The One Big Beautiful Bill

[Postvieww]

I'm not arguing for no tax on investments. As I said earlier, if we leave our house to our children, no-one pays any tax. But if they hold onto the property as an investment and it increases in value then the increase in value is taxed.

I've no problem with that.

Sounds like what you just described is a tax on unrealized gains. How is that a fair tax ? If you sell an investment for profit , sure a tax on profit could be justifiable but a tax on increase value you have not cashed in is ridiculous. Do you get a rebate if the value goes down?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Here's a tip. If you want to persuade people that your point of view is worth the bandwidth then it would be a good idea to put forward your point of view rather than screen shots of random comments by random people that take up the whole page and which I am pretty sure no-one reads.

At least someone read it given that the falsehoods in the screen shot were referred to, but a giant text screen capture is a automatic "scroll past" signal, just like bible verses. He isn't a random nobody, but a right-wing "influencer" (propagandist).

The "post" does remind me of something I didn't think I needed to put in my list of income that should be taxed -- payments from your gig job.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Let's hope the Senate moves quickly for this phenomenal bill everyone on the left will hate and everyone on the right will want.

 

[BCP1928]

Let's hope the Senate moves quickly for this phenomenal bill everyone on the left will hate and everyone on the right will want.

Right. The important thing is that the Left should hate it. Whether it's good for the economy or the country as a whole is beside the point. MAGA!

 

[Always in His Presence]

Right. The important thing is that the Left should hate it. Whether it's good for the economy or the country as a whole is beside the point. MAGA!

Nope - you missed it - perhaps your bias is preventing you from seeing the positive to anything Trump does or says.

This is a good bill - stops a huge tax increase

 

[BPPLEE]

Right. The important thing is that the Left should hate it. Whether it's good for the economy or the country as a whole is beside the point. MAGA!

Both sides are lying about it, I don't believe the Democrats or the Republicans

 

[Say it aint so]

Let's hope the Senate moves quickly for this phenomenal bill everyone on the left will hate and everyone on the right will want.

Better watch what one asks for, one just may get it. This bill will in fact hurt a lot of Trump supporters ( just like his tariffs ) who don't have memberships at Mar A Largo. When "owning the libs" becomes such a fixation that one is willing to hurt themselves, who is being owned?

 

[Say it aint so]

Both sides are lying about it, I don't believe the Democrats or the Republicans

Here, this may help. It's a quick snap shot

 

[BPPLEE]

Here, this may help. It's a quick snap shotView attachment 365396

Yeah, who put that together?
You can just as easily find one that paints a rosy picture

 

[Say it aint so]

Yeah, who put that together?
You can just as easily find one that paints a rosy picture

Data from the Congressional Budge Office. Composed in chart for by the NYT. The point and reason why I provided the chart is to see what the deficit increases are, and where the cuts are, without "rosy picture" commentary.,

 

[BPPLEE]

Data from the Congressional Budge Office. Composed in chart for by the NYT. The point and reason why I provided the chart is to see what the deficit increases are, and where the cuts are, without "rosy picture" commentary.,

Republicans increase the debt with tax cuts and Democrats increase it with spending.
We're in trouble either way

 

[Richard T]

Republicans increase the debt with tax cuts and Democrats increase it with spending.
We're in trouble either way

It is a myth that Republicans don't spend more. Not generally as much and for different things but none the less spending increases. Here is the verdict on Trump's first 100 days. Despite Trump's promised cuts, U.S. spent more than $200 billion more in first 100 days than last year

Here are some of the projections for 2026.
"But these trims (budget cuts) are wrapped in a document that nevertheless sustains a bloated government. Even with the reductions, 2026 discretionary spending would remain essentially unchanged at $1.6 trillion. In some respects, the budget enshrines Biden-era spending.

Then there’s defense. For all the “America First” rhetoric about maintaining a domestic focus, Trump’s budget does nothing to rein in the Pentagon’s fiscal free-for-all aimed at projecting power around the world. Quite the opposite: It proposes a 13 percent increase, pushing base defense spending past $1 trillion, including $892.6 billion in discretionary spending supplemented by $119.3 billion in mandatory spending and an additional $150 billion to be passed through Congress’ reconciliation process." https://www.cato.org/commentary/trumps-new-budget-another-blueprint-big-spending

These projections could be far too rosy too. Interest rates on new and rolled over debt could be higher than expected. Natural disasters, fired employees put back to work under court order, programs not cut by the Senate in the recent Big Beautiful Bill, a slack economy, a pullback in capital gains collections and tax receipts all are very possible. It is very hard to project tariff revenues too, especially when we do not have established rates. So lots of budget wreckers that could make it worse, and possible a few that could make it better. Regardless, Trump spent more in his first term (partly due to covid) than Obama and he will spend more in this term than Biden.

 

[BPPLEE]

It is a myth that Republicans don't spend more. Not generally as much and for different things but none the less spending increases. Here is the verdict on Trump's first 100 days. Despite Trump's promised cuts, U.S. spent more than $200 billion more in first 100 days than last year

Here are some of the projections for 2026.
"But these trims (budget cuts) are wrapped in a document that nevertheless sustains a bloated government. Even with the reductions, 2026 discretionary spending would remain essentially unchanged at $1.6 trillion. In some respects, the budget enshrines Biden-era spending.

Then there’s defense. For all the “America First” rhetoric about maintaining a domestic focus, Trump’s budget does nothing to rein in the Pentagon’s fiscal free-for-all aimed at projecting power around the world. Quite the opposite: It proposes a 13 percent increase, pushing base defense spending past $1 trillion, including $892.6 billion in discretionary spending supplemented by $119.3 billion in mandatory spending and an additional $150 billion to be passed through Congress’ reconciliation process." https://www.cato.org/commentary/trumps-new-budget-another-blueprint-big-spending

These projections could be far too rosy too. Interest rates on new and rolled over debt could be higher than expected. Natural disasters, fired employees put back to work under court order, programs not cut by the Senate in the recent Big Beautiful Bill, a slack economy, a pullback in capital gains collections and tax receipts all are very possible. It is very hard to project tariff revenues too, especially when we do not have established rates. So lots of budget wreckers that could make it worse, and possible a few that could make it better. Regardless, Trump spent more in his first term (partly due to covid) than Obama and he will spend more in this term than Biden.

Neither party consistently spends more—it depends on the metric and context. Republicans tend to increase deficits through tax cuts and defense spending, while Democrats prioritize social programs and stimulus during crises. Congressional control, economic conditions, and policy priorities blur the lines.

 

[Say it aint so]

How did the markets respond to Trump's "big beautiful bill?

Sort like the Trump tariffs.

 

[Richard T]

Neither party consistently spends more—it depends on the metric and context. Republicans tend to increase deficits through tax cuts and defense spending, while Democrats prioritize social programs and stimulus during crises. Congressional control, economic conditions, and policy priorities blur the lines.

Government Spending in Historical Context Defense spending counts and don't forget some programs like Bush and Medicaid part D, or Trump's response with free money and loans for Covid. The chart in real dollars is consistently up. Biden downward movement was the rollback on covid spending looks like the only exception in many decades.

 

[Say it aint so]

Neither party consistently spends more—it depends on the metric and context. Republicans tend to increase deficits through tax cuts and defense spending, while Democrats prioritize social programs and stimulus during crises. Congressional control, economic conditions, and policy priorities blur the lines.

Don't mean to be nick picky, but regardless of party come financial and/or pandemic crisis, all parties prioritize a response.
Ok, I'm done being nick picky.

 

[mark46]

Immediate Tax Relief to Farmers, Ranchers, & Small Businesses in Rural America
• Permanent enhanced Death Tax Relief.
o Prevents the Death Tax from hitting over 2 million family-owned farms who would otherwise see their limitation cut in half. Ensures that family-owned farms and ranches can be passed down to the next generation.
• Permanent Small Business Deduction.
o 98% of farms in the U.S. are pass-throughs. Prevents the Small Business Deduction from ever expiring and increases to 23%.
• Extended 100% Immediate Expensing.
o Ensures farmers can expense today the tools that secure tomorrow’s harvests.
• Permanent Doubled Small Business Expensing.
o Increases section 179 Small Business Expensing threshold to $2.5M. Agricultural industry utilizes one-fifth of all Small Business Expensing deductions across the American economy.
• Immediate Expensing for NEW manufacturing/production structures in America.
o Enhances cost recovery for new agricultural and farm investments in Rural America.
• Renews Opportunity Zone (OZ) program to better target Rural America.
o Provides new OZ incentives to drive investments to rural and underserved areas

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/The-One-Big-Beautiful-Bill-Make-Rural-America-Great-Again.pdf

I have few problems with most of the bill. These are good steps. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE DEFICIT. Interest costs on the debt will strangle the federal government and the safety net if steps are not taken. Higher federal tax rates on the rich is not nearly enough

The issue is the methodology of the cuts and the lack of cuts to the defense half of the discretionary budget.

We need to reduce the debt. Much can indeed come from the reduction of the number of federal workers and work/student requirements for federal programs. Clinton did those things. The states should be more responsible for the cost and decison-making of safety net programs.

The illusion that the states can't afford the costs is just that. Certainly, the rich blue states will be better off with lower federal taxes and higher local and state taxes. If they fail, then they fail. Chicago is a fine example, as is San Francisco. These are state and local problems.

Where Trump fails big time is in his cutting of the healthy and safety infrastructure. We see that this week when we see that the experts on lead in schools have all been fired. The CDC, FDA, OSHA, and the nuclear agencies are indeed federal responsibilities.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Musk Says GOP Megabill ‘Undermines’ DOGE​

Elon Musk, the billionaire tech mogul who had a near-constant presence in the early weeks of President Donald Trump’s second-term administration, has expressed dissatisfaction with Trump’s legislative priority: a massive tax and spending package dubbed the “big, beautiful bill.”

Like some Republican lawmakers, Musk criticized the megabill over how it would significantly raise the national debt. In a clip released Tuesday night of an exclusive interview with CBS that will air in full on Sunday, Musk said he was “disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit"

Nonpartisan groups have estimated that the bill would add trillions of dollars to the national debt. The bill faced opposition from fiscal conservatives but ultimately passed in the Houselast week and is now before the Senate, where Republicans also hold a slim majority.

 

[durangodawood]

....Where Trump fails big time is in his cutting of the healthy and safety infrastructure. We see that this week when we see that the experts on lead in schools have all been fired. The CDC, FDA, OSHA, and the nuclear agencies are indeed federal responsibilities.

Maybe lead exposure is beneficial as it leads children to vote R as adults?

 

[iluvatar5150]

We need to reduce the debt. Much can indeed come from the reduction of the number of federal workers and work/student requirements for federal programs.

Work requirements have been tried in the past and they largely don't do what they purport to do. The savings they produce come mostly from kicking off people who are eligible, but who, for one reason or another, fail to jump through the bureaucratic hurdles required to demonstrate their eligibility. That's not increasing efficiency or cleaning up abuse; that's just denying help to people who need it.

Musk Says GOP Megabill ‘Undermines’ DOGE​

Hmm... maybe I can get on board...