Liberal Media Goes Completely Silent After New Report Proves Trump’s Tax Cuts Were Massive Success

Well, most people do not advocate policy that is going to cost them significantly more money and disincentivize your fellow countrymen from investing which chokes the economic engine. There are exceptions however. I will take you at your word and assume you are one of them.

Investment in the market IS investment in businesses. Are you trying to say that you rehab properties and sell them for a profit? A higher capital gains rate would not be helpful for that.

 

I rehab properties and rent them — I also own two businesses in the service sector one of which pays me dividends in addition to salary to reduce my taxable burden.

The Canadian system will not disincentivize American’s from investing especially if we reduce cg up to a specific lifetime amount and then treat anything about that as regular income. Middle and upper class people would see their taxes in this area decrease but people that derive the bulk of their income from these gains will be taxed as it being their regular income.

 

OK, so you did not mean invest in business, rather you meant that you work 2 service gigs and have rental income ( which is great). So you are not advocating policies that harm you financially afterall, which was my original assumption. At least it wont harm you until you go to sell those rental properties, at which point you may likely see it through a different lense.

 

No, one of the “service gigs” is ran by people I have hired and pays me a salary and dividends, the other is self employment income and rental properties are separate. I have already sold multiple properties and pay the appropriate taxes — we specifically hold until the tax burden decreases or under a 1031 exchange.

I would absolutely be hit if the proposals I support were implemented. It’s sad that you don’t believe we should do what is right just because it would negatively impact you. Why are old people, especially conservative ones always of the mentality of “I got mine, f*** you?”

 

What I believe is right is to implement 5% across-the-board spending decreases across every department for the next several years. The business world has done this for decades and learned to produce more with less. It is high time that the government does the same. There is more than enough bloat and bureaucracy in government to accomplish this goal.

I have no desire for your ever-expanding government dreams. I am also not all that old. I am just old enough to be in my prime earning years, and as someone in the lower end of the 1%, what I pay in taxes currently is absolutely astronomical. To imply that I am not paying my fair share is devoid of reality. It would be like me being at a restaurant with 10 people, and I pay $800 of the $1000 check, while being told I did not pay enough. The assertion is laughable.

 

So, if your tax bill is astronomical, your income must be even more astronomical. What are you complaining about? Many people would kill to be in your shoes.

In any case, let's say we cut 5% across the board for the next years (which I suppose includes SS and Medicare, which are a main benefit that many GOP voters rely upon for a living), the next GOP president will get into office and will have campaigned on giving the saving back to the tax payers' as tax cuts. We've seen it before, this is EXACTLY what happened when GWB was elected. We had a surplus, soon after, we had red ink as far as the eye can see. Of course, then the rallying cry will start for more spending cuts, rinse and repeat. That's why I said that there needs to be an agreement between both parties to leave tax rates alone. Will it happen? Not a chance.

 

No, they don't.

 

I do not share the ever-expanding government dream held by so many on the left. I never have, so this is not a new revelation for me even when I struggled financially. There is very little that the government does efficiently, and I do not support an expansion of its tentacles. I can spend my money better than the government can. IMHO, so can you. My father was a truck driver, and he felt the exact same way.

My intent was certainly not to turn this about my income so I will be brief... While my household income is high by many standards, it is not as if I have been earning that amount for the last 20 years where I have accumulated an enormous amount. I am not playing the poor mouth, but even for my kids, I do not support them working their whole life only to be raped when/if they finally start making a lot of money, especially for the express purpose of expanding an already bloated government. When the top 10% pays 71% of all taxes, that is more than enough in my book. High earners do not consume that much more in government services to even remotely justify such a cost, and while I understand that the poor should not be paying income taxes, Mr. 50% certainly should and for the most part they are not. I dislike the notion that just because someone makes more money that they should be footing the bill for everyone else. To be told that 71% of the bill for only 10% of the population is not enough, is seriously out of wack in my book.

 

I don’t disagree we need to cut government. We can do so surgically instead of just a blanket cut however. Some of the cuts can come from modernization which will cost money upfront but save on the backend. Others can be achieved in allowing appropriate agencies to negotiate such as in healthcare.

What is laughable is that you think any of these proposals would impact you and what is disgusting is that your personal gain influences your policy positions — or that you believe you are paying 80% of anything.

 

Surgically? LOL...yeah that gives cover to cutback on virtually NOTHING.

Why would an increased capital gains rate not impact me? Huh? What are you saying?

-Well, the top 10% pay 71% of all taxes. Is an 80% share in that situation with 10 people out of wack for the 99 out of 100? I pulled that number out of a hat, but the number is definitely more than 71% out of 10. Hell, 80% out of 10 might be low. Off the top of my head, I'm not sure how to calculate that one (maybe just use 1 out of 10 to be simple as representation of 10% and use the 71% number, but the distinction is irrelevant. The point still stands. I am paying the lions share and you are smugly saying it is not enough while gleefully finishing your dessert. Maybe the complainers should have instead just skipped dessert and stop expecting others to foot the bill? I don't mind paying for the children at the table, but the adults 50-80 percentile, can pay for their own damned meals.

I find this "pay for me" notion from the modern far left to be abhorrent. A good friend of mine married a woman with a college-aged daughter. The daughter filed for unemployment when Covid hit despite never having had a job in her life. She collected something like $20k for doing nothing, and at the end of the year, was "disgusted" that she had to pay $1500 in payroll taxes, especially after learning that she only had to pay because her mother had the gall to claim her as a dependant just because she was paying for her college tuition and room and board ( can you believe the nerve of that greedy mom? DISGUSTING!). Anyway, this girl is a vocal far lefty as well, and she too thinks it is "disgusting" to complain that I am paying the lions share of taxes.

 

That's what I don't get. I am not as fortunate as you, I am ONLY at the bottom of the top 10%. That still makes me much more fortunate than 90% of other US citizens, and probably 99% of the remaining inhabitants of the world. Do I resent the bottom 50% for paying less taxes than I do? I absolutely do not. I am grateful to be living in a system that has allowed me to prosper beyond many people's dreams. Paying taxes is a part of this system. Do I LOVE paying taxes? Absolutely not, but I don't feel constantly that I pay too much because someone else, who is less fortunate, is mooching off my tax dollars.

On the other hand, I am glad that the social safety net (others call it the welfare state in derogatory manner) is there, if one of my family members or friends should need it. You never know, it could be your kid who gets into a car accident, sustains brain damage, and becomes dependent on assistance, both medially and financially, for the rest of their lives. I've seen it with my late dad. He was a respected industry leader, then, right after retirement, he was unfortunate to fall and sustain a head injury, which rendered him in a coma for 6 months. During these months, and the years after, he probably used up a lot more of health insurance and public assistance compared to what he ever paid into the system.

So, yes, I don't understand why rich people constantly have to try to tear down the system that has allowed them to become so incredibly rich. I don't understand the resentment. As if paying 5% less in taxes would make their already incredibly privileged life significantly better. The grass is always greener somewhere else. But, why hate on a system that works? Likelihood is that whatever drastic changes are implemented will make it worse, not better. Just like the fair tax. Why risk the largest economy of the world by switching to an unproven system? So rich people can save a few more bucks? No thank you.

Okay, rant over.

Note in edit. I am a liberal. You are not paying for me. I can pull my own weight, thank you very much. But, it's a typical assumption conservatives make that liberals want others to pay for them. It;s not true, it's just RW propaganda.

 

No one cares what MBFC says in their biased silly ratings.

 

Doesn't change the facts.

 

It was only because of the tax cuts Trump got done that this revenue increase happened.

 

Nope, sorry.

 

There is no need for a tax cut right now. Only keeping the current individual rates in effect now the same going forward. The party pushing tax cuts lately are the democrats trying to cut taxes for the rich.

 

If you're going to "keep the current individual rates" it will require a tax cut because McConnell's (not tRaitor tRump's) tax cut soon expires for all but the wealthy. If the democrats are pushing for "tax cuts" it's just to give the little guy a chance.

 

Not even close to being true. Ignorance or willful lie - which?

 

Trump never had a trillion dollar deficit in a non-COVID year. Biden has not had a deficit of LESS THAN one trillion.

 

-Lets make sure we keep this in the proper context. I complained about the bottom 50% paying nothing, ONLY when confronted numerous times by numerous sources in this thread boisterously complaining that the top does not pay their fair share. To be perfectly honest, I do not think like that. I was only giving them what they were giving. There is not one fiber of my being that looks at others and thinks they need to be paying more. Across the board tax cuts are perfectly fine with me. 90 or bottom of 99%, in the big picture is not all that different when compared to the true top. When you get into the top of the 99th you have an enormous leap all the way up to billionaires. I have not and would never complain that they are not paying enough. I don't look at tax policy as some sort of great equalizer that needs to transfer wealth from top to bottom or vice versa.

-As far as a social safety net, I absolutely support as much, and not one thing I have said contradicts that notion. You may argue in a discussion about Medicaid that you want to give it to those up to 50th percentile while I argue it should remain for the poor at 1.5 times the poverty line ( made up numbers), but we both support that concept of help for those in need. For me, I do not consider someone at 50th percentile as being in need, rather I think they should tighten their belt to pay for their healthcare. There is a difference in my mind between a safety net and straight-up wealth redistribution. The only argument is where should that line be drawn.

-Who is hating on the system? Hell, I am defending the system, it is others that are saying the system does not have me paying my fair share. I am defending the notion that it is perfectly acceptable for capital gains to be taxed at a lower rate than income.

-It is my sincere belief that less government intervention means a more prosperous economy. The government that governs least, governs best. This is not all based solely in not wanting to pay taxes as you seem to be asserting. When arguing for a smaller government, I am arguing for a more prosperous economy. I think you may misunderstand the Conservative mindset.


-Have I said that I pay for you and that you cannot pull your own weight? I am not sure where you are getting that.

 

AbsaByGodLutely … TRUE.

 

. Yeah, because Dems forced the twilighting. GOP will push to extend them; dems with block.

 

Fair enough. Sometimes it is not easy to differentiate the opinion of reasonable posters, like you, with those of the rabid partisans, as they sometimes have a tendency to overlap.

Two things:

1) As to your last sentence, here is a quote from you from this thread: "I find this "pay for me" notion from the modern far left to be abhorrent." I interpreted this in the way that you infer that I (as probably part of the left) want you to pay for me. Was I wrong?

2) Why is it acceptable for capital gains to be taxed at a lower rate than work? I guess the argument is to not discourage investment. Well, does taxation of work discourage work? Why is work more discouraged by higher taxation than investments? Is the tax code designed to encourage people sitting on their behinds and collecting capital gains without work, rather than doing actual work?

In my view, taxing capital gains the same as labor income would not discourage investments. People need to grow their money. They don't do this by putting the money under the mattress. They rather make money investing whether the capital gains is taxed at 15 or 20%. Now what DOES discourage investments are low interest rates. However, those are often caused by free market forces. before covid, there was too much money around chasing too few good investments. That's why interest rates were low. Now, they are artificially high, forced by the Fed. They will come down again soon enough, because the situation I just described still persists. It is a situation you get from too much wealth inequality.

 

That’s upside down horseshit.

 

Nope.