CBS explores impact of tax cuts

[hislegacy]

Seems everyone benefits.

 

[Belk]

Seems everyone benefits.

Not those who have medical bills. Nor those who are adopting.

 

[hislegacy]

Not those who have medical bills. Nor those who are adopting.

Not one tax plan is 100% good for 100% of the population.

 

[Belk]

Not one tax plan is 100% good for 100% of the population.

I agree. Just pointing out that it does not benefit everyone as your initial point said.

 

[hislegacy]

The ‘everyone’ was in reference to the video. No one would assume it speaks for everyone in the US.

Then again maybe someone would.

 

[Belk]

The ‘everyone’ was in reference to the video. No one would assume it speaks for everyone in the US.

Then again maybe someone would.

Ah. So you were only speaking about three people? Very well I agree. These three people will benefit from the tax cut net year.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Does it benefit all if the deficit rises 1/5 trillion as a result?

 

[Dawnhammer]

Does it benefit all if the deficit rises 1/5 trillion as a result?

Of course. Debt bought by China is a problem for the future generations nothing to worry about, like global warming.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I don't believe the 13 million who will lose healthcare see it as a benefit. And many who are not wealthy will see their taxes creep up and will pay more by 2025.

see The Tax Bill’s Winners and Losers

THE ELDERLY A 2010 law requires that any legislation that adds to the federal deficit be paid for by spending cuts, increases in revenue or other offsets. Some cuts would be automatic, and the biggest program to be affected is Medicare, the health insurance program for the elderly and disabled. Dozens of other programs are likely to be cut as well, but Medicare, which would face a 4 percent cut, is by far the biggest. Republicans say that this rule will be waived and the cuts will be averted, but that will take a bipartisan deal.....

LOW-INCOME FAMILIES Low-income families who claim the earned-income tax credit will lose out on at least $19 billion over the coming decade under the bill because of the change in the way inflation is calculated. And a new requirement that families claiming the child tax credit provide a Social Security number is projected to mean a big reduction in the families claiming it, since those who are not in the United States legally would be prohibited, even if their children were born in the United States.
​

But the multimillionaires are really going to benefit big time.

​

 

[FreeinChrist]

Of course. Debt bought by China is a problem for the future generations nothing to worry about, like global warming.

Yes, I wonder how many are concerned that to afford these cuts, we have to borrow more from China.

They will own the country at this rate.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Nobody is “losing healthcare” in this bill. That’s a lie spread by democrats and media. This bill eliminates the mandate in Obamacare. That’s it period.
So it takes away the fine associated with being forced to buy Obamacare, and gives people more options.

 

[mark46]

No one loses healthcare under the bill.

No one know about future tax increases, which you assume take place.

Withe regard to healthcare, the issue is premiums, and that is a separate issues that may or may empt be addressed but probably will with a month or two.

I don't believe the 13 million who will lose healthcare see it as a benefit. And many who are not wealthy will see their taxes creep up and will pay more by 2025.

see The Tax Bill’s Winners and Losers

THE ELDERLY A 2010 law requires that any legislation that adds to the federal deficit be paid for by spending cuts, increases in revenue or other offsets. Some cuts would be automatic, and the biggest program to be affected is Medicare, the health insurance program for the elderly and disabled. Dozens of other programs are likely to be cut as well, but Medicare, which would face a 4 percent cut, is by far the biggest. Republicans say that this rule will be waived and the cuts will be averted, but that will take a bipartisan deal.....

LOW-INCOME FAMILIES Low-income families who claim the earned-income tax credit will lose out on at least $19 billion over the coming decade under the bill because of the change in the way inflation is calculated. And a new requirement that families claiming the child tax credit provide a Social Security number is projected to mean a big reduction in the families claiming it, since those who are not in the United States legally would be prohibited, even if their children were born in the United States.
​

But the multimillionaires are really going to benefit big time.

​

 

[mark46]

Not those who have medical bills. Nor those who are adopting.

Medical care expense deduction weren't eliminated. They were increased for 2017 and 2018.

 

[hislegacy]

Does it benefit all if the deficit rises 1/5 trillion as a result?

I find it amusing, but not amazing that my friend on the Left are now speaking of the deficit and China for the first time in nine years of silence as the former administration spent us almost into oblivion.

 

[Brotherly Spirit]

Analysis by Congress's Official Scorekeeper Shows Final GOP Tax Bill Comes Nowhere Close to 'Paying for Itself'

Jason Furman ✔ @jasonfurman
JCT dynamic score just out. Shows:
1. Annual growth rate is 0.01 to 0.02 pp higher over ten years. (Yes, less than 2 hundredths of a percent.)
2. Tax cut costs $1.071T
3. Conference bill is more costly and less pro-growth than House or Senate.https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5055 …

Low increases of growth and revenue compared to high increases of deficit and debt. Much of the benefits to most people are short term. But there's long term losses for most people, an example is lower individual income rates and using slower inflation rate growth for adjusting brackets. As it's been said, taxation itself aside; also will have spending cuts eventually, which would be social programs benefiting many people.

Hopefully it's not as bad as expected, but it seems the experts plus historic examples make it highly probable it will be. President's Reagan and Bush has similar economic approaches with taxation, the result was increased deficits and debt; for example housing bubble aside, it doesn't seem worth it for growth.

I understand the idea of pro-growth, it's something I'd support. The problem is it should be planned with the long term in mind, and not limited to or reliant only on tax cuts.

 

[Brotherly Spirit]

I find it amusing, but not amazing that my friend on the Left are now speaking of the deficit and China for the first time in nine years of silence as the former administration spent us almost into oblivion.

Wasn't the increased deficits at the beginning caused by the recession, efforts which began at the end of President Bush's second term? Then after the bailout and stimulus spending, deficits began to decrease during President Obama's eight years?

 

[mark46]

1) We'll see whether there is growth and whether revenues come back into the US as part of the one time reduction in taxes for those with assets stranded overseas. If there is not growth, the Republicans will lose lots more seats than they would have ordinarily.

2) As of now, there are not loss of services in 2018. Obamacare rates may or may not come down from their PRESENT numbers based on owhether there is future legislation. Having the tax on those who didn't want insurance wasn't effecting rates. That money wasn't going to the insurance companies.

3) WHOARE THE POOR LOSERS IN THE BIG TAX STATES
Let us say someone has a $200K income and a property taxes of $10K. Their state income tax might be as much as $7K or so. And the rates went down. $7K less in deductions at a lower rate.

No, these are not the folks who were harmed. We are talking about folks who income was over $250K and has a $1M house. Worry if you must. And yes, that cost will gain seats. However, most of the middle class and poor are not going to vote Democratic because of these costs.

IMHO, the middle class will vote against the Republican tax plan if their taxes go up, if their services go down, and if the economy goes down the tubes and jobs are lost. If these things don't happen, the Democrats have much better issues.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Wasn't the increased deficits at the beginning caused by the recession, efforts which began at the end of President Bush's second term? Then after the bailout and stimulus spending, deficits began to decrease during President Obama's eight years?

Yep!

 

[FreeinChrist]

No one loses healthcare under the bill.

No one know about future tax increases, which you assume take place.

Withe regard to healthcare, the issue is premiums, and that is a separate issues that may or may empt be addressed but probably will with a month or two.

Health-care cuts in GOP tax bill will cost people and states more long-term

The Senate Republican tax bill seeks to repeal the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate provision. The will do this by using the proceeds to partially offset over a trillion-and-a-half-dollar deficit that the bill would create.

While it sounds nearly painless that repealing this health-care provision would save taxpayers money — without the incentive from the mandate, some 13 million people, most of whom currently receive reduced-cost insurance, are expected to fail to take up that coverage, saving the government from making those coverage payments — it isn’t.

In the health insurance market, people who fail to take up coverage not only harm their own health and access to care, but they also shift costs and coverage burdens onto the rest of us who pay for health care.​

 

[hislegacy]

Does it benefit all if the deficit rises 1/5 trillion as a result?

Wasn't the increased deficits at the beginning caused by the recession, efforts which began at the end of President Bush's second term? Then after the bailout and stimulus spending, deficits began to decrease during President Obama's eight years?

Eight years of deficit spending to the tune of a 100% increase and the slowest recession recovery on record.

I know their are those who want to blame Bush for everything bad that happened during the eight years of Obama’s, that is just not reality.