The Trump Effect

#926
#926
Sea Ray said:
Problem is 3 votes out of 500 or so in Congress is not enough to get anything done. You need a lot more than that. There's no Blue Dog Democrats anymore. All I can say is "Republicans are the lesser of the evils" but neither party is fiscally conservative
Click to expand...
Agreed. Those 3, or at least one of them, would need to be a leader and skilled orator to insert his fiscal ideology into the House to have a hope of accomplishing something meaningful. Tough ask.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#927
#927
Sandman 423 said:
The Dems did put forth a law and Trump torpedoed it. In fairness it wasn't a very good law, but it was at least an attempt. It blows my mind that any gov agency has people with guns working without body cams.

Does it really matter what the law is?...because DHS, ICE, and this admin just keep ignoring the law?
The previous admin ignored the law just as much as this one and now the pendulum has swung the other way.

Until people start coming up with reasonable solutions that the majority of Americans agree with politicians will continue to use it for political gain. Hell, you have J.D Vance talking about excepting less legal migrants and folks don't even blink. Population growth is vital to a countries economy and Americans aren't exactly popping out kids like they used to. That said, we can't just open up the gate to everyone.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with anything? The point isn't "Republicans are bad" the point is "ICE is out of control." Cool that you think the last admin was just as criminal.

ICE violated court orders 100x in January, and scholars were saying that's more than most agencies have in their entire existence. Sincerely, GTFOH with this both sides nonsense. The point is about ICE overreach (which I blame on both sides).
 
#928
#928
n_huffhines said:
What does this have to do with anything? The point isn't "Republicans are bad" the point is "ICE is out of control." Cool that you think the last admin was just as criminal.

ICE violated court orders 100x in January, and scholars were saying that's more than most agencies have in their entire existence. Sincerely, GTFOH with this both sides nonsense. The point is about ICE overreach (which I blame on both sides).
Click to expand...
HEY!
Nobody talks to good ole Sandman 423 niner like that you social justice Karen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines
#929
#929
utvolpj said:
Because Trump signed the spending back into place. He didn't have to. He also didn't have to give the war dept another half trillion but that happened. This admin is still not serious about real cuts

I support cuts to all entitlement programs and have for a very long time
Click to expand...
Trump needs the ability to do an itemized veto.

 
#930
#930
Sea Ray said:
I don't think that's fair to RP. He went against his party in the most significant spending bill, the BBB. He voted against it because of fiscal concerns
Click to expand...

He went against it when the party had the votes to pass it without him...

He got in line with TCJA since his vote was needed to pass it and the trillions of debt that created. 90% of BBB was essentially extending TCJA's provisions....
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#931
#931
jmacvols1 said:
Trump needs the ability to do an itemized veto.

Click to expand...

Problem is the next administration may not continue the policy, particularly a democratic admin. Also, the line item veto was ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS in 1996, but I agree it could have been a good tool against runaway spending. We are nation of spending crack addicts, regardless of “cause du jour”, be it the MIC, social welfare programs, etc. only exacerbated by continued Fed liquidity injections that have all brought us to this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#932
#932
BigOrangeMojo said:
He went against it when the party had the votes to pass it without him...

He got in line with TCJA since his vote was needed to pass it and the trillions of debt that created. 90% of BBB was essentially extending TCJA's provisions....
Click to expand...
That was a tax cut act. I think that was a good thing and I’ve greatly benefited from it. Do support a tax increase right now?
 
#934
#934
Sea Ray said:
That was a tax cut act. I think that was a good thing and I’ve greatly benefited from it. Do support a tax increase right now?
Click to expand...

TCJA was a tax cut act adding trillions to deficit. Rand was needed to pass that so he voted yes

95% of the spending for BBB was extending TCJA. BBB adds trillions to deficit. Paul voted no because his vote wasnt needed...

Either you are for deficit spending or not. Paul has shown he is for it when needed to tiptoe the party line....
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#936
#936
BigOrangeMojo said:
TCJA was a tax cut act adding trillions to deficit. Rand was needed to pass that so he voted yes

95% of the spending for BBB was extending TCJA. BBB adds trillions to deficit. Paul voted no because his vote wasnt needed...

Either you are for deficit spending or not. Paul has shown he is for it when needed to tiptoe the party line....
Click to expand...
No question politics were involved as they always are. You opted not to answer my question

Were it up to me I would not have cut taxes on the top income bracket folks in that 2017 bill. But money talks and pols can’t seem to go against their fat cat donors
 
#938
#938
Sea Ray said:
I get it. But my question is do you support increasing taxes by repealing the Trump tax cuts?
Click to expand...
It's the only option if you aren't going to cut spending and want to maintain this country for a longer term.

I'm personally in favor of drastic spending cuts across the board but it seems that's a very lonely place these days
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#939
#939
utvolpj said:
It's the only option if you aren't going to cut spending and want to maintain this country for a longer term.

I'm personally in favor of drastic spending cuts across the board but it seems that's a very lonely place these days
Click to expand...
Clinton/Gingrich came together on a plan that had a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. I wasn't too thrilled at the time but I must say it did work. We need that now. Our pols can't do this. It's why they suck.

I would increase taxes on the top tax bracket 5% and create a new bracket for over a million/yr. I'd have them pay at least an additional 5%, maybe 10%. I'd also cut the military budget somewhat along with a bunch of other departments. I'd raise the earliest age you could get SS from 62 to 65. Even with all of this we'd likely still be short due to the massive growth of interest on the debt. This kind of stuff should have been done 10-15 yrs ago

What's your plan? Let's talk specifics like I have here
 
#940
#940
Sea Ray said:
No question politics were involved as they always are. You opted not to answer my question

Were it up to me I would not have cut taxes on the top income bracket folks in that 2017 bill. But money talks and pols can’t seem to go against their fat cat donors
Click to expand...

First, this isnt a discussion about my opinions of using debt to fund tax cuts. In 2017, Paul was for trillions of debt to fund tax cuts. He was for it because his vote was needed. In 2025, he was not for trillions of debt to fund the extension of those same tax cuts. The Rs had the votes without needing him in 2025. Rand was like Manchin for the Ds. He talked a big game but he almost always gets toes the party line when needed...

Ill give my opinions on tax cuts on separate response
 
#941
#941
BigOrangeMojo said:
First, this isnt a discussion about my opinions of using debt to fund tax cuts. In 2017, Paul was for trillions of debt to fund tax cuts. He was for it because his vote was needed. In 2025, he was not for trillions of debt to fund the extension of those same tax cuts. The Rs had the votes without needing him in 2025. Rand was like Manchin for the Ds. He talked a big game but he almost always gets toes the party line when needed...

Ill give my opinions on tax cuts on separate response
Click to expand...
I disagree with you on Paul but that's OK
 
#942
#942
Here is what we need to do.

1. We need to equalize returns on social security. Right now, higher earners are subsidizing lower earners through negative returns on contributions. This will save hundreds of billions annually.

2. We have to eliminate all preferences in the tax code. By doing that, you will largely eliminate the reporting gap (saving 600-800 billion annually) plus another 1.5 trillion in preferences. You can take 70% of these savings and issue an across the board tax cut and the other 30% goes to deficit reduction. No more getting thousands of refunds for limited income. No more step up basis.

3. Take discretionary federal govt budget bsck to a 2000 baseline (adjusted for inflation). This will save about 700 billion, the bulk of which is defense.

This should get budget close to breakeven annually and will led to a reduction of taxes for vast majority of income taxpayers...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#943
#943
Sea Ray said:
Clinton/Gingrich came together on a plan that had a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. I wasn't too thrilled at the time but I must say it did work. We need that now. Our pols can't do this. It's why they suck.

I would increase taxes on the top tax bracket 5% and create a new bracket for over a million/yr. I'd have them pay at least an additional 5%, maybe 10%. I'd also cut the military budget somewhat along with a bunch of other departments. I'd raise the earliest age you could get SS from 62 to 65. Even with all of this we'd likely still be short due to the massive growth of interest on the debt. This kind of stuff should have been done 10-15 yrs ago

What's your plan? Let's talk specifics like I have here
Click to expand...

Cut EITC, Cut Step up basis, Cut Refundable Tax Credits, Cut SALT deduction, Cut home mortgage deduction, Cut tax benefits for company provided insurance, cut no tax on OT, cut no tax on tips. Use 80% of those savings to fund an across the board tax rate reduction. Other 20% goes to deficit spending...
 
#944
#944
BigOrangeMojo said:
Cut EITC, Cut Step up basis, Cut Refundable Tax Credits, Cut SALT deduction, Cut home mortgage deduction, Cut tax benefits for company provided insurance, cut no tax on OT, cut no tax on tips. Use 80% of those savings to fund an across the board tax rate reduction. Other 20% goes to deficit spending...
Click to expand...
Refundable tax credits. 100% That's a good one. I'd forgot about that Obama creation. I think the rest will have a minimal effect depending on where you place the personal exemption. Where it is right now very few people itemize. In general it seems counter productive to go through all of that only to give 80% back. Just raise taxes to whatever that 20% adds up to and be done

These are the sorts of conversations our pols should be having. They need to have an exchange of ideas and address this problem. They're not doing this. Instead they're shutting down the gov't and investigating things. They suck

I will add that I wish Trump would show some leadership on this and tell them to come up with a plan
 
#945
#945
Sea Ray said:
Refundable tax credits. 100% That's a good one. I'd forgot about that Obama creation. I think the rest will have a minimal effect depending on where you place the personal exemption. Where it is right now very few people itemize. In general it seems counter productive to go through all of that only to give 80% back. Just raise taxes to whatever that 20% adds up to and be done

These are the sorts of conversations our pols should be having. They need to have an exchange of ideas and address this problem. They're not doing this. Instead they're shutting down the gov't and investigating things. They suck

I will add that I wish Trump would show some leadership on this and tell them to come up with a plan
Click to expand...

Roughly 2T of preferences exist now. 20% is 400B. Of the people actually paying income tax, most would benefit from much lower across the board rates. You'd probably get another 600B from closing reporting gap. That's a trillion right there in deficit savings. Get discretionary fed govt back to 2000 baseline and eliminate the wealth redistribution in social security and your budget is balanced...

The poor probably wouldnt like my plan but the income tax code and social security calculations shouldn't be subsidizing them...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#946
#946
utvolpj said:
It's the only option if you aren't going to cut spending and want to maintain this country for a longer term.

I'm personally in favor of drastic spending cuts across the board but it seems that's a very lonely place these days
Click to expand...
Amen and preach it, pj to the last sentence.

Increasing taxes does not correlate to increased revenue in all cases. So a bit erroneous to say we have to increase taxes if we continue to deficit spend. We do need to increase revenue if though.
 
#947
#947
BigOrangeMojo said:
Here is what we need to do.

1. We need to equalize returns on social security. Right now, higher earners are subsidizing lower earners through negative returns on contributions. This will save hundreds of billions annually.

2. We have to eliminate all preferences in the tax code. By doing that, you will largely eliminate the reporting gap (saving 600-800 billion annually) plus another 1.5 trillion in preferences. You can take 70% of these savings and issue an across the board tax cut and the other 30% goes to deficit reduction. No more getting thousands of refunds for limited income. No more step up basis.

3. Take discretionary federal govt budget bsck to a 2000 baseline (adjusted for inflation). This will save about 700 billion, the bulk of which is defense.

This should get budget close to breakeven annually and will led to a reduction of taxes for vast majority of income taxpayers...
Click to expand...
Another good idea(s) with no chance of seeing the light of day.
 
#950
#950
BigOrangeMojo said:
Roughly 2T of preferences exist now. 20% is 400B. Of the people actually paying income tax, most would benefit from much lower across the board rates. You'd probably get another 600B from closing reporting gap. That's a trillion right there in deficit savings. Get discretionary fed govt back to 2000 baseline and eliminate the wealth redistribution in social security and your budget is balanced...

The poor probably wouldnt like my plan but the income tax code and social security calculations shouldn't be subsidizing them...
Click to expand...
Social security is the biggest wealth redistribution scam ever levied on the US population
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top