Political Roundtable Part XIII

JWizmentality · Post #1722 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:48 am

dckingsfan wrote:
JWizmentality wrote:Can someone sum up the total amount of taxpayer money the GOP wasted voting to repeal Obamacare for 7+ years?

I don't think you can really put a price on debate can you? Or any exercise in the legislature? Otherwise you would have to put a cost on both parties ignoring the deficit. Wouldn't that dwarf all other debates (or the lack thereof?)

You're seriously not going to stand there and defend over 50+ votes to repeal as debate...or legitimate exercise of legislature are you? You f*cking with me right? :roll:

JWizmentality · Post #1723 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:51 am

AFM wrote:Nate, and1 this post if you're alive.

nate too busy boning up on his talking points from Breitbart and Infowars. Also probably amassing numerous links to post that your antivirus will no doubt find scrupulous.

sfam · Post #1724 » by **sfam** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:14 am

dckingsfan wrote:
sfam wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:Ooops - you missed the part on the deficit reduction? Check out the CBO report!

Klein's argument is circulus in probando. I may agree with the premise but it is still poor logic.

The most recent CBO score for the first set of changes brought the deficit reduction down to just over 100 billion. Apparently the last set of changes would have wiped out all deficit reduction.

eh - last official scoring.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52486

Could be $1.2T if they hadn't cut the tax.

well again, they've updated this for the first set of changes. Most observers say the last set of changes wipe out the deficit reduction entirely.

sfam · Post #1725 » by **sfam** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:15 am

DCZards wrote:

I would sooo throw that baby out with the dirty bathwater.

TGW · Post #1726 » by **TGW** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:48 am

Induveca wrote:
sfam wrote:Trump is a hard worker, assuming he's on the Senior PGA

So now we're graphing guesswork partisan data from media pool reports? Ha.

Says the guy who gets his news from Breitbart and Infowars. :lol:

JWizmentality · Post #1727 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:04 am

TGW wrote:
Induveca wrote:
sfam wrote:Trump is a hard worker, assuming he's on the Senior PGA

So now we're graphing guesswork partisan data from media pool reports? Ha.

Says the guy who gets his news from Breitbart and Infowars.

And Wikileaks. Can't forget wikileaks!!

Doug_Blew · Post #1728 » by **Doug_Blew** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:35 am

Induveca wrote:
DCZards wrote:
Induveca wrote:
He's stood and has begun enacted his campaign pledges (no matter if you disagree with them), more than any US president in my lifetime.

I'd call that focus. Obama watched basketball/ESPN in his fine off. Trump tweets. (Ha).

Exactly what campaign pledges has Trump enacted? Which ones have actually become law? The wall? Immigration reform? The Muslim ban? The repeal of Obamacare?

More than any US president in your lifetime? Truth is Obama enacted more impactful legislation in the first month of his presidency than Trump has enacted to this point in his presidency. In fact, have #45 and the Repubs enacted any legislation?

Trump has signed some symbolic, mostly meaningless Executive Orders...but that's about it.

Pipeline, wall, immigration reform, jobs, Obamacare repeal, regulation reform, tax reform, jobs. If you read closely I said "begun enacting", and I tied it back to his promises during the campaign.

This is the part where you tell me my opinion is wrong, and yours is right.

This post stood out to me at the time it was written. So far he has not gotten too far on this list.

Pipeline - he promised to use american steel.
Wall - he promised the Mexicans will pay for it. I doubt we ever see a wall
Immigration reform - he has rounded up some immigrants but his travel bans have failed to pass through the legals system
jobs - Too early to say
Obama Care repeal - has not happened
regulation reform - He's rolled back the financial regulations that Obama put in place. Is this reform?
tax reform - has not begun. Will be just as hard to get this through Congress.

I will say that President Trump is on his way to having the worst first 100 days of any President in my lifetime. Every week he's had, seems to be worse than the previous one.

I'm sure he'll have a better week here at some point. But the bar is so low that it will not take much.

dckingsfan · Post #1729 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:48 pm

sfam wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
sfam wrote:
The most recent CBO score for the first set of changes brought the deficit reduction down to just over 100 billion. Apparently the last set of changes would have wiped out all deficit reduction.

eh - last official scoring.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52486

Could be $1.2T if they hadn't cut the tax.

well again, they've updated this for the first set of changes. Most observers say the last set of changes wipe out the deficit reduction entirely.

Just so you know, when they actually release an update - the post it on cbo.org.

dckingsfan · Post #1730 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 12:56 pm

JWizmentality wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
JWizmentality wrote:Can someone sum up the total amount of taxpayer money the GOP wasted voting to repeal Obamacare for 7+ years?

I don't think you can really put a price on debate can you? Or any exercise in the legislature? Otherwise you would have to put a cost on both parties ignoring the deficit. Wouldn't that dwarf all other debates (or the lack thereof?)

You're seriously not going to stand there and defend over 50+ votes to repeal as debate...or legitimate exercise of legislature are you? You f*cking with me right?

Yes and no. Yes, it was a waste of time.

No. And for the same reason that Obama continually spent time to raise taxes on the wealthy that wouldn't go anywhere in the R Congress. You liked those speeches.

It is how politicians sharpen their messages to see what will fly and what is ridiculous.

Clearly the Rs in congress didn't learn much :nod:

they are the party of obstruction and have shown they don't know how to govern.

verbal8 · Post #1731 » by **verbal8** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 2:57 pm

JWizmentality wrote:Can someone sum up the total amount of taxpayer money the GOP wasted voting to repeal Obamacare for 7+ years?

Not sure what the number is, but I am sure Obama could have had some really nice vacations for that figure.

JWizmentality · Post #1732 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:13 pm

Watch on YouTube

verbal8 · Post #1733 » by **verbal8** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:35 pm

Doug_Blew wrote:regulation reform - He's rolled back the financial regulations that Obama put in place. Is this reform?
tax reform - has not begun. Will be just as hard to get this through Congress.

I will say that President Trump is on his way to having the worst first 100 days of any President in my lifetime. Every week he's had, seems to be worse than the previous one.

I'm sure he'll have a better week here at some point. But the bar is so low that it will not take much.

I think changes to the tax code will happen, similar to the regulation "reform".
Some guesses:

One thing that could produce a reasonable tax code, would be to replace the whole individual tax code with a modified version of the AMT. On it's own the AMT doesn't collect enough money - so I think there has to be a lower rate tier added. It would have to implement less of a marriage penalty than the current version. The complexity of the AMT isn't in the system itself, but that it is added to the normal tax code.

verbal8 · Post #1734 » by **verbal8** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:51 pm

I doubt this will happen with Republicans running the government, but one change to the tax code that would make a lot of sense, would be to greatly reduce the number of people subject to federal income tax.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-americans-pay-most-income-taxes-but-enough-to-be-fair/
From 2014:

people with incomes of less than $50,000 accounted for 62.3% of all individual returns filed, but they paid just 5.7% of total taxes. Their average tax rate was 4.3%.

That means a 6% increase for those above 50K could make such a change revenue-neutral.

If it was applied all to those with incomes over 250K, it would be around a 10% increase in those taxes.

I don't think a flat tax will ever be reasonable, but I think if you move the brackets around correctly something like 0%/15%/30% could me much simpler and fairer without losing revenue. If you want to retain some deductions the numbers are probably 5 to 10% higher.

dckingsfan · Post #1735 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Mar 25, 2017 4:16 pm

verbal8 wrote:I doubt this will happen with Republicans running the government, but one change to the tax code that would make a lot of sense, would be to greatly reduce the number of people subject to federal income tax.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-americans-pay-most-income-taxes-but-enough-to-be-fair/
From 2014:
people with incomes of less than $50,000 accounted for 62.3% of all individual returns filed, but they paid just 5.7% of total taxes. Their average tax rate was 4.3%.

That means a 6% increase for those above 50K could make such a change revenue-neutral.

If it was applied all to those with incomes over 250K, it would be around a 10% increase in those taxes.

I don't think a flat tax will ever be reasonable, but I think if you move the brackets around correctly something like 0%/15%/30% could me much simpler and fairer without losing revenue. If you want to retain some deductions the numbers are probably 5 to 10% higher.

I think I agree with you - it seems like a mess to make those that make less than 50K file a return. But, on average, they get money back - so there is that.

It is estimated that someone making $250,000 per year pays ~ $100K in taxes when you include, federal income, federal payroll, state income, real estate, and other taxes. I assume you want that to go to $125K?

But let's say we go to 100% of taxes on those making $390,000 - the top 1%. We still don't balance the budget. We have a spending problem and I see no meaningful proposals from either party to take care of that issue. We still bring nearly 20% of GDP into the federal coffers each year.

Agreed that our corporate tax structure is deeply flawed. We are the only country to encourage corporations not to bring the $$s back home and invest here. That should be the very first thing they address.