I can't speak for everyone.  Americans a very generous people and it's not all because of tax incentives.  For those getting benefits from tax cuts, some probably would be more charitable with more money in pocket.  Giving comes from the heart, not tax savings.  All that being said, we are downsizing and every room of furniture and article of clothing we give away, we'll deduct next April.

Disagree. Most folks who routinely give find out what they owe first then charitable contributions decided at the end of the year. I don't know many altruistic people I guess.

My guess is that this will change a lot when this all is put on paper.

#50 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,269 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 09:32 PM

Disagree. Most folks who routinely give find out what they owe first then charitable contributions decided at the end of the year. I don't know many altruistic people I guess.

My guess is that this will change a lot when this all is put on paper.

 

thats sad



#51 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 10:07 PM

 . I don't know many altruistic people I guess.

My guess is that this will change a lot when this all is put on paper.

You probably hang around too many liberals who would rather give other people's money than their own.   :lol:

 

I also question the elimination of charitable deductions.  That will cause just as much of an outcry as the mortgage deduction if it were canceled.  What will probably happen is the Dems will scream bloody murder without offering any constructive alternatives and the Reps will turn into cowards afraid to harm anyone's sacred cow.  If the remains are just a corporate tax cut to 20%, it will be worth it, but I don't trust congress to get any of it right.



#52 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 3,431 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:29 PM

What then would you say about charitable deductions? Would folks donate as much without the tax break?

It's absurd to think that the only reason people donate is because of their deduction

 

in my current bracket, I'd get 20 bucks back from a 100 dollar donation

 

if it was about making money, there are far easier ways to get a better ROI

 

people donate because they WANT to... clearly



#53 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 3,431 posts

Posted 28 September 2017 - 11:32 PM

 include tax deductions for children as well?

 

for the record I'm still a proponent of a consumer tax (fair tax)

absolutely tax breaks for children

 

future taxpayers are needed



#54 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 29 September 2017 - 01:43 AM

 include tax deductions for children as well?

 

for the record I'm still a proponent of a consumer tax (fair tax)

If we're going to eliminate taxes on the amount needed to cover basic needs, then certainly family size would be a factor.  Just like people don't give to charities just to get a deduction worth a part of it, most people won't have more kids just to get a larger standard deduction.  It doesn't make economic sense.  Of course, many people have no economic sense.


  • oldtimer likes this

#55 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,269 posts

Posted 29 September 2017 - 12:30 PM

If we're going to eliminate taxes on the amount needed to cover basic needs, then certainly family size would be a factor.  Just like people don't give to charities just to get a deduction worth a part of it, most people won't have more kids just to get a larger standard deduction.  It doesn't make economic sense.  Of course, many people have no economic sense.

 

 

 I do believe that that comes into the equation  to some who plan on family size ..it has too in the affordability equation but then there are those others..I'm sure that was racist  :P



#56 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,269 posts

Posted 29 September 2017 - 12:31 PM

It's absurd to think that the only reason people donate is because of their deduction

 

in my current bracket, I'd get 20 bucks back from a 100 dollar donation

 

if it was about making money, there are far easier ways to get a better ROI

 

people donate because they WANT to... clearly

 

Yep



#57 Calichief

Calichief

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,427 posts

Posted 02 October 2017 - 08:33 AM

that's because you're rich


In another state, you could maybe say that. I do well. Government has been raping my bonus for years. Funny how "bonus" is taxed differently.
I feel like chevy chase in xmas vacation.

Instead of a pool, I just got a new jelly of the month.

#58 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,269 posts

Posted 02 October 2017 - 12:03 PM

In another state, you could maybe say that. I do well. Government has been raping my bonus for years. Funny how "bonus" is taxed differently.
I feel like chevy chase in xmas vacation.

Instead of a pool, I just got a new jelly of the month.

:lol:



#59 mex

mex

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 3,431 posts

Posted 02 October 2017 - 01:06 PM

In another state, you could maybe say that. I do well. Government has been raping my bonus for years. Funny how "bonus" is taxed differently.
I feel like chevy chase in xmas vacation.

Instead of a pool, I just got a new jelly of the month.

lol of course I know you're not necessarily rich... 

 

think of it this way

 

look at these young kids coming into the nfl... they get a 1 or 2 million bonus... end up with big single year earnings

 

pay their agents a hefty fee, then their federal, state and local taxes... and they end up with 1/3 of what they earned

 

the average career is just a few years... then they go back to real life with very little... making normal amounts of money... they can't even benefit from the money they earned in that very short time

 

taxation is theft



#60 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 02 October 2017 - 08:50 PM

lol of course I know you're not necessarily rich... 

 

think of it this way

 

look at these young kids coming into the nfl... they get a 1 or 2 million bonus... end up with big single year earnings

 

pay their agents a hefty fee, then their federal, state and local taxes... and they end up with 1/3 of what they earned

 

the average career is just a few years... then they go back to real life with very little... making normal amounts of money... they can't even benefit from the money they earned in that very short time

 

taxation is theft

Probably typical, but it doesn't have to be that way in spite of taxes.  If they have good financial advice AND TAKE IT, they can walk away with a good nest egg even with a short career.  The problem is that their advisers are usually in it for themselves and rip off the naive athlete.  The major sports leagues have programs to help, but lots of kids listen to their friends or homeys or posse and end up with nothing.  There are ways to average out income over several years and defer part of it to avoid the highest taxes all at once.  Kids just need to seek out good advice and do it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users