Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by william the wie, Oct 21, 2017.
I expect my taxes to go down by a lot.
Think it will pass, but its set up so the potential damage wont begin to appear until after the next election & its true scope until after the 2020 elections. the only thing that will show up right away is the additional trillion+ added to the debt. early on much noise was made over the needed reduction of the debt. only hear silence now. don't understand what that trade off is about. as usual it looks like ordinary working folks will carry most of the burden.
Well, according to what I just heard on the news, I should expect that I'm going to see something in excess of $130K in my pocket as a result of Trump's tax proposal. (The sum cited is just my quoting what I heard the news anchor say regarding earners roughly in my range of income. I haven't done the math for my specific earnings.) That's about enough to cover the tuition for two of my kids' college next year. Now that's great, and as I've repeatedly said, yes, I'll take the money. But here's the thing: my kids are already attending those schools and I'm already paying out of pocket for them to be there. The money Trump/the GOP wants to put back into my pocket won't alter their or my lifestyles.
The current GOP proposal, according to what I just saw on cable news, defines three tax brackets -- 12%, 25% and 25% -- where by the projected tax saving are as follows:
After tax incomes up to $25K --> 0.5% savings, corresponding to ~$50 to $125.
After tax incomes between $48.6K and $85.1K --> 1.3% savings corresponding to ~$630 to $1106
After tax incomes of $150K+ --> 3.3% savings corresponding to $4950+ (because of some current phase out provisions, for this group, the actual savings aren't as easily shown by merely multiplying the rate times the income, accordingly the savings for this group actually start at $8500, but I'm not going to take the time here to explain them, so I've, for now, gone with the $4950 figure.)
That is a travesty and a miscarriage of equitableness in my mind. Why in the hell is the thing not structured so the savings percentages are reversed or otherwise designed so that the highest earner aren't the ones reaping the greatest percentage savings? For instance, why aren't the folks with incomes up to $25K the one's who'll see the 3.3% savings? I realize that $825 dollars isn't much, but I suspect that $825 to a person earning $25K means a good deal more than does ~$5K to someone earning $150K. Be that as it may, the folks earning $25K or less are surely the ones most in need of the savings, yet they aren't the ones who are receiving the greatest percentage measure of relief.
Are those savings going to alter the lifestyles of low and middle income earners? No! But, IMO, if Trump's/the GOP's tax proposal were intended to be good for low and middle income earners, they'd be structured so that they do provide enough that some sort of noteworthy change would be possible as a result of the tax savings.
Why would I suggest structuring the tax changes thus? Well, because I know how much it'd take for a tax liability reduction to alter the lives of people in my income bracket and higher -- and I'm nowhere near the top of high income earners -- and it's simply not realistic to think that kind of reduction is plausible, probable or even possible. Consequently, I think it better to make possible the prospect of positive life change where one can rather than to not do so anywhere because one cannot do so for everyone.
A boom in the economy, but an issue with the national debt and need to cut spending
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The third proposed tax bracket is 35%.
"After tax income" should have been "taxable income."
Impressive income you have there, kudos on being a 1%er. Even more impressive is your civic-minded attitude. The problem with tax breaks for people like yourself is, as you noted, you don't need the money and will likely save/invest it. People on the lower end will spend almost every dime they get and the entire economy will get a spur. I believe it's been shown the tax-reduction benefits trickle up, they don't trickle down.
Thank you. That, unlike my earnings, is a source of pride. One's income simply is what it is, but having money doesn't make one a better citizen or person.
Still, making $4M/yr is something to be proud of. Unless you inherited $40M, in which case you're a blood-sucking parasite.
Either way, enjoy it.
Without at doubt, I do. LOL
Unless the MSM convinces their sheep it ain't really happening.
Separate names with a comma.