The Truth about Tax Reform

[KeithE]

429 page GOP tax plan:

We will see about the “Jobs” claim in the Act’s title. Nothing specifically enhances jobs in this Act - all suppositions.

Quick Assessment from the

[Haruo]

Automation is such that overall, job creation is a fiction. Most job creation is makework, and there is nothing in unregulated capitalism to make the creation of jobs desirable where a machine can do as well or better for the cost of the electricity it consumes.

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

[Sandy]

I got my tax return for 2016 out and tried to figure out how it would look with the percentage of tax that would be due if the new plan went into effect. Adding in the doubled standard deduction, subtracting what I get from deductions now, and the personal exemption, and plugging in the appropriate tax rate, I would pay just a shade more than I did this year. No tax cut for me. Where I lose out is in the deductions that will no longer be allowed, and the personal exemption. Anyone who itemizes is most likely going to have the same experience.

[KeithE]

[William Thornton]

As Pelosi is saying...get over it, he's in.

All this wonk stuff doesn't matter to the general public which likes or dislikes tax reform based on one or two pet exemptions. Most of us would like to see congress do something. Obama, BTW, was our most arrogant president. He was just smooth about it. His favorite word was "I".

But, thank God for the corrupt Clintons being deep sixed, hopefully forever. It's great to see that Dems are now saying that HIl was the only candidate who could lose to Trump. In looking back over about a half century of following politics, I'd have to say that watching Hil lose twice would make my top ten political events. Offhand here's my top ten:

1. Reagan elected.
2. Reagan re-elected.
3. Bush the First elected.
4. Bush the Second elected.
5. Bush the Second re-elected.
6. Jimmy Carter elected. (last Dem I voted for...with regrets today)
7. Hil losing to Obama in the primaries.
8. Hil losing to Trump.
9. Clinton losing his one election in Arkansas (I was living in Memphis at the time).
10. My coming in tied for second in a church election of who the grouchiest person was in our congregation.

[Haruo]

That's a pretty red-state sort of like list, William, though not more so than I anticipated. But it's a like list. I'd be interested in seeing your top ten political events/developments, including things other than election outcomes.

[William Thornton]

Sandy, that's a foolish, thoughtless, racist comment. I deleted it. I don't care whose forum this is. Perhaps you would rethink your approach.

Actually, I liked the guy. I always appreciate a scintillating speaker even if he's a flaming lib dem.

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

[Jim]

Everything at this point is pure speculation. No one knows yet what kind of legislation will be passed, if any anytime soon. What is evident in this forum is that some consider financial success as virtually sinful and should be punished by confiscating the fruits of good management or good luck, inherited wealth or winning the lottery. This is the philosophy that the richest—by hook or crook—must totally fund the rest, including the so-called middle-class, with the mean family income between 50- and 60-thousand annually. On this basis, I am among the poor but do not feel that this entitles me to leech off those smarter than I or luckier. Counting both fed and other taxes, those in the infamous top 1% fork over close to half of what they make one way or another, while nearly half of all households pay no taxes at all. This seems unfair in spades, and I don't care about what other people pay or not pay. There never has been or will be a “fair tax” or “level playing field,” the former indefinable and the latter against Nature.

[Haruo]

But given a fallen world, it may be our duty to our Savior to struggle against the laws of nature on behalf of the least of his brethren. Or not. The top 1% also receive benefits paid for by the taxes the whole population pays. And cutting funding for those benefits is not nearly as high a priority, from the budget-balancers' usual POV, as cutting the much cheaper benefits to the poor. IMO.

[KeithE]

[Jim]

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

OK folks - this GOP tax plan is of, by, and for the rich people and corporations (i.e. Congressional donors). It was been analyzed to quantify the income distributional effects by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) (evaluating tax cuts) with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) (evaluating the loss of benefits due to the known program cuts).

Here are the results



Recognize that this is not a per person/per year tax cut. The data is in millions of USD of tax revenue cuts/spending benefits losses and is cumulative by year for the income class as a whole in the first column. Thus the negative numbers by 2027 show that those over $1M income will have $5,780 Billion cumulatively to spread around; those that make less than $75,000/year (i..e the middle class and low class) will be taxed more and/or less spending on that class. So in 2019 this bill is is bad for the lower class and good for the middle through top class; but by 2027 it will be bad for the missile class and lower class (<$75,000/year) and good for the upper middle class and above (>$75,000/year).

The reason for the lack of tax cuts/spending losses is mainly due to programs being cut/dropped for the poor like the drop in Medicaid and non-renewal of CHIP. They did change the tax hike planned for the poorest from 10% to 12% and are keeping it at 10% at the same time they dropped the top bracket from 39.6% to 38.5%. These and many more assumptions / explanations are given at


This is a travesty and being done through a reconciliation approach that will not allow for discussion in Congress. There are many protests going on and rightfully so. I hope at least three GOP senators will see through this scam (middle class tax my eye- the tax cut goes mainly to corporations and their stockholders and they will not invest much of these tax breaks - they have record profits now and are not reinvesting those profits now nor are they increasing wages).

[Haruo]

Well, you know, there's always Revolution.

[KeithE]

[Dave Roberts]

[Sandy]

I ran the numbers on the potential hit my wife and I will take with this. We are definitely "middle class", and we'll have to take the standard deduction now. That will make doing this simpler, since we're losing most of what we can now deduct, but without personal exemptions, our tax liability will go up almost 6%. It's probably close to the same for just about anyone who makes over $60,000 and itemizes.

[KeithE]