WowBB Forums Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

 Moderated by: Ron, brodiescomics, beejmi Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page  
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Tax Bill/Reform  Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 02:34 pm
  PM Quote Reply
31st Post
broke



Joined: Tue Jan 22nd, 2008
Location: Bolton, ON
Posts: 2754
Status: 
Offline
Again, anything that somehow results in less Americans I should be all for. Just don't move here and fuck up this country any more than it already is.



____________________
Comic Saaaaaannnsss
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 02:48 pm
  PM Quote Reply
32nd Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Papa Voo wrote: Ultimark wrote: The corporate tax was too high. However the secret to the bill is how they really aim to pay for it. Mandatory spending cuts to social security and medicare. Sure, they will hit other programs but that is where the money is and they will have no option. Since it passed, I have not followed it but I did hear that Trump might delay the signing until 18 so the cuts won't hit until 19. Make it less of an election issue.

I think any cuts on SS or medicare would be in the form of those who would collect in the future. If they cut a dime on people currently receiving those benefits, they would lose a hundred seats in the House.

As for the bill overall, it will actually save our household about $15,000. My wife's business is small enough that she can still be a LLC and count for pass through status. That is eliminated at 315K something we won't hit. We will save $10,000 on that and another $5k on the brackets.

The theory is my wife will hire someone with that extra money. Not true but I havre no doubt we will go on another vacation. She cannot get enough of travel. So that is a stimulative effect.

I think, upfront, we will see the positives. Tax $ returning from abroad and the cuts will stimulate the economy. Longer term, it could hurt but we can't know for certain.

Trickle Down Part II
It was a failure the first time around so we will try it, again.  
Trickle down has not been shown to work in the long term.  However, it can work in the short run and that can last for several years.   I guess we have no choice but to wait and see.  The side effects down the road could really suck. 





Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 02:54 pm
  PM Quote Reply
33rd Post
DaNkinator



Joined: Tue Oct 23rd, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 5994
Status: 
Offline
Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents.

Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year).

Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end).

Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents.

The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/10/10/want-a-better-economy-history-says-vote-democrat/#2e85fbc6cb44

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 03:16 pm
  PM Quote Reply
34th Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Hard to argue with that. Still, there are diversions from that mean on a short term basis which can last several years. Look at the market under Reagan for instance. Fantastic returns and there is no way to discount that. As it happens the 3 major collapses occurred under R POTUS - Bush, Hoover and you forgot Nixon. Almost a 50% bear market. The last D POTUS to not have strong market returns was Carter. The only one I can think of in the last century. However, an argument can be made that the D's have been unusually lucky to get in while the market is low.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 03:52 pm
  PM Quote Reply
35th Post
Papa Voo



Joined: Thu Jan 17th, 2008
Location: Right Outside The Burgh, USA
Posts: 8614
Status: 
Offline
Ultimark wrote: Papa Voo wrote: Ultimark wrote: The corporate tax was too high. However the secret to the bill is how they really aim to pay for it. Mandatory spending cuts to social security and medicare. Sure, they will hit other programs but that is where the money is and they will have no option. Since it passed, I have not followed it but I did hear that Trump might delay the signing until 18 so the cuts won't hit until 19. Make it less of an election issue.

I think any cuts on SS or medicare would be in the form of those who would collect in the future. If they cut a dime on people currently receiving those benefits, they would lose a hundred seats in the House.

As for the bill overall, it will actually save our household about $15,000. My wife's business is small enough that she can still be a LLC and count for pass through status. That is eliminated at 315K something we won't hit. We will save $10,000 on that and another $5k on the brackets.

The theory is my wife will hire someone with that extra money. Not true but I havre no doubt we will go on another vacation. She cannot get enough of travel. So that is a stimulative effect.

I think, upfront, we will see the positives. Tax $ returning from abroad and the cuts will stimulate the economy. Longer term, it could hurt but we can't know for certain.

Trickle Down Part II
It was a failure the first time around so we will try it, again.  
Trickle down has not been shown to work in the long term.  However, it can work in the short run and that can last for several years.   I guess we have no choice but to wait and see.  The side effects down the road could really suc 


Please explain how it has worked.  


I am not talking based on questionable market trends.  I am talking about investment into the workforce.




Last edited on Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 03:54 pm by Papa Voo

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 04:19 pm
  PM Quote Reply
36th Post
indikator



Joined: Fri Jan 23rd, 2009
Location: Bratenwender City, Germany
Posts: 2423
Status: 
Offline
I can see the argument that the Democrats were lucky (Bill Clinton!) but just look at Kansas or the UK to see that austerity is not going to help any economy at all. So even if they have been lucky in the past, a democrat should always outperform a austerity-driven GOP plan.



____________________
The Don Owen signature has been retired as the Dean Silverstone book made the point that he was an antisemite. I shall give you a Greatmuta1025 approved Hello Kitty picture instead.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 04:52 pm
  PM Quote Reply
37th Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Well,you won't believe anything I type but job and wage growth was rampant under Reagan.  In one month alone, it was either august or sept of 82, a million jobs were created.  At that time, it was the longest we went without a recession. UE and inflation both decreased to levels many economists said could never happen again. The last Bush year and the Clinton years would surpass that and now we are on the verge of doing so again with Obama/Trump.  The difference with Obama was that wage growth remained muted.  It is too early to tell with Trump what will happen with wages.  
The stats are out there.  I know things weren't perfect then either.  They never are.  I just think some people get so stuck on something that they never see the other side.  BT is like that.  I always look at the data.  The two times a market crash didn't happen late in a R term was with Reagan and Ike.  Both were pragmatists although the right likes to pretend that Reagan was not.  


Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 04:55 pm
  PM Quote Reply
38th Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
indikator wrote: I can see the argument that the Democrats were lucky (Bill Clinton!) but just look at Kansas or the UK to see that austerity is not going to help any economy at all. So even if they have been lucky in the past, a democrat should always outperform a austerity-driven GOP plan.I guess that is probably what made Ike and Reagan different.  They were not into austerity.  Even Reagan agreed to a huge stimulus package in order to get his tax bill approved in 82.  Ike spent a ton on public projects and basically created the interstate highway system.  Nixon had other issues obviously and I am not certain he had any real governing philosophy.   According to my friends who are on the far right, Bush was a Democrat in regards to spending. 

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 05:10 pm
  PM Quote Reply
39th Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Here is the chart of monthly job numbers going way back.
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 05:48 pm
  PM Quote Reply
40th Post
Principal_Raditch



Joined: Mon Feb 18th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 6204
Status: 
Offline
On a smaller basis, the supply side experiment failed miserably here in Kansas. Brownback negated income taxes for business. The theory was, it would stimulate job growth. Not only did it not, but Kansas plummtted to being one one of the worst growth states the last 5 years. Then of course, Revenue's sank, forcing plundering of the state transportation fund, and massive cuts. Still revenues continued to drop, more cuts, more emptying of the remaining surpluses. FInally the Cons had to throw their hands up and admit defeat, and reinstate the taxes...all while Brownback kept on trying to convince people to give it more time (already after 5 years of downfall) He tried to blame it on a soft agro market. Completely clueless fucker

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 05:53 pm
  PM Quote Reply
41st Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Not defending this tax bill and I think there will be serious repercussions down the road but the issues in KS are much different. On a federal level, we really should go to where Canada is - a lower corp rate but without all the nonsense that we have built in. This bill lowers the rate but made things only a bit more simple on the corporate level.

I do think it will provide stimulus in the beginning. I don't think what happened in KS will happen nationwide - at least not as nearly as fast.

It's like we are all at a party and about to get seriously drunk for a while. The hangover is coming - just a matter of when.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 06:20 pm
  PM Quote Reply
42nd Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
I got the year wrong for the millions plus jobs created. It was in Sept of 83, not 82. The difference between then and now should be obvious. Back then, we had high UE across the board. This time it is different because the rate is much lower. So, I highly doubt this bill will result in anything near a million jobs in one month. It is also a much different country in regards to Demographics now.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 06:23 pm
  PM Quote Reply
43rd Post
Ultimark



Joined: Sun Oct 28th, 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5663
Status: 
Offline
Just realized the table won't come through on the link
Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
1-Month Net Change

Series Id: CES0000000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Series Title: All employees, thousands, total nonfarm, seasonally adjusted
Super Sector: Total nonfarm
Industry: Total nonfarm
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 1981 to 2017

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1981 94 68 105 73 10 197 112 -36 -87 -99 -209 -278
1982 -326 -5 -130 -280 -45 -243 -342 -158 -181 -277 -123 -14
1983 224 -75 172 276 277 379 418 -30 1115 271 353 356
1984 446 481 275 363 308 379 313 242 310 286 349 128
1985 266 124 346 196 274 146 190 193 203 188 209 167
1986 125 107 94 187 127 -94 318 114 347 186 186 205
1987 172 232 249 338 226 172 347 171 228 492 232 294
1988 94 453 276 245 229 363 222 124 339 268 339 290
1989 262 258 193 173 118 116 40 49 250 111 277 96
1990 336 248 215 39 152 22 -31 -216 -90 -160 -149 -56
1991 -117 -306 -158 -212 -123 94 -39 10 32 15 -57 26
1992 51 -61 55 158 127 65 73 138 36 181 136 211
1993 310 243 -49 308 267 179 302 158 241 283 263 316
1994 272 196 464 350 334 314 374 283 354 209 421 280
1995 326 201 219 163 -16 234 96 255 244 151 149 134
1996 -15 429 265 164 323 285 250 180 224 249 299 171
1997 233 305 315 292 261 266 306 -31 511 342 304 304
1998 274 199 149 280 404 220 129 342 222 201 280 347
1999 126 409 108 374 212 263 321 162 216 397 293 299
2000 228 131 468 287 226 -44 176 -13 135 -14 228 142
2001 -25 72 -27 -280 -39 -130 -111 -156 -241 -327 -291 -172
2002 -135 -136 -21 -78 -5 56 -84 -14 -60 122 13 -158
2003 92 -149 -209 -44 -7 10 22 -41 104 203 11 123
2004 159 48 331 251 307 77 45 119 162 346 66 129
2005 136 239 135 364 177 245 374 196 67 84 341 157
2006 278 315 282 183 25 79 206 183 153 8 209 171
2007 240 89 190 80 143 75 -34 -20 88 84 114 98
2008 17 -84 -78 -210 -186 -162 -213 -267 -450 -474 -766 -694
2009 -793 -702 -823 -687 -349 -471 -329 -213 -220 -204 -2 -275
2010 23 -68 164 243 524 -137 -68 -36 -52 262 119 87
2011 43 189 225 346 77 225 69 110 248 209 141 209
2012 358 237 233 78 115 76 143 177 203 146 132 244
2013 211 286 130 197 226 162 122 261 190 212 258 47
2014 190 151 272 329 246 304 202 230 280 227 312 255
2015 234 238 86 262 344 206 254 157 100 321 272 239
2016 126 237 225 153 43 297 291 176 249 124 164 155
2017 216 232 50 207 145 210 138 208 38 244 228

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 07:47 pm
  PM Quote Reply
44th Post
srossi
Mr Monday Night!
 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 43922
Status: 
Offline
When every single one of us die an excruciating death in a nuclear holocaust, it's still going to be worth it because of moments like this.  Never forget that even if Trump is LITERALLY Hitler, as in the reincarnated body of a long-dead Nazi leader bent on reviving concentration camps to torture and kill indiscriminately based on his whims and the latest Fox News story, the answer to whether or not he is better or worse than the average liberal will still be a push.    

Attachment: Burned.jpg (Downloaded 27 times)

Last edited on Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 07:51 pm by srossi



____________________
This thread was great before AA ruined it.
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Fri Dec 22nd, 2017 08:58 pm
  PM Quote Reply
45th Post
Papa Voo



Joined: Thu Jan 17th, 2008
Location: Right Outside The Burgh, USA
Posts: 8614
Status: 
Offline
Market rose and wages increased in 1983 due to more national spending and not tax cuts. The debt-spending is what got us out of the so-called recession.   

There are no marked statistics showing increase in middle class jobs and higher wages for middle class. In fact, those stats have almost been stagnant since 1980.  That is crazy!  

I am looking at the impact of the trickle-down specifically on middle class and middle class wage earners.

Last edited on Sat Dec 23rd, 2017 01:29 am by Papa Voo

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

Current time is 10:21 am Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  Next Page Last Page    
WowBB Forums > Sports And Wrestling > General Discussion > Tax Bill/Reform Top




UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2013 Data 1 Systems