Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
The GOP Tax Cut and Rising Wages....or not.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andrew77" data-source="post: 73281711" data-attributes="member: 406955"><p><strong> Well Andrew, the thing is that tax deductions and tax cuts are not the same thing.</strong></p><p></p><p>Really? Are you sure about that?</p><p></p><p>If I get a tax deduction every single year, that reduces my tax by $1,000, that is not the same thing as having my tax reduced by $1,000? Because both have the exact same effect of me paying $1,000 less in tax.</p><p></p><p>Do tell the massive practical difference between the two.</p><p></p><p><strong>Just because I say corporations were given money in the form of tax breaks does not disavow that the money being taxed was from their profits.</strong></p><p></p><p>I see a huge difference between stealing money from one person, to give to another person, verses just reducing how much money you steal from someone.</p><p></p><p>Huge difference. No one "gave money" to corporations. A tax cut is not "giving money" to corporations or anyone. It is morally wrong to steal money, and give that stolen money to someone else.</p><p></p><p>Look, you can complain about this, and you can claim I'm being dishonest. You are wrong, and you are lying. As long as you keep saying we "gave corporations money" I'm going to keep contradicting you until you either admit you are wrong, or you quit saying it.</p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>But that really has nothing to do with anything substantive since revenue always increases as an economy grows and the real issue is the growing budget deficit. I also added that since no one was ever debating whether revenues have increased or not, it's a strawman argument.</strong></p><p></p><p>No, the strawman is arguing that the tax cuts caused a deficit when tax revenue drastically increased.</p><p></p><p>My argument remains the same. The problem is spending. We need to cut spending. Cutting taxes is a benefit to the entire economy, which is proven by the jump in tax revenue. The problem is exclusively spending. Cut the spending.</p><p></p><p><strong>Tax cuts do not address cuts in spending however, and I would add that Trump greatly increased the spending when he took away the sequester imposed during the Obama administration as a means to cut spending</strong></p><p></p><p>Yeah, I fully expected Trump to increase spending. Trump is no conservative, and if left to his own, would borrow and spend without a second thought.</p><p></p><p>However, I have come to the conclusion that some of the sequestration would have been repealed anyway, namely because of the military.</p><p></p><p>When you do mandatory cuts on the military, people end up dying. There is other way about it. Specifically the sequestration resulted in cuts to maintenance, and one thing you can't avoid is maintaining aircraft. Some Marine Companies had gotten so bad, that only 1 in 3 Aircraft were still flight ready. </p><p></p><p>You can't simply cut spending on military stuff in this manor. The results are devastating.</p><p></p><p>That said, I don't see the Democrats doing any better on spending cuts. Contrary to the implication, Obama didn't agree to sequestration by design. He agreed to it by force, namely that of the Republicans refusing to blindly increase the debt ceiling. I would happily bet good money, that if the Republicans had not pushed the debt limit fight, Obama would have continued over spending without questioning it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andrew77, post: 73281711, member: 406955"] [B] Well Andrew, the thing is that tax deductions and tax cuts are not the same thing.[/B] Really? Are you sure about that? If I get a tax deduction every single year, that reduces my tax by $1,000, that is not the same thing as having my tax reduced by $1,000? Because both have the exact same effect of me paying $1,000 less in tax. Do tell the massive practical difference between the two. [B]Just because I say corporations were given money in the form of tax breaks does not disavow that the money being taxed was from their profits.[/B] I see a huge difference between stealing money from one person, to give to another person, verses just reducing how much money you steal from someone. Huge difference. No one "gave money" to corporations. A tax cut is not "giving money" to corporations or anyone. It is morally wrong to steal money, and give that stolen money to someone else. Look, you can complain about this, and you can claim I'm being dishonest. You are wrong, and you are lying. As long as you keep saying we "gave corporations money" I'm going to keep contradicting you until you either admit you are wrong, or you quit saying it. [B] But that really has nothing to do with anything substantive since revenue always increases as an economy grows and the real issue is the growing budget deficit. I also added that since no one was ever debating whether revenues have increased or not, it's a strawman argument.[/B] No, the strawman is arguing that the tax cuts caused a deficit when tax revenue drastically increased. My argument remains the same. The problem is spending. We need to cut spending. Cutting taxes is a benefit to the entire economy, which is proven by the jump in tax revenue. The problem is exclusively spending. Cut the spending. [B]Tax cuts do not address cuts in spending however, and I would add that Trump greatly increased the spending when he took away the sequester imposed during the Obama administration as a means to cut spending[/B] Yeah, I fully expected Trump to increase spending. Trump is no conservative, and if left to his own, would borrow and spend without a second thought. However, I have come to the conclusion that some of the sequestration would have been repealed anyway, namely because of the military. When you do mandatory cuts on the military, people end up dying. There is other way about it. Specifically the sequestration resulted in cuts to maintenance, and one thing you can't avoid is maintaining aircraft. Some Marine Companies had gotten so bad, that only 1 in 3 Aircraft were still flight ready. You can't simply cut spending on military stuff in this manor. The results are devastating. That said, I don't see the Democrats doing any better on spending cuts. Contrary to the implication, Obama didn't agree to sequestration by design. He agreed to it by force, namely that of the Republicans refusing to blindly increase the debt ceiling. I would happily bet good money, that if the Republicans had not pushed the debt limit fight, Obama would have continued over spending without questioning it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
The GOP Tax Cut and Rising Wages....or not.
Top
Bottom