Author Topic: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)  (Read 137714 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15101
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #200 on: November 03, 2017, 01:26:10 PM »
Deductions/credits should be done for one reason. Influence behavior. Do we have an aging population problem? No? Eliminate child tax credits.

It would be horrible to actually use some tax theory in Washington vs. these bumbledicks rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and saying "look what we did, we made less brackets" and simples believing them and posting on message boards how great the plan is.

I disagree with this fundamentally. I think deductions should be available so that the tax rate you pay reflects your ability to pay. Nobody looks at tax breaks as some sort of incentive to have kids. The idea that ending those breaks will cause people to have less kids is laughable. This is why the elimination of the deduction for medical expenses exceeding 10% of your income is so despicable.

This is certainly a component of it, but at the end of the day you can pick from a limitless amount of things that Americans spend a lot of money on if this is 100% your philosophy.  Why have a child tax credit instead of a deduction for paying utilities? Why have a mortgage interest deduction instead of a deduction for expenses like bus fares or gas that you spend getting to and from work?

There has to be more to it than lightening the burden on taxpayers, and that is where the social engineering part comes into play.

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #201 on: November 03, 2017, 01:35:49 PM »
Deductions/credits should be done for one reason. Influence behavior. Do we have an aging population problem? No? Eliminate child tax credits.

It would be horrible to actually use some tax theory in Washington vs. these bumbledicks rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and saying "look what we did, we made less brackets" and simples believing them and posting on message boards how great the plan is.

I disagree with this fundamentally. I think deductions should be available so that the tax rate you pay reflects your ability to pay. Nobody looks at tax breaks as some sort of incentive to have kids. The idea that ending those breaks will cause people to have less kids is laughable. This is why the elimination of the deduction for medical expenses exceeding 10% of your income is so despicable.
So I can't pay as much because I have these 5 kids... So give me a tax break? Seems backwards

I do agree having a kid probably isn't a decision made many times because of ones 1040.  Didn't mean we can influence behaviors with taxes.

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #202 on: November 03, 2017, 01:37:06 PM »
You shouldn't be rewarded with lower taxes just because you reproduce
Correct

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #203 on: November 03, 2017, 01:40:43 PM »
In fact I'd charge more taxes to families 3+ kids and tax breaks for vacestomies. Large families put way more burden out there for society beyond what the family dollar impact is.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #204 on: November 03, 2017, 01:43:29 PM »
Deductions/credits should be done for one reason. Influence behavior. Do we have an aging population problem? No? Eliminate child tax credits.

It would be horrible to actually use some tax theory in Washington vs. these bumbledicks rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and saying "look what we did, we made less brackets" and simples believing them and posting on message boards how great the plan is.

I disagree with this fundamentally. I think deductions should be available so that the tax rate you pay reflects your ability to pay. Nobody looks at tax breaks as some sort of incentive to have kids. The idea that ending those breaks will cause people to have less kids is laughable. This is why the elimination of the deduction for medical expenses exceeding 10% of your income is so despicable.
So I can't pay as much because I have these 5 kids... So give me a tax break? Seems backwards

I do agree having a kid probably isn't a decision made many times because of ones 1040.  Didn't mean we can influence behaviors with taxes.

It just doesn't seem that backwards to me. It's not like the personal exemption covers 100% of the cost of having a kid or something. It's just an extra $4k that comes off of your annual income.

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #205 on: November 03, 2017, 01:45:21 PM »
Deductions/credits should be done for one reason. Influence behavior. Do we have an aging population problem? No? Eliminate child tax credits.

It would be horrible to actually use some tax theory in Washington vs. these bumbledicks rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and saying "look what we did, we made less brackets" and simples believing them and posting on message boards how great the plan is.

I disagree with this fundamentally. I think deductions should be available so that the tax rate you pay reflects your ability to pay. Nobody looks at tax breaks as some sort of incentive to have kids. The idea that ending those breaks will cause people to have less kids is laughable. This is why the elimination of the deduction for medical expenses exceeding 10% of your income is so despicable.
So I can't pay as much because I have these 5 kids... So give me a tax break? Seems backwards

I do agree having a kid probably isn't a decision made many times because of ones 1040.  Didn't mean we can influence behaviors with taxes.

It just doesn't seem that backwards to me. It's not like the personal exemption covers 100% of the cost of having a kid or something. It's just an extra $4k that comes off of your annual income.
Understood.... I agree taxes should be based on ability to pay.... But that's based on income... Not expenses you decide to incur.

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63770
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #206 on: November 03, 2017, 02:08:38 PM »
Maybe kdub should just live within his means instead of relying on government handouts for having unprotected sex
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #207 on: November 03, 2017, 02:10:28 PM »
Statistically the more intelligent you are the less children you have

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #208 on: November 03, 2017, 02:18:48 PM »
As with all statistics there are outliers, so that wasn’t a dig at anybody

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #209 on: November 03, 2017, 03:12:20 PM »


You shouldn't be rewarded with lower taxes just because you reproduce

I'm not asking to be rewarded. I'm asking to not be penalized under this current reform by actually raising my taxes due to stripping away a previously extremely valuable personal exemption. For lower income folks, losing those personal exemptions doesn't hurt nearly as bad because the doubling of the standard deduction more than offsets it. But for higher income folks, our itemized deductions were already comparable to the new standard deduction, so losing the personal exemption for our kids could increase our taxes - when we high wage earners already pay a higher effective tax rate than the vast majority of Americans.

Kinda like those who benefit under the ACA aren't asking to be rewarded. They're just asking not to be penalized under this current reform due to stripping away a previously extremely valuable premium tax credit.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Did you really just equate taking somebody's money with handing it to someone else?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15101
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #210 on: November 03, 2017, 03:59:09 PM »
That’s literally what taxes are KSUW.

Online wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30240
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #211 on: November 03, 2017, 05:54:33 PM »
In fact I'd charge more taxes to families 3+ kids and tax breaks for vacestomies. Large families put way more burden out there for society beyond what the family dollar impact is.

Extra taxes if one of their spawn has a disability
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #212 on: November 03, 2017, 06:51:52 PM »
President Silverback and I are working toward a plan where we all have better jobs and make more cash, we really don’t give a crap whether you are gonna save a few bucks or not, our goal is that after this is implemented that more of you are working making more money and yes paying more taxes because you are kicking so much more ass.

Statement from the Institute for Alpha thought
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Online chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21894
    • View Profile

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #214 on: November 03, 2017, 07:00:21 PM »
FSD was right. No change for ol SdK!

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15101
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #215 on: November 03, 2017, 07:02:00 PM »
It is a pretty great plan for the super rich.

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #216 on: November 03, 2017, 07:21:31 PM »
The high tide raises all boats
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Online steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85177
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #217 on: November 03, 2017, 07:26:05 PM »
dnr the plan or this thread or anything about this plan. what do you need to make to make it good for you?

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #218 on: November 03, 2017, 07:28:54 PM »
Not about that stevedave, I’ll refer you to the statement from the Institute for Alpha thought.
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Online steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85177
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #219 on: November 03, 2017, 07:29:42 PM »
Not about that stevedave, I’ll refer you to the statement from the Institute for Alpha thought.

well, let me know what they say bud

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #220 on: November 03, 2017, 07:32:03 PM »
Scroll up about 7-8 posts, it’s all there
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21335
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #221 on: November 03, 2017, 07:42:22 PM »
The high tide raises all boats
Ann Coulter debunked this theory when she got bumped from premium economy.

Online steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85177
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #222 on: November 03, 2017, 07:47:57 PM »
The high tide raises all boats
Ann Coulter debunked this theory when she got bumped from premium economy.

 :lol:

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51305
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #223 on: November 03, 2017, 08:34:32 PM »
President Silverback and I are working toward a plan where we all have better jobs and make more cash, we really don’t give a crap whether you are gonna save a few bucks or not, our goal is that after this is implemented that more of you are working making more money and yes paying more taxes because you are kicking so much more ass.

Statement from the Institute for Alpha thought

What kind of loser is currently unemployed

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #224 on: November 03, 2017, 09:34:55 PM »
FSD was right. No change for ol SdK!

Duh. If you can add you can see the plan is good for you. Not rocket science
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd