The Brady/Ryan Tax Reform Plan

[bripat9643]

Not enough smears or logical fallacies? Requires too much thinking? What?

Well we disagree alot, but when I agree im not afraid to say it. I would prefer the elimination of the income tax, but we have to compromise.

I prefer the elimination of the income tax as well, and prefer we have consumption taxes. I lean heavily in favor of the Fair Tax. It has its pitfalls, but it is far better than an income tax.

However, no matter which tax scheme we have, we must first ban tax expenditures, and this Brady/Ryan plan is a big move in that direction.

I understand the political cowardice behind not removing the MID. But it really needs to go sooner or later.

The public must first be educated.

How will that prevent politicians from simply adding them back in at a later date?

 

[g5000]

Not enough smears or logical fallacies? Requires too much thinking? What?

Well we disagree alot, but when I agree im not afraid to say it. I would prefer the elimination of the income tax, but we have to compromise.

I prefer the elimination of the income tax as well, and prefer we have consumption taxes. I lean heavily in favor of the Fair Tax. It has its pitfalls, but it is far better than an income tax.

However, no matter which tax scheme we have, we must first ban tax expenditures, and this Brady/Ryan plan is a big move in that direction.

I understand the political cowardice behind not removing the MID. But it really needs to go sooner or later.

The public must first be educated.

How will that prevent politicians from simply adding them back in at a later date?

Please read posts 62, 67 and 68.

I've said it at least a hundred times on this forum. It does not matter what tax scheme you have (progressive income tax, flat tax, Fair Tax, etc), none of it makes a damn bit of difference if you don't first ban the corruption of tax expenditures.

 

[AntonToo]

"Eliminates all itemized deductions besides the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable contribution deduction."

First, big mistake not to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. That's an $80 billion boondoggle scheme which transfers wealth from the pocket of the common man into the pockets of those up the food chain.

The rubes have been fooled into bleeving they are "getting to keep more of my own money". That's a huge lie. They are paying higher prices for their homes, and higher tax rates, to support the mortgage interest deduction.

Next, notice the key words "eliminates all itemized deductions". This bill still provides an up front bulk "standard deduction" just for breathing.

For every deduction, standard or otherwise, you have to raise tax rates higher to make up the difference.

But if you put a gun to my head, I would have to say this is one of the better tax reform plans to come down the pike since 1986.

I am a common man with a common mortgage. If mortgage interest deduction gets removed my mortgage will not get cheaper and my taxes due will increase significantly.

Tell me again how that is not a big time loser for me.

 

[bripat9643]

Not enough smears or logical fallacies? Requires too much thinking? What?

Well we disagree alot, but when I agree im not afraid to say it. I would prefer the elimination of the income tax, but we have to compromise.

I prefer the elimination of the income tax as well, and prefer we have consumption taxes. I lean heavily in favor of the Fair Tax. It has its pitfalls, but it is far better than an income tax.

However, no matter which tax scheme we have, we must first ban tax expenditures, and this Brady/Ryan plan is a big move in that direction.

I understand the political cowardice behind not removing the MID. But it really needs to go sooner or later.

The public must first be educated.

How will that prevent politicians from simply adding them back in at a later date?

Please read posts 62, 67 and 68.

I've said it at least a hundred times on this forum. It does not matter what tax scheme you have (progressive income tax, flat tax, Fair Tax, etc), none of it makes a damn bit of difference if you don't first ban the corruption of tax expenditures.

Sure it does. It's much harder to carve out exemptions with the FAIR tax.

 

[AntonToo]

Not enough smears or logical fallacies? Requires too much thinking? What?

Well we disagree alot, but when I agree im not afraid to say it. I would prefer the elimination of the income tax, but we have to compromise.

I prefer the elimination of the income tax as well, and prefer we have consumption taxes. I lean heavily in favor of the Fair Tax. It has its pitfalls, but it is far better than an income tax.

However, no matter which tax scheme we have, we must first ban tax expenditures, and this Brady/Ryan plan is a big move in that direction.

I understand the political cowardice behind not removing the MID. But it really needs to go sooner or later.

The public must first be educated.

How will that prevent politicians from simply adding them back in at a later date?

Please read posts 62, 67 and 68.

I've said it at least a hundred times on this forum. It does not matter what tax scheme you have (progressive income tax, flat tax, Fair Tax, etc), none of it makes a damn bit of difference if you don't first ban the corruption of tax expenditures.

Bingo.

Conservatives tax ideas are usually just budget busters and tax burden redistribution schemes, while almost entirely neglecting the purpose of taxes - PAY FOR SPENDING.

 

[jc456]

"Eliminates all itemized deductions besides the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable contribution deduction."

First, big mistake not to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. That's an $80 billion boondoggle scheme which transfers wealth from the pocket of the common man into the pockets of those up the food chain.

The rubes have been fooled into bleeving they are "getting to keep more of my own money". That's a huge lie. They are paying higher prices for their homes, and higher tax rates, to support the mortgage interest deduction.

Next, notice the key words "eliminates all itemized deductions". This bill still provides an up front bulk "standard deduction" just for breathing.

For every deduction, standard or otherwise, you have to raise tax rates higher to make up the difference.

But if you put a gun to my head, I would have to say this is one of the better tax reform plans to come down the pike since 1986.

I am a common man with a common mortgage. If mortgage interest deduction gets removed my mortgage will not get cheaper and my taxes due will increase significantly.

Tell me again how that is not a big time loser for me.

so the program would be to lessen your tax percentage, that's how. That's all that does anyway is lessen the percentage by lowering your income level.

 

[jc456]

BTW, Libs will never concede that almost 50% of the country doesn't pay income tax. I find that hilarious and sad at the same time. They want a tax break for those who pay no income tax. how does one accomplish that?

 

[AntonToo]

"Eliminates all itemized deductions besides the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable contribution deduction."

First, big mistake not to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. That's an $80 billion boondoggle scheme which transfers wealth from the pocket of the common man into the pockets of those up the food chain.

The rubes have been fooled into bleeving they are "getting to keep more of my own money". That's a huge lie. They are paying higher prices for their homes, and higher tax rates, to support the mortgage interest deduction.

Next, notice the key words "eliminates all itemized deductions". This bill still provides an up front bulk "standard deduction" just for breathing.

For every deduction, standard or otherwise, you have to raise tax rates higher to make up the difference.

But if you put a gun to my head, I would have to say this is one of the better tax reform plans to come down the pike since 1986.

I am a common man with a common mortgage. If mortgage interest deduction gets removed my mortgage will not get cheaper and my taxes due will increase significantly.

Tell me again how that is not a big time loser for me.

so the program would be to lessen your tax percentage, that's how. That's all that does anyway is lessen the percentage by lowering your income level.

umm I can get the tax cut AND keep the mortgage deduction according to that plan.

But if the I get a tax cut WITHOUT mortgage deduction, that is actually a net TAX INCREASE for me.

Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction Calculator - Bankrate

 

[jc456]

"Eliminates all itemized deductions besides the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable contribution deduction."

First, big mistake not to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. That's an $80 billion boondoggle scheme which transfers wealth from the pocket of the common man into the pockets of those up the food chain.

The rubes have been fooled into bleeving they are "getting to keep more of my own money". That's a huge lie. They are paying higher prices for their homes, and higher tax rates, to support the mortgage interest deduction.

Next, notice the key words "eliminates all itemized deductions". This bill still provides an up front bulk "standard deduction" just for breathing.

For every deduction, standard or otherwise, you have to raise tax rates higher to make up the difference.

But if you put a gun to my head, I would have to say this is one of the better tax reform plans to come down the pike since 1986.

I am a common man with a common mortgage. If mortgage interest deduction gets removed my mortgage will not get cheaper and my taxes due will increase significantly.

Tell me again how that is not a big time loser for me.

so the program would be to lessen your tax percentage, that's how. That's all that does anyway is lessen the percentage by lowering your income level.

umm I can get the tax cut AND keep the mortgage deduction according to current plan.

But if the I get a tax cut WITHOUT mortgage deduction, that is actually a net TAX INCREASE for me.

how do you figure? if the tax amount is lower than what you paid with the current deduction, how is it you paid more?

 

[AntonToo]

"Eliminates all itemized deductions besides the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable contribution deduction."

First, big mistake not to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. That's an $80 billion boondoggle scheme which transfers wealth from the pocket of the common man into the pockets of those up the food chain.

The rubes have been fooled into bleeving they are "getting to keep more of my own money". That's a huge lie. They are paying higher prices for their homes, and higher tax rates, to support the mortgage interest deduction.

Next, notice the key words "eliminates all itemized deductions". This bill still provides an up front bulk "standard deduction" just for breathing.

For every deduction, standard or otherwise, you have to raise tax rates higher to make up the difference.

But if you put a gun to my head, I would have to say this is one of the better tax reform plans to come down the pike since 1986.

I am a common man with a common mortgage. If mortgage interest deduction gets removed my mortgage will not get cheaper and my taxes due will increase significantly.

Tell me again how that is not a big time loser for me.

so the program would be to lessen your tax percentage, that's how. That's all that does anyway is lessen the percentage by lowering your income level.

umm I can get the tax cut AND keep the mortgage deduction according to current plan.

But if the I get a tax cut WITHOUT mortgage deduction, that is actually a net TAX INCREASE for me.

how do you figure? if the tax amount is lower than what you paid with the current deduction, how is it you paid more?

Your "if" is obviously false in my case.

Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction Calculator - Bankrate

If you are early in your mortgage and pay something like $25,000 in interest that creates a big deduction that is easily more significant than relatively small bracket tax cuts.

 

[The Derp]

BTW, Libs will never concede that almost 50% of the country doesn't pay income tax. I find that hilarious and sad at the same time. They want a tax break for those who pay no income tax. how does one accomplish that?

They don't pay income taxes because you cut their taxes. So you complain about a problem that you caused. And we don't want them to get tax breaks, we want them to get higher wages.

 

[jc456]

BTW, Libs will never concede that almost 50% of the country doesn't pay income tax. I find that hilarious and sad at the same time. They want a tax break for those who pay no income tax. how does one accomplish that?

They don't pay income taxes because you cut their taxes. So you complain about a problem that you caused. And we don't want them to get tax breaks, we want them to get higher wages.

what exactly are you saying I'm complaining about exactly? I have no problem with those lower 45% as I already pointed out. so what is it you think I'm complaining about. please you aren't making sense.

Again, why do the libs use them? that's my problem

 

[xotoxi]

If the Brady/Ryan Tax Plan has as great an outcome as the Brady/Ryan Superbowl, then I am all for it!

 

[The Derp]

what exactly are you saying I'm complaining about exactly?

The burden the wealthy pay vs. the burden everyone else pays. You're here lamenting that the wealthy pay such an unfair share, yet the reason is because the policies you support caused it. So that's how your argument is masturbatory.

Cutting the taxes of the wealthy accomplishes what? It accomplishes deficits which are then used as an excuse to cut spending you are ideologically opposed to, yet lack the courage and/or support to actually do. So you deliberately wreck the budget to complain about it and use it as an excuse to cut the spending you have no chance of cutting without the manufactured budget crisis.

It's pretty transparent.

 

[jc456]

what exactly are you saying I'm complaining about exactly?

The burden the wealthy pay vs. the burden everyone else pays. You're here lamenting that the wealthy pay such an unfair share, yet the reason is because the policies you support caused it. So that's how your argument is masturbatory.

Cutting the taxes of the wealthy accomplishes what? It accomplishes deficits which are then used as an excuse to cut spending you are ideologically opposed to, yet lack the courage and/or support to actually do. So you deliberately wreck the budget to complain about it and use it as an excuse to cut the spending you have no chance of cutting without the manufactured budget crisis.

It's pretty transparent.

The burden the wealthy pay vs. the burden everyone else pays

not me, you have me confused with someone else. As I stated, I don't understand why the left argue taxes for the 45% that pay zero taxes and bitch when the upper 50% get a cut. Now that I don't understand. Perhaps you could explain.

It accomplishes deficits which are then used as an excuse to cut spending you are ideologically opposed to,

No it doesn't and that is fake news. cutting taxes will always increase revenues. always. look it up. you won't however, you feel comfortable arguing bullshit than fact.

 

[The Derp]

not me, you have me confused with someone else. As I stated, I don't understand why the left argue taxes for the 45% that pay zero taxes and bitch when the upper 50% get a cut. Now that I don't understand. Perhaps you could explain..

So that's a straw-man argument there. The wealthy should pay more in taxes since they're not trickling it down like you all promised they would.

No it doesn't and that is fake news. cutting taxes will always increase revenues. always. look it up. you won't however, you feel comfortable arguing bullshit than fact.

LOL! Trickle-down doesn't fucking work. They just repealed it in Kansas.

Here's the Kansas budget with and without the tax cuts. SB 30 is the repeal of the tax cuts. Notice what happens to the deficit once the tax cuts are repealed? It disappears. So cutting taxes doesn't increase revenue...raising taxes does because, math.

 

[The Derp]

cutting taxes will always increase revenues.

Why do you think that's the case? What's the reasoning behind you coming to this conclusion?

 

[xotoxi]

...cutting taxes will always increase revenues. always....

Explain.