Conservative Tax Cuts - you gotta be kidding me

[Markle]

What I miss most about Carter was the 13% Unemployment and the 21% home loans.

Well, you can thank Nixon, Ford, and shitty Conservative Fed policy that began in the early 70's.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

And it punishes Blue States for daring to have services Red States can't pay for..so there's that!!

Does the huge font make up for the shortcomings your post?

Take California, yep, they give away and commit to BILLIONS/TRILLIONS in giveaways for which they are DEEPLY in debt. While they are deeply in debt, they are going ahead with a useless trillion dollar highspeed rail system. The price of which skyrockets every time they have a new estimate.

We in Florida have all the necessary safety nets but we wisely passed on Obama's offer to chip in a few billion if we also built a worthless highspeed rail. Our government employee retirement plan is well funded. California is trillions in debt. How is theirs doing?

I'm not going to do the California thing one more time..I live in Idaho...I'm just pointing out what everyone knows..that the Blue states will be adversely affected..and that warms the cockles of the right's hearts. Admit it or not.

Truthfully, I doubt that this bill is going to pass, now that they've proposed eliminating the Obamacare mandate. The same people that killed the ACA will kill the tax bill...which is good..because i was kinda for it..until it was revealed that the corporate tax cuts were permanent..and the individual cuts temporary. Oh, and when I learned that mandatory Medicare cuts would be implemented..because more was going out..and the revenue coming in would not make up the difference.

Just too much underhanded BS..by the Repubs...for me to stomach.BTW..kinda blind..thus the large font..sorry.

 

[initforme]

How can they justify permanent corporates taxcuts but not individual? Seems crooked beyond imagination. Welcome to America the corporatocracy. We know who runs the country.

 

[francoHFW]

Do Conservatives seriously think that their budget-busting, deficit-expanding transfer of wealth from the 99% to the top has any chance of passing in this political environment? Never mind the fact that tax cuts never deliver on any of the promises made of them, never mind the fact that we just went through this 16 years ago with Bush the Dumber and 5 years ago with Brownback in Kansas, and never mind the fact that Conservative policy has been stuck in the same rut for 40 years, why would these tax cuts magically grow the economy when they didn't before?

About half of all people making under $100K will either see no change in their taxes, or an increase in their taxes because of the elimination of deductions. Meanwhile the top 0.1% will benefit the most from this tax plan, with the 1% also benefiting immensely, some of whom will see their taxes cut in half. To pay for tax cuts for the rich, the Conservatives are eliminating state & local tax deductions, capping mortgage interest deductions, eliminating grad school (re: STEM grad students) tuition deductions, eliminating student loan interest deductions, eliminating the child tax credit, eliminating EITC, eliminating the AMT, eliminating medical expense deductions, deductions for teachers who buy school supplies for their students, the adoption tax credit, etc.

There is nothing in this Conservative tax plan that benefits anyone other than the very rich and their pet corporations.

It also increases the deficit beyond 10 years which means it's either got to have an expiration date (thus eliminating the entire purpose of this thing) or it needs 60 votes in the Senate to pass. Since Conservatives only have a 52-48 majority (which could drop to 51-49 pending AL's Senate election), they simply lack the votes to pass this disaster.

There is no need or purpose for this tax cut. The only reason Conservatives are pushing this is because they want to take more for their rich corporate donors and give you the shaft.

All Democrats need to stand on soap boxes and proudly repeat your view the middle class does need need any more of their hard earned income in their pockets.

What?

 

[Markle]

And it punishes Blue States for daring to have services Red States can't pay for..so there's that!!

Does the huge font make up for the shortcomings your post?

Take California, yep, they give away and commit to BILLIONS/TRILLIONS in giveaways for which they are DEEPLY in debt. While they are deeply in debt, they are going ahead with a useless trillion dollar highspeed rail system. The price of which skyrockets every time they have a new estimate.

We in Florida have all the necessary safety nets but we wisely passed on Obama's offer to chip in a few billion if we also built a worthless highspeed rail. Our government employee retirement plan is well funded. California is trillions in debt. How is theirs doing?

I'm not going to do the California thing one more time..I live in Idaho...I'm just pointing out what everyone knows..that the Blue states will be adversely affected..and that warms the cockles of the right's hearts. Admit it or not.

Truthfully, I doubt that this bill is going to pass, now that they've proposed eliminating the Obamacare mandate. The same people that killed the ACA will kill the tax bill...which is good..because i was kinda for it..until it was revealed that the corporate tax cuts were permanent..and the individual cuts temporary. Oh, and when I learned that mandatory Medicare cuts would be implemented..because more was going out..and the revenue coming in would not make up the difference.

Just too much underhanded BS..by the Repubs...for me to stomach.BTW..kinda blind..thus the large font..sorry.

Anyone can adjust the size of their text on their computer. If that were true, you could not read the posts on this forum.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

And it punishes Blue States for daring to have services Red States can't pay for..so there's that!!

Does the huge font make up for the shortcomings your post?

Take California, yep, they give away and commit to BILLIONS/TRILLIONS in giveaways for which they are DEEPLY in debt. While they are deeply in debt, they are going ahead with a useless trillion dollar highspeed rail system. The price of which skyrockets every time they have a new estimate.

We in Florida have all the necessary safety nets but we wisely passed on Obama's offer to chip in a few billion if we also built a worthless highspeed rail. Our government employee retirement plan is well funded. California is trillions in debt. How is theirs doing?

I'm not going to do the California thing one more time..I live in Idaho...I'm just pointing out what everyone knows..that the Blue states will be adversely affected..and that warms the cockles of the right's hearts. Admit it or not.

Truthfully, I doubt that this bill is going to pass, now that they've proposed eliminating the Obamacare mandate. The same people that killed the ACA will kill the tax bill...which is good..because i was kinda for it..until it was revealed that the corporate tax cuts were permanent..and the individual cuts temporary. Oh, and when I learned that mandatory Medicare cuts would be implemented..because more was going out..and the revenue coming in would not make up the difference.

Just too much underhanded BS..by the Repubs...for me to stomach.BTW..kinda blind..thus the large font..sorry.

Anyone can adjust the size of their text on their computer. If that were true, you could not read the posts on this forum.

True that...not what i read..but..what i write...and convenience..but hey..way to respond to what i wrote..very cogent and to the point..LoL!

 

[The Derp]

We're supposed to believe you? You jest.

You don't have to believe me, you have to accept it as fact.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...-raises-taxes-on-almost-everyone-by-2027.html

• New GOP Tax-Cut Plan Raises Taxes on Virtually Everyone by 2027
• Here's how the Drumpf tax plan would raise taxes on many middle-income families
• The GOP tax plan will raise taxes on lots of people. A new analysis shows how many.
• Drumpf Plan Would Raise Taxes on Some Middle-Income People, Study Says
• An Empty Pay-Raise Promise
• The numbers are in, and the House Republican tax bill raises taxes on over a quarter of Americans
• Drumpf would hike taxes for some in middle class

At this point, anyone still believing trickle down bullshit is either a complete imbecile, or a propagandist.

 

[The Derp]

I don't know where to start with this. First of all, you apparently don't know what a Conservative is. At this time, Conservatives have very little power in the GOP. IT's predominately establishment Republicans and Nationalist-Populists who control the agenda. Conservative voices have been relegated to the back seat for now.

No they haven't. The only distinction between all these groups is the volume and rancor at which they convey their message. All of them believe the same stupid shit. Some of them are just more overt about their bigotry and idiocy than others, but when it comes down to it, they're all the same people. For fuck's sake, the "Conservative" pick from Trump to head the DoT was Bush the Dumber's DoT secretary.

The definition of what a "Conservative" is changes depending on how your individual argument is faring on a message board. According to you people, everyone is a Conservative up until you decide they aren't. And you only decide they aren't because you don't want to impugn the already tainted label of "Conservative" with the failures that come from Conservative policy. For instance, Conservatives 100% supported Bush the Dumber for his 8 years. It was only after the wreckage that Conservatives suddenly started saying Bush wasn't one of them. Only after Conservative policies erased a surplus, quagmired us in two unwinnable wars of occupation, collapsed the economy, lost jobs, and doubled the debt did Conservatives cast Bush the Dumber out. But while he was pushing those disastrous policies Conservatives were behind him 100%.

So you can try to make a semantic argument over the definition of "Conservative", moving those goalposts so you don't have to be held to account for the failures of your belief system, but I'm not going to let you make such a silly argument. Conservatives supported and elected Bush. Conservatives supported and elected Trump. You own both. Deal with it.

 

[AntonToo]

How do crazy angry lefties get away with the term "budget busting" when Barry Hussein busted the budget

Why aren't YOU angry about budget busting?

And if you are, why are you busy ranting about Democrats instead of simply opposing budget busting?

 

[nat4900]

There is no need or purpose for this tax cut. The only reason Conservatives are pushing this is because they want to take more for their rich corporate donors and give you the shaft.

Well, in "fairness," the need to pass these tax cuts to the rich is for GOPers in congress to REPAY their donors......Whores MUST pay back their pimps.

 

[Boss]

At this point, anyone still believing trickle down bullshit is either a complete imbecile, or a propagandist.

"Trickle down" is exactly how all free market capitalist systems work.

The problem is, what YOU favor could be aptly called "trickle up" economics. Whereby, we all collectively give over our earnings to the Big Government Nanny State who then disperses what it deems we need. This system generally ends with thousands lined up in front of an open ditch awaiting a bullet to the back of the head.

 

[The Derp]

Having clarified that major error, I can tell you that MOST Conservatives aren't pleased with either the House or Senate tax plan. However, it's not for the same cockamamie reasons you leftards are opposed. You see, all you are doing is parroting what you've heard on TV from your mentors on the left. You have not one clue about which you speak. You're basically a borderline retard who relies on someone else to tell you what to think.

So what is it about this tax plan you don't like, precisely? You don't say. As usual, when it comes to depth the Conservative comes up real shallow. I don't expect you guys to make thoughtful, supported arguments about anything. They're always emotional arguments with you people. There's no economic or fiscal benefit to these tax cuts. Even the CEO's say that cutting corporate taxes isn't going to spur them to invest in their companies, and this was made hilariously clear just a couple days ago when Gary Cohn, your guy Trump's chief economic adviser, asked a room of CEO's to raise their hands if they would "invest" in their companies if those companies got a tax cut. The overwhelming majority of those CEO's didn't raise their hands....the video from the WSJ is painful if you're a Conservative married to trickle down dogma. How very humiliating. But not unexpected. Of course a business isn't going to hire people just because they got a tax cut. And anyone with even cursory knowledge of economics would know that.

These "deductions" you are all now whining and moaning about, are precisely what you called "loopholes" just a few years ago, and claimed the tax code was full of these and it advantaged the wealthy over the 99%. Now that Republicans are proposing eliminating them, you've suddenly became in favor of them! For instance, they proposed a cap on mortgage interest deduction... so that, you know, "evil rich people" who live in million-dollar mansions, can't claim but so much of their interest-- but suddenly, that's a BAD thing! And it's mostly the upper middle class who itemize deductions anyway. The lower middle and poor will generally take the standard deduction, which is to be DOUBLED!

The elimination of individual deductions is why taxes for at least half of those making up to $100K will go up. BTW - the Conservatives didn't eliminate deductions for corporations...for instance, in this Conservative tax plan, an elementary school teacher wouldn't be able to deduct supplies (pens, pencils, paper, general stuff) for their students, yet corporations would be able to deduct those exact same supplies for themselves. This was also made hilariously clear (and painful) during the House Congressional Committee's hearings (more video). So the only "loopholes" you guys want to eliminate are those that help the middle class. You keep all those same loopholes for corporations. Just curious, why?

TThen you just roll into outright lies and falsehoods about EIC. It's actually being expanded. So your entire rant is full of absolute bullshit... from the understanding of what Conservatism is to the actual bill being proposed by feckless Republicans who probably won't get it passed, even without the 60-vote requirement.

No, it's not being expanded. It's being eliminated and replaced with a doubling of the standard deduction. But that doubling of the standard deduction isn't going to cover the loss of deductions for individuals like the medical cost deductions, mortgage interest deductions, state and local tax deductions, student loan interest deduction, child tax credit, adoption tax credit, and dozens and dozens of other deductions the middle class needs. However, no deductions have been eliminated for corporations, which is puzzling. How come?

 

[Boss]

I don't know where to start with this. First of all, you apparently don't know what a Conservative is. At this time, Conservatives have very little power in the GOP. IT's predominately establishment Republicans and Nationalist-Populists who control the agenda. Conservative voices have been relegated to the back seat for now.

No they haven't. The only distinction between all these groups is the volume and rancor at which they convey their message. All of them believe the same stupid shit. Some of them are just more overt about their bigotry and idiocy than others, but when it comes down to it, they're all the same people. For fuck's sake, the "Conservative" pick from Trump to head the DoT was Bush the Dumber's DoT secretary.

The definition of what a "Conservative" is changes depending on how your individual argument is faring on a message board. According to you people, everyone is a Conservative up until you decide they aren't. And you only decide they aren't because you don't want to impugn the already tainted label of "Conservative" with the failures that come from Conservative policy. For instance, Conservatives 100% supported Bush the Dumber for his 8 years. It was only after the wreckage that Conservatives suddenly started saying Bush wasn't one of them. Only after Conservative policies erased a surplus, quagmired us in two unwinnable wars of occupation, collapsed the economy, lost jobs, and doubled the debt did Conservatives cast Bush the Dumber out. But while he was pushing those disastrous policies Conservatives were behind him 100%.

So you can try to make a semantic argument over the definition of "Conservative", moving those goalposts so you don't have to be held to account for the failures of your belief system, but I'm not going to let you make such a silly argument. Conservatives supported and elected Bush. Conservatives supported and elected Trump. You own both. Deal with it.

Again, you're just plain wrong and I think it's because you listen to too much Rachel Madcow. Conservatives certainly didn't support Bush or his policies, in fact, that's where the Tea Party started! Bush and his father weren't Conservatives. It was Bush Sr. who coined the phrase "voodoo economics" to describe Reagan's economic policies and he did everything he could to undermine those policies as president. Dubya was a social conservative populist. His economic principles and policies were not conservative.

I agree there is much confusion over what exactly constitutes a Conservative but you can't tie everything to the right of Karl Marx to Conservatives. We're not Nationalist-Populists, we're not Elitist Establishment Republicans and we're certainly not the Bushes or Trump.

 

[The Derp]

Eliminating state tax deductions evens the playing field among the states

How so?

All taxpayers pay generally the same amount of state taxes regardless of where they reside.

Untrue.

States with an income tax have the benefit of a deduction not available to the residents in states without an income tax. So overall I pay the same amount of taxes in a state with an income tax but I get nothing to deduct.

The states without an income tax end up using federal welfare to balance their budgets. Like Kansas did.

 

[The Derp]

"Trickle down" is exactly how all free market capitalist systems work.

No, it isn't. Not in that pure form like you're imagining. Why are you posturing like you know what you're talking about?

The problem is, what YOU favor could be aptly called "trickle up" economics. Whereby, we all collectively give over our earnings to the Big Government Nanny State who then disperses what it deems we need. This system generally ends with thousands lined up in front of an open ditch awaiting a bullet to the back of the head.

Here's the thing you don't understand...no business will expand if there's no demand to fill. So by cutting corporate income taxes, how are you increasing consumer demand?

What's also too bad for you is that this very question was posed by your guy, Gary Cohn, to a roomful of CEO's just a couple days ago. In the painful clip, Cohn asks the CEO's to raise their hands if they're going to increase investment because they got a tax cut. Most CEO's didn't raise their hands, prompting Cohn to gasp exasperatedly, "why isn't everyone's hand up?" The reason, Mr. Cohn, is because businesses don't invest based on the tax rate. Conservatives either know this, and are deliberately lying, or they don't and are clueless dupes.

So are you a liar or a dupe?

 

[The Derp]

Again, you're just plain wrong

Pfft. I didn't vote for Bush. None of my liberal, left-wing friends voted for Bush. So who did? Someone had to have voted for him to win twice. Who could it have been? Ah yes, the same people who are now pretending they never supported Bush, even though they voted for him twice and supported all his shit policies for 8 years. It was only after the wreckage that you guys distanced yourselves from Bush. But everyone else remembers. You're the same people who voted for Bush, the same people who were cheerleading Iraq, the same people who were cheerleading deregulation, the same people who were cheerleading deficit-inducing, budget-busting Tax Cuts. Now you expect me to believe you never supported any of that? PLEASE! I'm not as stupid as you, so don't think you can play me like you played yourself.

Conservatives certainly didn't support Bush or his policies

BULL-FUCKING-SHIT.

Conservatives supported the Bush Tax Cuts.
Conservatives supported Wall Street Deregulation
Conservatives supported the Iraq War
Conservatives supported the War on Terror

You think opposing the bailout retroactively means you opposed the things that caused the bailout? Fuck you. No one buys your shit. Peddle that revisionist crap somewhere else. To think how lowly you must think of yourself that you feel the need to pretend that your opposition to the bailout caused by your policies means you opposed the policies that led to that bailout is a fucking embarrassment. Take some fucking responsibility for yourselves instead of trying to maintain your already shitty reputation. Believe me, there's nothing you can do that will remove the stain of Bush from your reputation. So stop trying because it's pathetic.

What a whiny little bitch. You don't get to restore your reputation by pretending your opposition to the bailout -which was caused by your policies in the first place- translates to your opposition to all the policies that caused the bailout. No one buys that shit.

, in fact, that's where the Tea Party started! Bush and his father weren't Conservatives. It was Bush Sr. who coined the phrase "voodoo economics" to describe Reagan's economic policies and he did everything he could to undermine those policies as president. Dubya was a social conservative populist. His economic principles and policies were not conservative.

Seems like Conservatism has an identity crisis...or you do. I doubt you can even explain your positions and policies. All you do is make knee-jerk reactions to things and then try to revise history to pretend you didn't. What a fraud. I see right through you.

 

[Boss]

So what is it about this tax plan you don't like, precisely? You don't say. As usual, when it comes to depth the Conservative comes up real shallow. I don't expect you guys to make thoughtful, supported arguments about anything. They're always emotional arguments with you people. There's no economic or fiscal benefit to these tax cuts. Even the CEO's say that cutting corporate taxes isn't going to spur them to invest in their companies, and this was made hilariously clear just a couple days ago when Gary Cohn, your guy Trump's chief economic adviser, asked a room of CEO's to raise their hands if they would "invest" in their companies if those companies got a tax cut. The overwhelming majority of those CEO's didn't raise their hands....the video from the WSJ is painful if you're a Conservative married to trickle down dogma. How very humiliating. But not unexpected. Of course a business isn't going to hire people just because they got a tax cut. And anyone with even cursory knowledge of economics would know that.

Okay.. So, the past 10 years or so, you've all been telling us that CEOs are evil rich bastards who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves, lining their pockets with million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes on the backs of their poor workers who they pay slave wages to--- Now, all of a sudden, they are the bellwether on who we need to listen to regarding tax policy?

Why would a corporate CEO want to change US tax policy to open up more competition in the marketplace? And why would a liberal want to listen to what a CEO wants? Your rhetoric has become so convoluted you aren't making any sense.

The elimination of individual deductions is why taxes for at least half of those making up to $100K will go up. BTW - the Conservatives didn't eliminate deductions for corporations...for instance, in this Conservative tax plan, an elementary school teacher wouldn't be able to deduct supplies (pens, pencils, paper, general stuff) for their students, yet corporations would be able to deduct those exact same supplies for themselves. This was also made hilariously clear (and painful) during the House Congressional Committee's hearings (more video). So the only "loopholes" you guys want to eliminate are those that help the middle class. You keep all those same loopholes for corporations. Just curious, why?

Most school teachers don't itemize deductions, they take the standard individual deduction which is doubled under the new plan. Most US taxpayers use the standardized deduction. It's only the wealthy and upper middle class who itemize deductions, which you previously decried as "loopholes" that gave them an unfair advantage over the 99%. So again, you are contradicting your past rhetoric here. Either you want to eliminate "loopholes" (i.e.; tax deductions) or you don't.

No, it's not being expanded. It's being eliminated and replaced with a doubling of the standard deduction. But that doubling of the standard deduction isn't going to cover the loss of deductions for individuals like the medical cost deductions, mortgage interest deductions, state and local tax deductions, student loan interest deduction, child tax credit, adoption tax credit, and dozens and dozens of other deductions the middle class needs. However, no deductions have been eliminated for corporations, which is puzzling. How come?

No, EIC is not being eliminated, I don't know who told you that. The amount per dependent is actually being increased under the new plan. Corporations are not individual taxpayers, they have a completely different tax code and their deductions or credits are based on totally different things.

So what is it about this tax plan you don't like, precisely? You don't say.

Well, for starters, there is no tax cut for top marginal rates. That's what generates growth revenue. If we were cutting that back to the Reagan era of 28%, I would be on board with the plan, but that's not in the works. I also don't like this notion of "revenue neutral" tax policy because that's not a tax cut. If we're going to collect the same amount of dollars under the new plan as the old, how have we cut taxes? We've simply changed who pays the taxes. I want REAL tax cuts and REAL spending cuts.

 

[The Derp]

Okay.. So, the past 10 years or so, you've all been telling us that CEOs are evil rich bastards who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves, lining their pockets with million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes on the backs of their poor workers who they pay slave wages to--- Now, all of a sudden, they are the bellwether on who we need to listen to regarding tax policy?

So your whataboutism is pretty fucking obvious here as you're trying to avoid the fact that no business will hire anyone based on their income tax rate. So your half-assed, rhetorical attempt here doesn't go unnoticed. Greedy CEO's still have a business to run. And these greedy CEO's are telling you that if you cut the tax rate for corporations, they will not invest in their companies. I'm not sure what more you need. A roomful of CEO's shooting down your stupid tax plan should be enough. Apparently it isn't. The reason why is obvious; for you, personally, your ego cannot take the bruising from being wrong about something like this. So you do everything you can to avoid and dodge and whatabout your way to not having to explain your shitty position.

Why would a corporate CEO want to change US tax policy to open up more competition in the marketplace? And why would a liberal want to listen to what a CEO wants? Your rhetoric has become so convoluted you aren't making any sense.

Please explain how eliminating or reducing corporate income taxes would open up competition in the market. Take me through that position of yours because I suspect you cannot do it. I think you Conservatives all thought that the CEO's were just as dumb as you and would think that cutting their income taxes would somehow translate into increased consumer demand. But bad news for you is that CEO's aren't as stupid as you, and rightfully recongize that the corporate income tax rate has no bearing on whether or not they invest.

Second, and most importantly, HIGH CORPORATE TAXES SPUR INVESTMENT because investing in your business isn't taxable. But income is. The higher the corporate income tax rate, the more the corporation is going to avoid that rate by investing in their business by increasing value of its assets through expansion and/or upgrading. Prior to Reagan, that meant expanding. Since Reagan, that meant stock buybacks and dividends. So the problem is twofold:

1. To spur corporate investment, the tax rate has to increase
2. To actually have investment, the rules allowing companies to buyback stocks and dividends have to be repealed.

 

[Boss]

You think opposing the bailout retroactively means you opposed the things that caused the bailout?

Sorry, I opposed the bailouts when they happened and there are threads on USMB to back that up. I NEVER supported "too big to fail" and I still don't.

It also wasn't conservative policies that led to the financial crisis. That was the result of left-wing democrat liberal policies which forced lenders to make sub-prime loans to people who couldn't afford them. Conservatives warned it would lead to disaster and it did. And yes, it was signed into law by G.W. Bush who was NOT a conservative!

Seems like Conservatism has an identity crisis...or you do. I doubt you can even explain your positions and policies. All you do is make knee-jerk reactions to things and then try to revise history to pretend you didn't.

Man, that's rich... a libtard accusing ME of making knee-jerk reactions?

I have NO trouble explaining MY position or policies. I am a constitutional conservative libertarian. I believe in a small limited government pursuant to Article I Sec. 8 of the Constitution. I believe social issues should be determined by state and local government and the federal government should stay out of it unless there is a compelling civil rights argument. I want federal government out of my life as much as possible. I personally favor a consumption tax as opposed to income tax.

 

[The Derp]

Most school teachers don't itemize deductions...Most US taxpayers use the standardized deduction. It's only the wealthy and upper middle class who itemize deductions, which you previously decried as "loopholes" that gave them an unfair advantage over the 99%. So again, you are contradicting your past rhetoric here. Either you want to eliminate "loopholes" (i.e.; tax deductions) or you don't.

How do you know this? You don't. You're just making this shit up as you go, aren't you? It's interesting that you think state and local tax deductions are "loopholes" but a business deduction for depreciation of equipment isn't. But again, you don't really understand fiscal policy anyway, so....

they take the standard individual deduction which is doubled under the new plan.

First of all, NO! The standard deduction isn't being doubled at all.

From Business Insider:
Under the GOP proposal, Americans who claim the standard deduction will be able to deduct $12,200, slightly higher than the current combined $10,400 deduction, which includes the standard deduction and one personal exemption. Joint filers would deduct $24,400, up from the current $20,800, which includes the standard deduction and two personal exemptions.

Among those who itemize deductions, the average claimed was $27,053 in 2015. The most common itemized deductions and the total amount deducted by US taxpayers in 2015 were:

• Taxes paid, including state and local income and sales tax: $539.8 billion (Which you want to eliminate)
• Interest paid, which primarily covers mortgage interest: $294.5 billion (Which you want to cap and/or eliminate)
• Charitable contributions: $201.3 billion
• Medical and dental expenses: $84.2 billion (Which you want to eliminate)

So how will the "doubling" of the standard deductions save anyone when the average amount deducted is more than the standardized deduction you guys are proposing? How's that math work?