Tax incentives are mandates

[dblack]

Republicans were elected to repeal ACA, most especially the 'individual mandate' requiring everyone to buy federally approved insurance or pay extra taxes. But Republicans in Congress aren't about to betray their lobbyists. They're planning to "replace" the individual mandate with tax incentives to achieve the same purpose - pushing as many people as possible into the pens of the insurance companies.

And our idiot citizenry will fall for it. They'll think that, somehow, calling it something different makes it OK.

Is there a link to go with this rant?
Has this been passed yet?
No? Then for now it is your opinion this will happen. Got it.

Every plan I've read from the Republicans include tax incentives to buy insurance.

 

[dblack]

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I'm trying.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety...

That's what we're opposed to. It's not the job of government to 'spur' us.

If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

Only some of your community wins, namely those with the clout to successfully lobby congress for the incentives. Those who don't, get screwed.

It's job of government to protect our freedom live how we want, to create the kind of society we want. Government shouldn't be in the business of telling us what kind of society is best and "incenting" (ie coercing) us into following along.[/QUOTE]

 

[Slade3200]

I dont want to pay higher taxes, which is why if I can pay less in tax for investing back in my business then I'll gladly take it. Why you'd oppose that makes no sense

investing in your business is already a tax deduction you don't need extra back from the government.
I oppose it because it's not the government's responsibility to give extra money to individuals or businesses for engaging in specific behaviors

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

I'd like to see the tax rate lowered for the poor, middle class and businesses and I also don't mind giving less in taxes for investing in my business or helping the community. I'd rather choose where to invest my money over giving it to the government.

Take Charity for example. If there wasn't a tax incentive for businesses and individuals to donate to charities, do you know how many charities would be out of business? Many of them... Given the choice to give to the government or invest in an individuals business or give to charity, most people choose the later options, which is a benefit to our communities. Why would you rather have the government collect more money and then waste it with their inefficient programs?

 

[dblack]

investing in your business is already a tax deduction you don't need extra back from the government.
I oppose it because it's not the government's responsibility to give extra money to individuals or businesses for engaging in specific behaviors

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

I'd like to see the tax rate lowered for the poor, middle class and businesses and I also don't mind giving less in taxes for investing in my business or helping the community. I'd rather choose where to invest my money over giving it to the government.

I think I haven't been clear. I'm not saying it's wrong for taxpayers to take full advantage of existing deductions. I certainly do. I'm saying it's wrong for government to use deductions to control people. Even if it is for something that, in your opinion, is a good cause, it's an abuse of government power. Government should be the referee for society, not its coach.

 

[Skull Pilot]

investing in your business is already a tax deduction you don't need extra back from the government.
I oppose it because it's not the government's responsibility to give extra money to individuals or businesses for engaging in specific behaviors

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

I'd like to see the tax rate lowered for the poor, middle class and businesses and I also don't mind giving less in taxes for investing in my business or helping the community. I'd rather choose where to invest my money over giving it to the government.

Take Charity for example. If there wasn't a tax incentive for businesses and individuals to donate to charities, do you know how many charities would be out of business? Many of them... Given the choice to give to the government or invest in an individuals business or give to charity, most people choose the later options, which is a benefit to our communities. Why would you rather have the government collect more money and then waste it with their inefficient programs?

I disagree with you on charities so what if people give because they want to they shouldn't get an income tax break for it

get rid of all this crap and we'll be able to lower the tax rate across the board and people will have more of their own money to do with as they will

 

[Slade3200]

I dont want to pay higher taxes, which is why if I can pay less in tax for investing back in my business then I'll gladly take it. Why you'd oppose that makes no sense

investing in your business is already a tax deduction you don't need extra back from the government.
I oppose it because it's not the government's responsibility to give extra money to individuals or businesses for engaging in specific behaviors

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

Well maybe Trump will get rid of all the credits and deductions when he drops the tax rates. Doubt it though.

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

I'd like to see the tax rate lowered for the poor, middle class and businesses and I also don't mind giving less in taxes for investing in my business or helping the community. I'd rather choose where to invest my money over giving it to the government.

Take Charity for example. If there wasn't a tax incentive for businesses and individuals to donate to charities, do you know how many charities would be out of business? Many of them... Given the choice to give to the government or invest in an individuals business or give to charity, most people choose the later options, which is a benefit to our communities. Why would you rather have the government collect more money and then waste it with their inefficient programs?

I disagree with you on charities so what if people give because they want to they shouldn't get an income tax break for it

get rid of all this crap and we'll be able to lower the tax rate across the board and people will have more of their own money to do with as they will

end result of your plan is a large percent of charities get shut down, innovation slows, start up businesses decline, and safety/environment initiatives go down... more money gets spent on consumer products resulting in china and the 1% getting even more richer.... our nation as a whole ends up being worse off.

 

[OKTexas]

ALL tax incentives should be done away with.
It's none of the government's business what car you drive, how yo insulate your home or whatever else they give tax credits for.

The whole idea of manipulating behavior with taxes is ham handed social engineering and that is NOT the function of government

That's what Robert's ran into with the mandate. He recognized that it's no more (or less) of a mandate than an equivalent tax 'deduction'. Yet the psychology of it works on people. If we proposed a federal "home mortgage mandate", that penalized people who don't maintain mortgage debt with higher taxes, people would be appalled. But reframe it as a tax deduction, as a reward rather for complying rather than a penalty for not, and they love it. I guess the moral of the story is that voters are essentially gullible children.

I haven't had a mortgage in almost 30 years, the deduction isn't that appealing compared to no mortgage.

 

[OKTexas]

Republicans were elected to repeal ACA, most especially the 'individual mandate' requiring everyone to buy federally approved insurance or pay extra taxes. But Republicans in Congress aren't about to betray their lobbyists. They're planning to "replace" the individual mandate with tax incentives to achieve the same purpose - pushing as many people as possible into the pens of the insurance companies.

And our idiot citizenry will fall for it. They'll think that, somehow, calling it something different makes it OK.

Chuck Schumer still has veto power by the filibuster, and with his other 48 senators he and they will make sure ACA does not change.

So don't fret your cookies over this, Cupcake, not to worry.

The GOP does not get dictatorial powers until the People elect 60 GOP senators.

The GOP is still 9 senators short of that.

High school civics. You should have paid attention.

Yeah, tell that to your dear leader who had to veto a bill this year that was going to abolish the UCA. The commiecrats in the senate couldn't stop it then and they won't be able to stop it now. Only difference is Trump will sign it.

 

[whitehall]

How the hell do hypocrite left wingers get away with condemning tax initiatives when every blue rust belt state (including New York) is advertising tax initiatives for industries?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Republicans were elected to repeal ACA, most especially the 'individual mandate' requiring everyone to buy federally approved insurance or pay extra taxes. But Republicans in Congress aren't about to betray their lobbyists. They're planning to "replace" the individual mandate with tax incentives to achieve the same purpose - pushing as many people as possible into the pens of the insurance companies.

And our idiot citizenry will fall for it. They'll think that, somehow, calling it something different makes it OK.

And you have proof of this?
BTW, a peruse of thy knowledge.
Other than the committee members of Congress that wrote the ACA legislation, which other parties were intricately involved in crafting the language of HR 3590?

 

[thereisnospoon]

funny thing about RW's ... they never bitched about the cost of healthcare tripling the first decade of this century, but for the last eight years they can't do anything BUT ***** ... AAAAARRRGGHHHH, TOO EXPENSIVE, DO AWAY WITH IT !!!!!!

Federal mandates and interference in the marketplace drive up the cost of medical care. Dates back to the late 70's with the advent of HMO's...Insurance companies wanted protected markets.
We are barred by law from choosing the type of medical coverage we wish.

 

[thereisnospoon]

How the hell do hypocrite left wingers get away with condemning tax initiatives when every blue rust belt state (including New York) is advertising tax initiatives for industries?

IN particular the NY State government has seen the light. Gone is the arrogant notion that "if you're not in New York, you're nowhere".
Mario Cuomo thought this way. During his 4 terms, his administration jacked up taxes on every aspect of business and invented a ton of other fees and taxes.
Cuomo never thought business owners would have the stones to pull up stakes and leave NY....He was wrong.
GE a mainstay and one of NY's largest non white collar employers has been closing plants in and around its former HQ in Schenectady NY for three decades.
The entire Capital District was in one way or another tied to GE. Many people in the region upon graduation from high school or college took jobs at GE for their entire careers.
The high real estate, business and employment taxes were in part the reason why GE finally moved most of its operations to other states or out of the US..
Other businesses such as Carrier, Union Carbide, a plethora of auto manufacturing plants as well as parts suppliers left the state.
One other aspect of NY that drove away many large employers is NY's tough labor laws which provide many protections for labor unions.
NY is perhaps the only state where "closed shop" practices which by federal labor law are illegal, but the way the NY laws are written, the state pushes the envelope without drawing the attention of federal scrutiny.
The latter makes NY an unattractive place to start or expand a business.
Fast forward to today. The present Andrew Cuomo administration has seen fit to offer tax incentives to any new business forming in NY or ones that relocate to NY a ten year exemption on certain business and real estate taxes.
This is really the only way NY can compete with other more business friendly states for job creation.

 

[thereisnospoon]

ALL tax incentives should be done away with.
It's none of the government's business what car you drive, how yo insulate your home or whatever else they give tax credits for.

The whole idea of manipulating behavior with taxes is ham handed social engineering and that is NOT the function of government

That's what Robert's ran into with the mandate. He recognized that it's no more (or less) of a mandate than an equivalent tax 'deduction'. Yet the psychology of it works on people. If we proposed a federal "home mortgage mandate", that penalized people who don't maintain mortgage debt with higher taxes, people would be appalled. But reframe it as a tax deduction, as a reward rather for complying rather than a penalty for not, and they love it. I guess the moral of the story is that voters are essentially gullible children.

This applies only to older people who were raised to believe that government owed them certain benefits for their being productive citizens.
They feel the same way about Social Security.
Walk up to any older person of retirement age. Even one's with lucrative pensions that allow them to afford two homes. For example northeastern dwelling snow birds who winter in Florida.....Tell those people the government is going to means test social security and those with pensions over a certain amount will either have their SS reduced or even eliminated and they will pull out a tirade that if they shouted standing in Palm Beach could be heard in Lake Ronkonkoma in NY.....They view this as sacrosanct.
I have heard the arguments against a fair or flat tax where all individual deductions, including the mortgage interest deduction would be eliminated and they go ballistic.
Even though rates are so low that the interest deduction is miniscule, they don't care. To them the mortgage interest deduction is an entitlement. A promise by government as a reward for working and saving up to buy a home. Its as though they almost believe they bought a home out of civic duty and the interest deduction is a reward for said performance of said duty.///Weird.
On a personal note, if my paycheck got larger in lieu of the couple thousand dollar deduction from my gross yearly income, I'd gladly surrender the deduction.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Republicans were elected to repeal ACA, most especially the 'individual mandate' requiring everyone to buy federally approved insurance or pay extra taxes. But Republicans in Congress aren't about to betray their lobbyists. They're planning to "replace" the individual mandate with tax incentives to achieve the same purpose - pushing as many people as possible into the pens of the insurance companies.

And our idiot citizenry will fall for it. They'll think that, somehow, calling it something different makes it OK.

Well, yes but the dems actually made a law requiring it citizens to buy a product, or risk jail time and/or fines.

It's no different than tax incentives. In either case, you either do as you're told, or you pay more in taxes as a result.

Nah...You have a strange way of rationalizing.
Not accurate.
Look, on the health insurance front. we have not had a competitive marketplace for this product in decades. The insurance companies lobbied for protected markets. The federal government obliged and wrote laws barring insurance carriers in the health insurance area from doing business across satte lines. Insurance carriers were all but too happy to do business in one state and not another to avoid competing with each other.
For example, I believe it is Alabama, BC/BC covers somewhere around 90% of all with health insurance coverage. IN New Jersey BC/BS was all I ever heard of. In fact when I was young, I thought that company name was a just a generic term for health insurance. Sort of like how people use "Kleenex" as a generic term for facial tissue. "Where's the Kleenex?"....Or that stuff we paint that makes up our wall material....We call it "Sheetrock"....Its actually gypsum board. Sheetrock is a trade name for US Gypsum's drywall product.
BTW US Gypsum's HQ used to be in Haverstraw, NY about 30 miles north of New York City. It is now HQ'd in Charlotte, NC. The NY Plant was once of US Gypsum's largest.

 

[thereisnospoon]

ALL tax incentives should be done away with.
It's none of the government's business what car you drive, how yo insulate your home or whatever else they give tax credits for.

The whole idea of manipulating behavior with taxes is ham handed social engineering and that is NOT the function of government

Take the 20% R&D tax credit that businesses get for investing in new technology, which can also be applied to labor expenses for small businesses. You'd rather get rid of that and instead of those companies having an extra 20% to invest back into their business you want the fed government to get it? How does that makes sense?

Get rid of ALL tax incentives PERIOD

Why would you rather have the government get that money instead of businesses investing in innovative technologies and growth?

If the ******* government didn't collect taxes and then give money back to people then taxes could be lowered and the people would keep that money to begin with

Why do you want to pay higher taxes so the government can give tax breaks to businesses or to people who buy electric cars?

BINGO....Essentially we allow government to take from us, and then under the guise of a "refund" or "break" actually returns OUR money to us.
I have to laugh at those who fill out their W-2 so that they are issued large tax refund checks. They look at the refund as though it were some kind of windfall. They don't realize they are giving the federal government an interest free loan. And made their paycheck smaller.
But tell these people that under a new flat or fair tax system refunds would no longer be available, they would freak out even thought their paychecks would be larger....Makes no sense.

 

[Skull Pilot]

investing in your business is already a tax deduction you don't need extra back from the government.
I oppose it because it's not the government's responsibility to give extra money to individuals or businesses for engaging in specific behaviors

That's fine, you can have that opinion. Personally I think the less they take the better.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

Well maybe Trump will get rid of all the credits and deductions when he drops the tax rates. Doubt it though.

This is why it won't change. People can't see past the end of their noses and actually like being told how to live.

Then explain it for us simple folk, please.

I support lower taxes. I also support tax credits that the "people" aka our elected leaders decide promote initiatives that spur business growth, innovation and environmental safety... If my business can spend 20K less on taxes in return for developing a new product or installing some solar panels, then it is a win for my business. I win and my community wins.

So you think it's a good idea for the governemnt to take more in taxes than it needs so it can give incentive money to some people?

If all these government giveaways were gone the tax rates could be lowered for everyone

I'd like to see the tax rate lowered for the poor, middle class and businesses and I also don't mind giving less in taxes for investing in my business or helping the community. I'd rather choose where to invest my money over giving it to the government.

Take Charity for example. If there wasn't a tax incentive for businesses and individuals to donate to charities, do you know how many charities would be out of business? Many of them... Given the choice to give to the government or invest in an individuals business or give to charity, most people choose the later options, which is a benefit to our communities. Why would you rather have the government collect more money and then waste it with their inefficient programs?

I disagree with you on charities so what if people give because they want to they shouldn't get an income tax break for it

get rid of all this crap and we'll be able to lower the tax rate across the board and people will have more of their own money to do with as they will

end result of your plan is a large percent of charities get shut down, innovation slows, start up businesses decline, and safety/environment initiatives go down... more money gets spent on consumer products resulting in china and the 1% getting even more richer.... our nation as a whole ends up being worse off.

when more people keep more of their own money it's always good for the country

why should we as taxpayers pay more than we have to subsidize anyone else with tax incentives

 

[dblack]

I'd just like to see a national consensus that the tax code shouldn't be used as a means of controlling people.

 

[Rustic]

funny thing about RW's ... they never bitched about the cost of healthcare tripling the first decade of this century, but for the last eight years they can't do anything BUT ***** ... AAAAARRRGGHHHH, TOO EXPENSIVE, DO AWAY WITH IT !!!!!!

Forcing people into a mandate is in absolute **** up. the people doing the forcing are deplorable… Why can't people take care of their own shit. Funny thing is, it's always progressives that **** it up for everyone else....

 

[Rustic]

ALL tax incentives should be done away with.
It's none of the government's business what car you drive, how yo insulate your home or whatever else they give tax credits for.

The whole idea of manipulating behavior with taxes is ham handed social engineering and that is NOT the function of government

Take the 20% R&D tax credit that businesses get for investing in new technology, which can also be applied to labor expenses for small businesses. You'd rather get rid of that and instead of those companies having an extra 20% to invest back into their business you want the fed government to get it? How does that makes sense?

It makes sense because it prevents Congress from using the tax code as to manipulate behavior. Taxes should be about funding government, not controlling people.

This whole issue is why Roberts decided to let the individual mandate from the ACA stand. He realized there's no difference between mandates and incentives, and he feared that striking down the individual mandate would set precedent that would unwind the established practice of Congress using taxes to coerce behavior. And he simly didn't have the balls to do that - even though it would have been exactly the right thing to do.

''Taxes should be about funding government, not controlling people''

That is the fucked up quote of the century!!!!
That's like saying never mind what the federal governments is doing... they're doing it for your own good… Progressive thinking is beyond fucked up

 

[dblack]

''Taxes should be about funding government, not controlling people''

That is the fucked up quote of the century!!!!
That's like saying never mind what the federal governments is doing... they're doing it for your own good… Progressive thinking is beyond fucked up

Huh?