The Republicans Should Have Called It The Big Too Big Bill!

[JimofPennsylvan]

The Republican Big Beautiful Bill would have been more aptly named if it was called The Big Too Big bill because one fatal flaw in the bill is that it went way further than just extending the 2017 individual tax rates it added a lot more spending and I include spending in the tax code in that definition, tax cuts cost the U.S. Treasury revenue just like direct federal expenditures do, and the Republicans had to make too many "bad" cuts in Federal spending to try to pay for the bill. The bill has been signed into law so time will tell if it adds to the national debt in a manner which causes high interest rates to exist across our economy.


One really noteworthy point and lesson which I hope our people and especially elected officials take from this reconciliation bill is that America has certain values which we as a people should hold the utmost dear and one is fairness in our laws we always make it a top priority to be fair. This bill directly violated this principle in sparing people that hold jobs where their compensation is in the form of tips and income which is generated from overtime pay rules where people get paid time and a half from their employer for such time these two types of income do not get taxed. This is egregiously wrong because hard working people who are not paid through tips and people that do not have overtime income don't get this tax break they have to pay taxes on all their income, and there is no compellingly good reasoning that these people get special treatment. Many experts think that cheating and manipulation will take place by taxpayers on these provisions such as people manipulating things where income that prior to this tax change was not classified as tip income or overtime pay now will be. Being responsible mandates that members of Congress monitor this issue and if manipulation and gaming the system occurs at a significant rate they will repeal these tax provisions and return the tax code to a system that strives to be always fair.

In addition, there is no compelling good reason to give seniors a $6000 personal exemption on their taxable income just because a Presidential candidate during a campaign in pandering for votes promises to not tax Social security income and because of legislative rules for a reconciliation bill such a removal of social security income from taxation cannot be done does it make it okay to add this $6000 personal exemption. This personal exemption is unfair and also keep in mind that many seniors are more well off financially than many non-seniors especially families with young children. Members of Congress and the President should have addressed the problem properly this problem where both political parties actually largely agree where more social security income should be excluded from taxation to lessen the financial burden on non-wealthy seniors!

 

[Auld Phart]

The Republican Big Beautiful Bill would have been more aptly named if it was called The Big Too Big bill because one fatal flaw in the bill is that it went way further than just extending the 2017 individual tax rates it added a lot more spending and I include spending in the tax code in that definition, tax cuts cost the U.S. Treasury revenue just like direct federal expenditures do, and the Republicans had to make too many "bad" cuts in Federal spending to try to pay for the bill. The bill has been signed into law so time will tell if it adds to the national debt in a manner which causes high interest rates to exist across our economy.


One really noteworthy point and lesson which I hope our people and especially elected officials take from this reconciliation bill is that America has certain values which we as a people should hold the utmost dear and one is fairness in our laws we always make it a top priority to be fair. This bill directly violated this principle in sparing people that hold jobs where their compensation is in the form of tips and income which is generated from overtime pay rules where people get paid time and a half from their employer for such time these two types of income do not get taxed. This is egregiously wrong because hard working people who are not paid through tips and people that do not have overtime income don't get this tax break they have to pay taxes on all their income, and there is no compellingly good reasoning that these people get special treatment. Many experts think that cheating and manipulation will take place by taxpayers on these provisions such as people manipulating things where income that prior to this tax change was not classified as tip income or overtime pay now will be. Being responsible mandates that members of Congress monitor this issue and if manipulation and gaming the system occurs at a significant rate they will repeal these tax provisions and return the tax code to a system that strives to be always fair.

In addition, there is no compelling good reason to give seniors a $6000 personal exemption on their taxable income just because a Presidential candidate during a campaign in pandering for votes promises to not tax Social security income and because of legislative rules for a reconciliation bill such a removal of social security income from taxation cannot be done does it make it okay to add this $6000 personal exemption. This personal exemption is unfair and also keep in mind that many seniors are more well off financially than many non-seniors especially families with young children. Members of Congress and the President should have addressed the problem properly this problem where both political parties actually largely agree where more social security income should be excluded from taxation to lessen the financial burden on non-wealthy seniors!

is that YOUR opinion, or do you have a link backing up that rant?

 

[Winston]

is that YOUR opinion, or do you have a link backing up that rant?

As if it would matter if he did. I mean he could post the cost estimates from the CBO, but again, who are you kidding, would it matter?

 

[Auld Phart]

As if it would matter if he did. I mean he could post the cost estimates from the CBO, but again, who are you kidding, would it matter?

read the rules:

• Copyright: Link each "Copy & Paste" to its source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material. (There is a 15 post minimum for new members before you are allowed to use this feature.) When starting a new thread and declaring something as fact in your opening post, you must link to a source. For example, "Polls say 2/3 of people think x, y, z." You need to link to a source for one of those alleged polls. Telling others to Google it on their own is not acceptable.

 

[imawhosure]

Really? Then maybe you should watch this--------->

 

[OKTexas]

THREAD CLOSED, LACKS REQUIRED LINK/S TO SUPPORT CLAIMS OF FACT IN THE OP