- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/20/17 at 10:37 am to Navytiger74
quote:
Nice recovery for shooting your ignorant mouth off, bumpkin.
No recovery needed. The Post title speaks for itself, as did my response.
Let me reiterate that I most certainly find you stupid enough to fulfill the original premise.
This post was edited on 12/20/17 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 12/20/17 at 10:38 am to Navytiger74
quote:
Because unless you’re a true deficit hawk (I’m not and neither are 99.9% of voters) it’s simply not a bad tax plan. It hurts high salary earners with expensive real estate in high tax states. And they have a legit gripe. But that’s not that many people. It does just about jack shite for quite a few people. I’m a single filer who makes a decent salary and deducts more from my mortgage interest and property taxes (about $18000 a year) than the expanded standard deduction will cover). Still, in WA state I will save a few hundred a year. WA has no income tax. When I transfer residency to VA, a relatively high-tax state, I will lose about $900 a year (on average according to those imperfect calculators). So it’s really not going to affect me that much and I think it will help to stimulate the economy. Business owners, couples, and people with children will on average do much better with this than a single guy whose primary earnings are just salary income.
Nice summary
quote:Nope, not legit in my eyes. Higher earners are mobile; they can move to a different state.
It hurts high salary earners with expensive real estate in high tax states. And they have a legit gripe.
quote:Kinda hard to give a tax break to those don't pay taxes...or actually get a subsidy through the EITC. So you aren't wrong, just think this framing of the issue is very disingenuous.
It does just about jack shite for quite a few people.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 10:43 am to ElectricWizard0
quote:
About 52k people from New Jersey.
Understandable. About 85k people in the middle 20% of filers in New Jersey will see a tax hike as a result of this bill. 750k will see a cut though.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 10:45 am to BigJim
quote:I explicitly mentioned myself and the only time I haven’t paid federal taxes was on deplyment. I’m not an OT/poliboard baller, but I pay about $16,000 a year. And a good quarter of my income (housing) is already tax exempt. This won’t help young single lawyers and other salaried professionals in the $100-$200k range. And we pay taxes.
Kinda hard to give a tax break to those don't pay taxes...or actually get a subsidy through the EITC. So you aren't wrong, just think this framing of the issue is very disingenuous.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:01 am to Navytiger74
quote:
I explicitly mentioned myself and the only time I haven’t paid federal taxes was on deplyment. I’m not an OT/poliboard baller, but I pay about $16,000 a year. And a good quarter of my income (housing) is already tax exempt. This won’t help young single lawyers and other salaried professionals in the $100-$200k range. And we pay taxes.
I think I saw about 1/3 of $100-$200k group will either not get a cut or get an increase especially if you live in a high tax state.
That really isn't very many people. Maybe 20% of the population? And only 2/3rds of that are better off?
At the end of the day, most of those people will react like you "oh well, I don't get much but still think it is good for the economy" and others will have little sympathy for the $100-200k crowd.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:02 am to PsychTiger
quote:
The smart ones will become snitches in the camps and earn extra privileges the others won't receive.
Maybe one of them can become a scrounger. Get things for everyone else... for a small fee, of course. That we could then tax and give directly to the rich in the form of a further tax cut in 2019. Call it a "camp tax".
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:04 am to Navytiger74
quote:
And we pay taxes.
baw how can you pay taxes when you are paid by taxes
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:13 am to el Gaucho
quote:
Republican values: letting the underprivileged starve so that you can save a couple thousand on taxes
Trumps values: letting the underprivileged starve so that you can save a couple thousand on taxes (until 2025). Meanwhile, the 40% corporate tax cut is permanent.
Blinders [OFF]
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:16 am to TDcline
quote:
They are blinded by hatred for Trump to see the good he’s doing.
Look I know Trump isn't perfect. Far from it. But the man's specialty is finances. He's been pretty successful at it. Anyone who thinks this is a bad plan is blinded by their hatred of all things Trump. End of story.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:16 am to jptiger2009
quote:
letting the underprivileged starve
You are a cliche. You know that right?
If you are so worried about starving citizens, feel free to donate your tax savings to your closest food bank.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:17 am to jptiger2009
quote:
letting the underprivileged starve
They don't pay shite in taxes as is. $0
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:17 am to BigJim
quote:
You are a cliche. You know that right? If you are so worried about starving citizens, feel free to donate your tax savings to your closest food bank.
I didn't say that. I was adding on to what someone else said.
Sure, ignore the part I added...
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:17 am to BigJim
> mfw a politard takes el Gaucho at face value
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:18 am to BigJim
quote:
el Gaucho
This post was edited on 12/20/17 at 11:19 am
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:21 am to TDcline
quote:
...that it’s bad because you can’t write-off as much.
Remember when tax write-offs were a bad thing to liberals?
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:24 am to jptiger2009
quote:
I didn't say that. I was adding on to what someone else said.
You are right, my apologies. Though you didn't particularly disagree either.
In terms of the corp cut...good. That is the most important part. Other threads have discussed this in much greater detail. In the meantime, feel free to lobby for making those cuts permanent.
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:27 am to jptiger2009
quote:
Trumps values: letting the underprivileged starve so that you can save a couple thousand on taxes (until 2025 unless they make it permanent, which they will). Meanwhile, the 40% corporate tax cut is permanent.
FIFY
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:30 am to HempHead
quote:frick you, mang. I’d take the cut to be spared the paperwork. Call it even.
baw how can you pay taxes when you are paid by taxes
Posted on 12/20/17 at 11:34 am to Navytiger74
quote:
This won’t help young single lawyers and other salaried professionals in the $100-$200k range. And we pay taxes.
Single lawyer in Virginia making $150k/year will still see a federal tax break even if you itemize and have deductions of $10,000 + SALT. You've got to find a very specific situation to say this won't help salaried professionals in the $100-$200k range.
This post was edited on 12/20/17 at 11:35 am
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News