What is going on with the Big Beautiful Bill?

[OrangeTsar]

Did you see the Congresswoman behind him doze off during his speech?

 

[McDad]

It’s a reduction of nearly 1 trillion (0.8) from the last budget.

But it really isn't. The budget projections of reductions is over how many years?

 

[CobbVol]

How leadership convinced poor rural voters that cutting taxes disproportionately for the wealthy, while slashing Medicaid to partially offset the lost revenue, and still adding to the deficit—is somehow in their best interest is nothing short of extraordinary

The top 50% of taxpayers pay 97% of the income taxes paid. Is that disproportionate?

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Did you see the Congresswoman behind him doze off during his speech?

Here he's bringing out his Obama side when talking up his BS.

 

[Persian Vol]

We have one of the most lopsided tax systems in the world. So yes, to people who don’t pay taxes, any tax decrease is going to disproportionately benefit those above them.

Do you believe only the upper half of income earners should pay taxes and do you believe the lower half should receive more than they paid into the tax system?

If we really wanted to fix our system, that’s where we should start. No one should profit from income taxes and more than half of the country should pay something

This ignores the reality of how regressive most other taxes are. Working-class and poor Americans may pay little or no federal income tax, but they still pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, and property taxes (even indirectly through rent)—all of which take a larger share of their income compared to the wealthy.

 

[Orangeburst]

never thought I would see day people would support paying more taxes for themseves.

 

[McDad]

This ignores the reality of how regressive most other taxes are. Working-class and poor Americans may pay little or no federal income tax, but they still pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, and property taxes (even indirectly through rent)—all of which take a larger share of their income compared to the wealthy.

agreed. we need fewer taxes and lower taxes for everyone. That way the working class (although we aren't under a class system) and the poor aren't burdened.

 

[C-south]

never thought I would see day people would support paying more taxes for themseves.

ONLY if you have to pay too.

 

[Persian Vol]

True, not everyone struggling are doing so because of bad decisions but I'd say bad decisions are the root cause for 90% or more them and people are tired of being taxed in order to support other people's bad decisions.

And let's face it, with the job market today the only able bodied people working low wage jobs with no benefits are those who choose to or have no other choice due to their bad decisions.

While personal responsibility plays a role in everyone’s life, attributing poverty primarily to “bad decisions” overlooks the broader systemic issues that affect millions of working Americans. Many individuals in low-wage jobs are not in that position due to poor choices, but rather due to stagnant wages, lack of access to affordable education, limited healthcare, and the rising cost of living. These are structural challenges, not moral failings. It is both inaccurate and unproductive to dismiss the struggles of the working poor as the result of personal irresponsibility.

 

[Persian Vol]

agreed. we need fewer taxes and lower taxes for everyone. That way the working class (although we aren't under a class system) and the poor aren't burdened.

Sure, we can talk about cutting taxes across the board, but we still have to answer some serious questions:

1. How do we manage a $30+ trillion national debt with even less revenue?
2. How do we fund Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—programs that tens of millions rely on?

 

[Majors]

Sure, let’s start with Medicaid. Over the last few years, millions of people have lost access due to redeterminations after the pandemic-era protections ended. Many of them were working poor, not unemployed or “gaming the system,” but people in low-wage jobs without employer coverage. At the same time, states that accepted big tax cuts are under more pressure to cut services to balance their budgets, and Medicaid is often one of the first things on the chopping block.

As for the second point sure, personal responsibility matters. But plenty of people working full-time still can’t afford basic healthcare, housing, or childcare, especially in rural areas or service-sector jobs. Not everyone who’s struggling is doing so because of bad decisions.

Are those in rural areas unable to go look elsewhere for opportunities? Or does comfort mean they get a lifetime pass?

 

[Vol8188]

But it really isn't. The budget projections of reductions is over how many years?

I’m providing the projected number for 2026 vs 2025. I’m also going off memory but I believe it was 2024 6.7 trillion, 2025 7.0, and 2026 6.2.

I honestly think the idea of doing a ten year projection seems absurd

 

[whodeycin85]

Oh believe me, I understand the emotional play here. Safety. Security. Reduction means we are poised for invasion. 20 years I felt exactly as you do.

And you will not like this, but you and Luther (or any partisan D) are opposite sides of the same coin.

What do you think would happen to the US if we weren't the military power we are??? I agree there needs to be a cuts but if we want to stay a global power then we need a powerful military. The US problem is the population is entitled and arrogant. God forbid a roof and food on the table is living...nope I'm the US we need wifi, iPhones, gucci, Lululemon, etc...because instead of being grateful for what we have most are resentful of what other have...tax the rich right???

 

[McDad]

Sure, we can talk about cutting taxes across the board, but we still have to answer some serious questions:

1. How do we manage a $30+ trillion national debt with even less revenue?
2. How do we fund Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—programs that tens of millions rely on?

Based on your previous lament, isn't it better to determine what people can/should pay keeping in mind the burden on working folks and then set the annual budget?

It seems we're going about it backwards. Uncle Sam needs x amount so how do we fund it? This is the way we've done it for at least 100 years. That approach isn't working, is it?

 

[McDad]

I’m providing the projected number for 2026 vs 2025. I’m also going off memory but I believe it was 2024 6.7 trillion, 2025 7.0, and 2026 6.2.

I honestly think the idea of doing a ten year projection seems absurd

If we are legitimately spending 1T less compared to actual spending the previous year, that is something to applaud.

 

[Vol8188]

This ignores the reality of how regressive most other taxes are. Working-class and poor Americans may pay little or no federal income tax, but they still pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, and property taxes (even indirectly through rent)—all of which take a larger share of their income compared to the wealthy.

The people of other countries typically pay those taxes too and still actually pay federal taxes. Like the 20% VAT tax in the UK

You also avoided one of my most important questions.

Should anyone earn a profit from federal income taxes? Should they receive more than they paid?

 

[CagleMtnVol]

What's Temu Barry trying to prove?

 

[EasternVol]

none are serious about the budget unless/until they start making cuts to entitlements starting with SS.

Why starting with SS, other than that's what talking heads tell you?
Personally I'd leave contributory programs untouched unless there's no other option.

 

[C-south]

While personal responsibility plays a role in everyone’s life, attributing poverty primarily to “bad decisions” overlooks the broader systemic issues that affect millions of working Americans. Many individuals in low-wage jobs are not in that position due to poor choices, but rather due to stagnant wages, lack of access to affordable education, limited healthcare, and the rising cost of living. These are structural challenges, not moral failings. It is both inaccurate and unproductive to dismiss the struggles of the working poor as the result of personal irresponsibility.

The fraudsters ruin it for many and they are prevalent. Tightening the screws on the crooks while assuring that benefits reach those truly in need would do a lot.

 

[Persian Vol]

.

 

[Persian Vol]

The people of other countries typically pay those taxes too and still actually pay federal taxes. Like the 20% VAT tax in the UK

You also avoided one of my most important questions.

Should anyone earn a profit from federal income taxes? Should they receive more than they paid?

True, many developed countries have high taxes like VATs and income taxes, but the tradeoff is they get universal healthcare, free or low-cost college, paid parental leave, subsidized childcare, and stronger social safety nets. In the U.S., we pay similar or higher out-of-pocket costs for those same needs, just privately, with fewer protections and worse outcomes.

 

[Persian Vol]

The fraudsters ruin it for many and they are prevalent. Tightening the screws on the crooks while assuring that benefits reach those truly in need would do a lot.

Fraud should absolutely be addressed, but it’s a small fraction of total spending. We shouldn’t punish the many struggling just to catch the few abusing the system.

 

[hog88]

True, many developed countries have high taxes like VATs and income taxes, but the tradeoff is they get universal healthcare, free or low-cost college, paid parental leave, subsidized childcare, and stronger social safety nets. In the U.S., we pay similar or higher out-of-pocket costs for those same needs, just privately, with fewer protections and worse outcomes.

Those other countries enjoy sponging off our defense spending.

 

[Persian Vol]

Based on your previous lament, isn't it better to determine what people can/should pay keeping in mind the burden on working folks and then set the annual budget?

It seems we're going about it backwards. Uncle Sam needs x amount so how do we fund it? This is the way we've done it for at least 100 years. That approach isn't working, is it?

That sounds reasonable in theory, start with what people can afford to pay and build a budget from there. But in reality, we already know what our country requires: healthcare for seniors, retirement security, infrastructure, national defense, education, and more. These aren’t luxuries, they’re foundational commitments we’ve made to tens of millions of Americans, especially through Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Sure, we could eliminate those programs and slash taxes even further. Yes, 40% of retirees would likely fall into poverty overnight, life expectancy would drop, and millions would lose healthcare, but hey, some ideological purists might sleep better. Of course, that’s not a serious or sustainable path.

The better question is: What kind of country do we want to be, and how do we fairly pay for that vision?

 

[Orangeburst]

good grief..subsidized housing, subsidized healthcare, subsidized education, subsidized food, subsidized retirement, subsidized phones, etc etc etc

**** like this is why we are position we are in. feds shouldnt be in any of it.