Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO

Post by Borrow & Spend tRUMP
Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO
"We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations
and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy," said the head of
Groundwork Collaborative. "This tax law should expire."
Jessica Corbett
May 08, 2024
6
As former U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans
campaign on extending their 2017 tax cuts if elected in November, a
government analysis revealed Wednesday that doing so would add $4.6
trillion to the national deficit.
When Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during his first term, the
initial estimated cost was $1.9 trillion. Last year, the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) projected that extending policies set to expire next
year would cost $3.5 trillion through 2033.
The new CBO report—sought by U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon
Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)
—says continuing the income, business, and estate tax cuts will now cost
$4.6 trillion through 2034.
"The Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to
corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and
make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families
with the cost of living in America."
Responding in a statement Wednesday, the senators cited an Institute on
Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimate that "extending the Trump tax
cuts would create a $112.6 billion windfall for the top 5% of income
earners in the first year alone."
They also slammed their GOP colleagues, who Whitehouse said "are awfully
eager to shield their megadonors from paying taxes."
He recalled that just last year, "Republicans held our entire economy
hostage," refusing to raise the debt ceiling and risking the first-ever
U.S. default, because they didn't want the Internal Revenue Service to get
more funding to "go after wealthy tax cheats."
"Remember the Trump tax scam cutting taxes for billionaires and big
corporations," Whitehouse continued. "Now they're set on extending those
tax cuts, even though it would blow up the deficit. The Trump tax cuts were
a gift to the ultrarich and a rotten deal for American families and small
businesses. With their impending expiration, we have a chance to undo the
damage, fix our corrupted tax code, and have big corporations and the
ultrawealthy begin to pay their fair share."
Wyden similarly took aim at the GOP, warning that "the Republican tax plan
is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the wealthy, run
the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it impossible to save Medicare
and Social Security or help families with the cost of living in America."
"Republicans have planned all along on making Trump's tax handouts to the
rich permanent, but they hid the true cost with timing gimmicks and a 2025
deadline that threatens the middle class with an automatic tax hike if they
don't get what they want," he argued. "In short, they're focused on helping
the rich get richer, and everybody else can go pound sand. Democrats are
going to stand by our commitment to protect the middle class while ensuring
that corporations and the wealthy pay a fair share."
A new CBO report estimates that extending the Trump tax cuts for the
next 10 years would add $4.6 trillion to the deficit.\n\nRemember this the
next time Republicans propose cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and
Medicaid. \n\nThe "party of fiscal responsibility" is full of it.
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens also responded
critically to the CBO report, saying Wednesday that "extending Trump's tax
law and effectively subsidizing corporate profiteering and billionaire
wealth is a nonstarter."
"This tax law, on top of decades of failed trickle-down cuts, has come at
the expense of workers and families," Owens stressed. "We can't afford 10
more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations and fail to invest
in the people who drive our economy. This tax law should expire."
While some of the tax cuts in the 2017 law are temporary—unless they get
extended—the legislation permanently slashed the statutory corporate tax
rate from 35% to 21%. As Common Dreamsreported last week, a new ITEP
analysis shows that tax rates paid by big and consistently profitable
corporations dropped from 22% to 12.8% after the law's enactment.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-tax-cuts

This one again?

Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax cuts), the
IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year (4.6B/year * 10 years =
4.6T).

Now, let's look at what the IRS says about the debt over those 10 years.
According to CBO stats the total projected debt accumulated over the 10
years of the tax cuts (2018 - 2027) is $17.2 trillion
(https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58946).

Next, let's look at the best case. If there were no tax cuts, and all
else equal, the debt over those 10 years is $12.6 trillion ($17.2T -
$4.6T = $12.6T).

What's the point? This - the $4.6 billion each year that would have been
collected by the IRS under your unicorn and rainbows scenario would have
been spent anyway. There would be no, none, zero, zilch, nada, change to
the deficit/debt. If you think otherwise you're on crack. Don't try to
convince anyone otherwise. It would have been spent.

spaminator

2024-05-10 21:02:36 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax cuts), the
IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year (4.6B/year * 10 years =
4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

<snip delusional fiction>

Ford Prefect

2024-05-10 21:16:20 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

spaminator

2024-05-10 21:27:37 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

You're broke.

Do that arithmetic again. Show your work.

Scout

2024-05-11 12:05:43 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B

On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant given the
sort of deficits the government is, has, and will continue to produce.

We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.

They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have to live
within their means like everyone else.

Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.

Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing state and
national debts (and would not apply to new debt)

The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new debt and
paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.

The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold to the
public to finance large government projects.

The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.

In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.

Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Yak

2024-05-11 17:26:44 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant given
the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have to live
within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing state
and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new debt
and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold to the
public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the total
deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and extending them
through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump
tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am I supposed to feel better
about this? Especially considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the
govt collected it they would spend it anyway.

Scout

2024-05-13 11:49:28 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant given the
sort of deficits the government is, has, and will continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have to live
within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing state
and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new debt and
paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold to the
public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the total
deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and extending them
through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump tax
cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am I supposed to feel better about
this? Especially considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If officials
exceed those limits there are consequences.

Charlie Glock

2024-05-13 21:17:35 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant given the
sort of deficits the government is, has, and will continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have to live
within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing state
and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new debt and
paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold to the
public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the total
deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and extending them
through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump tax
cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am I supposed to feel better about
this? Especially considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If officials
exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My issue is more of a what are they
spending my tax dollars on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to
study how chickens mate?

As a nation we need to fund the military so it remains strong.
Patrol the borders and the illegal crosser types or those with scripted asylum claims should be
sent back immediately and instructed in the process to apply legally.
Our infrastructure, highways, airports, internet access, electrical grid and just about everything
is in dire need of repair. I flew into JFK in New York City a couple of weeks ago, not a Boeing
plane thank goodness, and the once diamond of an airport looks like something one would see landing
in Haiti. It is a disgusting shame. The JetBlue terminal is actually quite nice and modern but the
rest of it is like a dive bar with sticky floors.
Trump was unable to pass the infrastructure bill as Obama was as well. Joe Biden did manage to pass
a bill, to his credit. I have not looked into exactly what is in the bill though. Hopefully it's
not packed with pork.
The country needs to be fiscally responsible or else we are going to collapse under all of this
debt.

--
Charlie Glock
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms"
- Thomas Jefferson 1776

Skeeter

2024-05-13 21:48:28 UTC

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant given the
sort of deficits the government is, has, and will continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have to live
within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing state
and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new debt and
paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold to the
public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the total
deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and extending them
through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump tax
cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am I supposed to feel better about
this? Especially considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If officials
exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My issue is more of a what are they
spending my tax dollars on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to
study how chickens mate?
As a nation we need to fund the military so it remains strong.
Patrol the borders and the illegal crosser types or those with scripted asylum claims should be
sent back immediately and instructed in the process to apply legally.
Our infrastructure, highways, airports, internet access, electrical grid and just about everything
is in dire need of repair. I flew into JFK in New York City a couple of weeks ago, not a Boeing
plane thank goodness, and the once diamond of an airport looks like something one would see landing
in Haiti. It is a disgusting shame. The JetBlue terminal is actually quite nice and modern but the
rest of it is like a dive bar with sticky floors.
Trump was unable to pass the infrastructure bill as Obama was as well. Joe Biden did manage to pass
a bill, to his credit. I have not looked into exactly what is in the bill though. Hopefully it's
not packed with pork.

It was.

Post by Charlie Glock
The country needs to be fiscally responsible or else we are going to collapse under all of this
debt.

Baxter

2024-05-13 22:52:46 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

Sam

2024-05-13 23:50:27 UTC

On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich. They would prefer that we
burn the place down and then appoint Trump as dictator.

Democracy let's the morons destroy a nation.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-14 00:09:52 UTC

On Mon, 13 May 2024 16:50:27 -0700

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich. They would prefer that we
burn the place down and then appoint Xiden as dictator.
Democracy let's the libtards destroy a nation.

fify!

Baxter

2024-05-14 02:07:08 UTC

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Mon, 13 May 2024 16:50:27 -0700

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich. They would prefer that we
burn the place down and then appoint Xiden as dictator.
Democracy let's the libtards destroy a nation.

fify!

The worm ate your brain and then shit itself to death.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-14 17:33:31 UTC

On Tue, 14 May 2024 02:07:08 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Mon, 13 May 2024 16:50:27 -0700

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We can do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich. They would prefer
that we burn the place down and then appoint Xiden as dictator.
Democracy let's the libtards destroy a nation.

fify!

The worm ate your brain

Loading Image...

Skeeter

2024-05-14 02:49:31 UTC

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich. They would prefer that we
burn the place down and then appoint Trump as dictator.
Democracy let's the morons destroy a nation.

Oh the irony.

Scout

2024-05-14 11:12:25 UTC

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

No, the dweebs are against taxing the rich.

You do realize that by the standards of the 50s and 60s virtually everyone
is uber rich.. even those on welfare.

So when you talk of the rich.. you're talking about virtually everyone.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-14 00:08:26 UTC

On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

That's called a taking, you filthy income thief!

Baxter

2024-05-14 02:05:20 UTC

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

That's called a taking, you filthy income thief!

Republicans then were fine with high taxes.

Scout

2024-05-14 11:26:33 UTC

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

That's called a taking, you filthy income thief!

Republicans then were fine with high taxes.

And now Democrats are fine with high taxes.....

You can't say it like it's a bad thing, when you are demanding it...

So tell me.. Given an average income of $59,000 how would you feel about
paying an average federal income tax rate of around 63%.. which means now
you have only $21,830 left or $1,819 per month after federal income tax and
that's not even considering state income taxes, sales tax, road tax,
property tax, fuel tax, luxury tax, fees, tolls, etc, etc, etc...

So are you really saying you want to raise the federal taxes of Americans by
an average of 286%?

Because that's what you are asking for.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-14 17:30:38 UTC

On Tue, 14 May 2024 02:05:20 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Sam
On Mon, 13 May 2024 22:52:46 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We
can do it again..

That's called a taking, you filthy income thief!

Republicans then...

Are DEAD now.

Next excuse!

Scout

2024-05-14 11:10:46 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

And then Baxter wonders why his taxes go up. By 50s and 60s standards
virtually everyone is "the rich".

in 2021 the top income tax rate was 37%... in 1955 paying 38% would require
you only make $10,000

But let's look at 1969 the LAST year of the 50s and 60s...

in 1969 to pay 36% in income tax would put your income at $12,000 or more.

Meanwhile in 2021 the average income was just over $59,000

Yep.. we are ALL rich according to the standards of the 50s and 60s and
Baxter just demanded our taxes be increased due to the fiscal
irresponsibility of the government.

Oh, and in 1969 you would be paying 53% in income tax with an income of
$59,000

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/

Yep, that's what Baxter demands for America.... massive increases in
taxation for EVERYONE!!!!

Yak

2024-05-14 12:49:43 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Baxter

2024-05-14 15:02:18 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Yak

2024-05-14 15:12:28 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 16:02:49 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase
any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

LOL

Mr. B1ack

2024-05-14 16:14:34 UTC

On 5/14/2024 8:12 AM, Gak, fucked up the ass by priests hundreds of times — and

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Yeah, poor people with no income. People between the median and 75th percentile
pay a higher percentage of their income than do rich people. The tax code
unfairly favors the rich.

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-14 18:14:38 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Skeeter

2024-05-14 20:16:46 UTC

In article <***@185.151.15.160>, ***@aol.com
says...

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My
issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars on? Are
these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to

study

Post by Charlie Glock
how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

Baxter

2024-05-14 21:04:41 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected
officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Yak

2024-05-14 21:08:08 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected
officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

pothead

2024-05-14 23:52:44 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected
officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

Yep.
The rich use the loopholes to their advantage. I am against that but it's the current system.
Somebody making 40k a year does not have that ability.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 02:23:46 UTC

Post by Mitchell Holman
Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks
your pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

Yep.
The rich use the loopholes to their advantage. I am against that but
it's the current system. Somebody making 40k a year does not have that
ability.

You pay taxes so Trump doesn't have to.

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:32:18 UTC

Post by Mitchell Holman
Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks
your pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

Yep.
The rich use the loopholes to their advantage. I am against that but
it's the current system. Somebody making 40k a year does not have that
ability.

You pay taxes so Trump doesn't have to.

Loading Image...

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 13:26:33 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur
under tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6
billion per year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd
grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any
bonds sold to the public to finance large government
projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they
don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts,
and extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion.
Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still
have $26.4 trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars
set aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out
spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks
your pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

Yep.
The rich use the loopholes to their advantage. I am against that but
it's the current system. Somebody making 40k a year does not have that
ability.

The rich MAKE the loopholes, the
rich use the loopholes, and you really
think they "apply across the board"?

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 02:22:45 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected
officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

According to the tax returns that
Trump promised to release but didn't?

All the excuses Trump has given for why he
wont release his tax returns
September 15, 2016

Trump: "Im being audited so I cant."

Trump: "Theres nothing to learn from them."

Trump: "Mitt Romney looked like a fool when
he delayed and delayed and delayed and didnt
file until a month and a half before the
election and it cost him big league."

Trump: His tax rate is "none of your business."

Paul Manafort, former campaign chairman: American
people "wouldnt understand them.

Manafort: The only people who want them "are the
people who want to defeat him."

Trump: "I dont think anybody cares."

Mike Pence, vice president who released his tax
returns: Theyre a "distraction."

Trump Jr.: "Theres a lot in a 12,000-page tax return
that wouldnt make sense to open up."

Trump: "You will learn more about Donald Trump" by
looking at his financial disclosure forms than by
looking at tax returns.

Rudy Giuliani, Trump surrogate: "The way all of you
are treating this is a very good indication of why
someone might not want to release their tax returns."

Trump: "The only ones that care about my tax returns
are the reporters."

Conway: "People didnt care."

http://tinyurl.com/y9lvk7vg

Yak

2024-05-15 12:09:34 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks

your

Post by Baxter
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

According to the tax returns that
Trump promised to release but didn't?

According to the six years of returns that the IRS sent to the house
ways and means committee.

Post by Mitchell Holman
All the excuses Trump has given for why he
won’t release his tax returns
September 15, 2016
Trump: "I’m being audited … so I can’t."
Trump: "There’s nothing to learn from them."
Trump: "Mitt Romney looked like a fool when
he delayed and delayed and delayed and … didn’t
file until a month and a half before the
election and it cost him big league."
Trump: His tax rate is "none of your business."
Paul Manafort, former campaign chairman: American
people "wouldn’t understand them.
Manafort: The only people who want them "are the
people who want to defeat him."
Trump: "I don’t think anybody cares."
Mike Pence, vice president who released his tax
returns: They’re a "distraction."
Trump Jr.: "There’s a lot in a 12,000-page tax return
that wouldn’t make sense to open up."
Trump: "You will learn more about Donald Trump" by
looking at his financial disclosure forms than by
looking at tax returns.
Rudy Giuliani, Trump surrogate: "The way all of you
are treating this is a very good indication of why
someone might not want to release their tax returns."
Trump: "The only ones that care about my tax returns
are the reporters."
Conway: "People didn’t care."
http://tinyurl.com/y9lvk7vg

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:14:14 UTC

Post by Baxter
That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

Nope, he used the very tax code that Biden, over his 2000+ years in
govt, has created.

2000+ years?! Nope. Biden didn't create those tax loopholes.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 21:20:12 UTC

In article <v20jl9$crt1$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

They found nothing wrong with his taxes. He has never picked my pocket.
Keep trying and maybe you can come up with something.

pothead

2024-05-14 23:53:52 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks your
pocket and cheats on taxes.

They found nothing wrong with his taxes. He has never picked my pocket.
Keep trying and maybe you can come up with something.

Did Biden pay taxes on the millions of bribes he received from foreign countries?

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 02:25:15 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Mitchell Holman
Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks
your pocket and cheats on taxes.

They found nothing wrong with his taxes. He has never picked my
pocket. Keep trying and maybe you can come up with something.

Did Biden pay taxes on the millions of bribes he received from foreign countries?

Biden has been releasing his tax
returns to the public for decades.

Can Trump say the same?

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 13:27:10 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur
under tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6
billion per year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd
grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any
bonds sold to the public to finance large government
projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they
don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other
sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts,
and extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion.
Subtract the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still
have $26.4 trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to
stop. My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax
dollars on? Are these bills productive or are millions of
dollars set aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out
spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

That's a real question. tRump claims to be a billionaire yet picks
your pocket and cheats on taxes.

They found nothing wrong with his taxes. He has never picked my
pocket. Keep trying and maybe you can come up with something.

Did Biden pay taxes on the millions of bribes he received from foreign countries?

What bribes?

pothead

2024-05-14 21:17:40 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for
you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My
issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars on? Are
these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to

study

Post by Charlie Glock
how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

I live in a high tax state, NYS, and Trump's tax cuts limited SALT which at the time hurt many
NY'ers.
However in states where the budget is under control people did better under Trump's taxes and they
are the majority by far and I can't blame them. NYS, CA and other locals are out of control
regarding spending and taxes while there are far more states that have this under control.

As it turned out, I did about the same under Trump's tax plan but I can see why people prefer it.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 22:59:28 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for
you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get
paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of
income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My
issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars on? Are
these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to

study

Post by Charlie Glock
how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

I live in a high tax state, NYS, and Trump's tax cuts limited SALT which at the time hurt many
NY'ers.
However in states where the budget is under control people did better under Trump's taxes and they
are the majority by far and I can't blame them. NYS, CA and other locals are out of control
regarding spending and taxes while there are far more states that have this under control.
As it turned out, I did about the same under Trump's tax plan but I can see why people prefer it.

I am in Colorado. A mostly blue state yet we were doing better when
Trump was in office.

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 02:15:01 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected
officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

Trump went for years without
paying any taxes. Did you ever do
that?

Skeeter

2024-05-15 02:32:06 UTC

In article <***@185.151.15.190>, ***@aol.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

Trump went for years without
paying any taxes. Did you ever do
that?

What does that have to do with anything? Trump pays his and I pay mine.
Do you pay yours?

Mitchell Holman

2024-05-15 13:28:19 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

On 2024-05-13, Scout

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't
because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under
tax cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per
year (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade
for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to
spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Post by Scout
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds
sold to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't
get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources
of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract
the $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4
trillion.

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially
considering, as Ford correctly noted, even if the govt
collected it they would spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop.
My issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars
on? Are these bills productive or are millions of dollars set
aside to

study

how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out

spending.

Post by Baxter
We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

Are you proud of paying more in taxes
than billionaire Trump?

Really? You are scraping bottom.

Trump went for years without
paying any taxes. Did you ever do
that?

What does that have to do with anything?

You pay taxes so Trump doesn't have to.

Baxter

2024-05-14 19:41:49 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

So?

When Income tax was first instituded ONLY the rich paid that tax. The
poor don't have money to pay taxes, but the rich do.

Yak

2024-05-14 19:51:13 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because
it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

have

Post by Scout
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend
$3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the

existing

Post by Scout
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any

new

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO

the

Post by Yak
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP.

Post by Scout
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My
issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars on? Are
these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to

study

Post by Charlie Glock
how chickens mate?

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We

can

Post by Baxter
do it again..

The rich are already taxed.

Many of the rich don't pay any taxes.

Many of the non-rich don't either.

So?
When Income tax was first instituded ONLY the rich paid that tax. The
poor don't have money to pay taxes, but the rich do.

Good, you admit the rich are paying the taxes. Maybe instead of reviling
them you should be revering them for not only carrying their load, but
also yours.

Baxter

2024-05-14 20:57:03 UTC

Post by Baxter
When Income tax was first instituded ONLY the rich paid that tax. The
poor don't have money to pay taxes, but the rich do.

Good, you admit the rich are paying the taxes.

NO. In the PAST they paid taxes, now many pay none at all, and most don't
pay what they owe.

Post by Yak
Maybe instead of reviling
them you should be revering them for not only carrying their load, but
also yours.

So you're a toady sucking rich fuck's ass.

Yak

2024-05-14 21:09:41 UTC

Post by Baxter
When Income tax was first instituded ONLY the rich paid that tax. The
poor don't have money to pay taxes, but the rich do.

Good, you admit the rich are paying the taxes.

NO. In the PAST they paid taxes, now many pay none at all, and most don't
pay what they owe.

They pay exactly what they owe. Stop blaming the taxpayer for using the
code that your lords and masters created.

Post by Yak
Maybe instead of reviling
them you should be revering them for not only carrying their load, but
also yours.

So you're a toady sucking rich fuck's ass.

No, I'm thanking them for carrying the load that welchers like you
refuse to contribute to, all the while whining about the people that
carry your burden for you.

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:17:00 UTC

Post by Baxter
So you're a toady sucking rich fuck's ass.

No, I'm thanking them for carrying the load that welchers like you
refuse to contribute to, all the while whining about the people that
carry your burden for you.

Yeah, you're sucking rich ass. - those uber rich are not carrying
anyone's burden - they're not even paying the taxes they owe. Meanwhile
they steal from your pocket - they're getting the intrest money you're
paying on the National Debt.

Yak

2024-05-15 12:13:28 UTC

Post by Baxter
So you're a toady sucking rich fuck's ass.

No, I'm thanking them for carrying the load that welchers like you
refuse to contribute to, all the while whining about the people that
carry your burden for you.

The top 1% paid 46% of the bill.
The top 5% paid 66% of the bill.

That is exactly carrying the burden.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-14 17:43:28 UTC

On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:02:18 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
the rich don't pay any taxes.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2023-update/

The top 1 percent’s income share rose from 20.1 percent in 2019 to 22.2 percent in 2020 and its share of federal income taxes paid rose from 38.8 percent to 42.3 percent.
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal
individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining
2.3 percent.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $548,336 and above) paid the
highest average income tax rate of 25.99 percent—more than eight times
the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.

In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes
paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of
taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90 percent
paid $450 billion.

Radio Gnome

2024-05-14 17:59:46 UTC

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:02:18 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
the rich don't pay any taxes.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2023-update/
The top 1 percent’s income share rose from 20.1 percent in 2019 to 22.2 percent in 2020 and its share of federal income taxes paid rose from 38.8 percent to 42.3 percent.
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal
individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining
2.3 percent.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $548,336 and above) paid the
highest average income tax rate of 25.99 percent—more than eight times
the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.
In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes
paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of
taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90 percent
paid $450 billion.

This is the part where they re-frame the narrative from income to wealth.

Baxter

2024-05-14 19:47:30 UTC

Post by Radio Gnome

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:02:18 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
the rich don't pay any taxes.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-inco
me-tax-data-2023-update/
The top 1 percentâs income share rose from 20.1 percent in 2019 to
22.2 percent in 2020 and its share of federal income taxes paid rose
from 38.8 percent to 42.3 percent. The top 50 percent of all
taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal individual income taxes,
while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.3 percent.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $548,336 and above) paid the
highest average income tax rate of 25.99 percentâmore than eight
times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.
In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income
taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of
taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90
percent paid $450 billion.

This is the part where they re-frame the narrative from income to wealth.

And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

Yak

2024-05-14 19:52:23 UTC

Post by Radio Gnome

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:02:18 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
the rich don't pay any taxes.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-inco
me-tax-data-2023-update/
The top 1 percent’s income share rose from 20.1 percent in 2019 to
22.2 percent in 2020 and its share of federal income taxes paid rose
from 38.8 percent to 42.3 percent. The top 50 percent of all
taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal individual income taxes,
while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.3 percent.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $548,336 and above) paid the
highest average income tax rate of 25.99 percent—more than eight
times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.
In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income
taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of
taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90
percent paid $450 billion.

This is the part where they re-frame the narrative from income to wealth.

And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden. Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

Baxter

2024-05-14 20:59:28 UTC

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 21:07:16 UTC

In article <v20jbg$crt1$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Why? I bet you support us paying off student loans too.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

How did you come to that? You wont say. Your name calling is typical of
a butthurt liberal.

pothead

2024-05-14 23:50:44 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Why? I bet you support us paying off student loans too.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

How did you come to that? You wont say. Your name calling is typical of
a butthurt liberal.

Libbys love free swag.
That's exactly why Biden is doing what he does.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:12:22 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Why? I bet you support us paying off student loans too.

Those students aren't rich and they'll be paying on those loans until
they die - forget retirement.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your
fair share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

How did you come to that? You wont say. Your name calling is typical
of a butthurt liberal.

You're a lying shill/

Yak

2024-05-14 21:10:50 UTC

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Nope. You want the benefits of govt you gotta have some skin in the game.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

They employ you. No good deed goes unpunished does it, welcher?

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:17:48 UTC

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Nope. You want the benefits of govt you gotta have some skin in the game.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your
fair share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

They employ you. No good deed goes unpunished does it, welcher?

They pay substandard wages unless you're in a Union.

Baxter

2024-05-15 03:18:55 UTC

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Nope. You want the benefits of govt you gotta have some skin in the game.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your
fair share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

They employ you. No good deed goes unpunished does it, welcher?

They pay substandard wages unless you're in a Union.

And they make 10 times (or more) from your labor than they pay you.

Blue Lives Matter

2024-05-15 09:40:45 UTC

On Tue, 14 May 2024 20:59:28 -0000 (UTC), Baxter

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

And theys till foot the overwhelming majority of the burden.

Most? The rich should be paying ALL of it.

Post by Yak
Maybe they
need better accountants to get people like you to start paying your fair
share for a change.

They own you. Go lick the shit of their asshole, toad.

Why do leftists think they deserve free stuff? It's because they have
the intellectual capability of a six year old, and a six year old gets
everything free.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 20:17:56 UTC

In article <v20f4i$bp8t$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Radio Gnome

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:02:18 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
the rich don't pay any taxes.

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-latest-federal-inco
me-tax-data-2023-update/
The top 1 percentâ€?s income share rose from 20.1 percent in 2019 to
22.2 percent in 2020 and its share of federal income taxes paid rose
from 38.8 percent to 42.3 percent. The top 50 percent of all
taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal individual income taxes,
while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.3 percent.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI of $548,336 and above) paid the
highest average income tax rate of 25.99 percentâ€?more than eight
times the rate faced by the bottom half of taxpayers.
In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income
taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of
taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90
percent paid $450 billion.

This is the part where they re-frame the narrative from income to wealth.

And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

It's called loopholes and everyone uses them.

Baxter

2024-05-14 21:05:49 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

It's called loopholes and everyone uses them.

No, "everybody" do not use them - the rich bought the lawmakers to craft
those loopholes just for them/the rich.

Skeeter

2024-05-14 21:21:12 UTC

In article <v20jnc$crt1$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
And the rich do creative accounting to pretend they have no income.

It's called loopholes and everyone uses them.

No, "everybody" do not use them - the rich bought the lawmakers to craft
those loopholes just for them/the rich.

and they all use them. What's your point?

You're poor huh?

Max Boot

2024-05-14 14:21:39 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it doesn't
account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year
(4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T).

ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for you.

What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school?

4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B
On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant
given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will
continue to produce.
We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase any taxes.
They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have
to live within their means like everyone else.
Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend $3.81 Trillion.
Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing
state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt)
The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new
debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt.
The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold
to the public to finance large government projects.
The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials.
In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get paid.
Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of income.

Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the
total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and
extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the
$4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am
I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as
Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would
spend it anyway.

As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If
officials exceed those limits there are consequences.

In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending. We can
do it again.

Nobody paid those 90% marginal rates.

Isle B Noxious

2024-05-10 21:25:20 UTC

Post by Borrow & Spend tRUMP
Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO
"We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and
corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy,"
said the head of Groundwork Collaborative. "This tax law should
expire." Jessica Corbett
May 08, 2024
6
As former U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans
campaign on extending their 2017 tax cuts if elected in November, a
government analysis revealed Wednesday that doing so would add $4.6
trillion to the national deficit.
When Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during his first term,
the initial estimated cost was $1.9 trillion. Last year, the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that extending policies
set to expire next year would cost $3.5 trillion through 2033.
The new CBO reportâsought by U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chair
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron
Wyden (D-Ore.) âsays continuing the income, business, and estate
tax cuts will now cost $4.6 trillion through 2034.
"The Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to
corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere,
and make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help
families with the cost of living in America."
Responding in a statement Wednesday, the senators cited an Institute
on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimate that "extending the
Trump tax cuts would create a $112.6 billion windfall for the top 5%
of income earners in the first year alone."
They also slammed their GOP colleagues, who Whitehouse said "are
awfully eager to shield their megadonors from paying taxes."
He recalled that just last year, "Republicans held our entire economy
hostage," refusing to raise the debt ceiling and risking the
first-ever U.S. default, because they didn't want the Internal
Revenue Service to get more funding to "go after wealthy tax cheats."
"Remember the Trump tax scam cutting taxes for billionaires and big
corporations," Whitehouse continued. "Now they're set on extending
those tax cuts, even though it would blow up the deficit. The Trump
tax cuts were a gift to the ultrarich and a rotten deal for American
families and small businesses. With their impending expiration, we
have a chance to undo the damage, fix our corrupted tax code, and
have big corporations and the ultrawealthy begin to pay their fair
share."
Wyden similarly took aim at the GOP, warning that "the Republican tax
plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the
wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it
impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families with
the cost of living in America."
"Republicans have planned all along on making Trump's tax handouts to
the rich permanent, but they hid the true cost with timing gimmicks
and a 2025 deadline that threatens the middle class with an automatic
tax hike if they don't get what they want," he argued. "In short,
they're focused on helping the rich get richer, and everybody else
can go pound sand. Democrats are going to stand by our commitment to
protect the middle class while ensuring that corporations and the
wealthy pay a fair share."
A new CBO report estimates that extending the Trump tax cuts for the
next 10 years would add $4.6 trillion to the deficit.\n\nRemember
this the next time Republicans propose cuts to Social Security,
Medicare, and Medicaid. \n\nThe "party of fiscal responsibility" is
full of it.
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens also
responded critically to the CBO report, saying Wednesday that
"extending Trump's tax law and effectively subsidizing corporate
profiteering and billionaire wealth is a nonstarter."
"This tax law, on top of decades of failed trickle-down cuts, has
come at the expense of workers and families," Owens stressed. "We
can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and
corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy.
This tax law should expire."
While some of the tax cuts in the 2017 law are temporaryâunless
they get extendedâthe legislation permanently slashed the statutory
corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. As Common Dreamsreported last
week, a new ITEP analysis shows that tax rates paid by big and
consistently profitable corporations dropped from 22% to 12.8% after
the law's enactment.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-tax-cuts

This one again?
Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because it
doesn't account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax
cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year (4.6B/year *
10 years = 4.6T).
Now, let's look at what the IRS says about the debt over those 10
years. According to CBO stats the total projected debt accumulated
over the 10 years of the tax cuts (2018 - 2027) is $17.2 trillion
(https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58946).
Next, let's look at the best case. If there were no tax cuts, and all
else equal, the debt over those 10 years is $12.6 trillion ($17.2T -
$4.6T = $12.6T).
What's the point? This - the $4.6 billion each year that would have
been collected by the IRS under your unicorn and rainbows scenario
would have been spent anyway. There would be no, none, zero, zilch,
nada, change to the deficit/debt. If you think otherwise you're on
crack. Don't try to convince anyone otherwise. It would have been
spent.

Well said. The US has a common sense spending problem. Most budgetary
expenditures are no longer targeted to maintain the infrastructure and
promote business opportunities. Instead they are used to reward the party
faithful and pay off criminal governments.

Frank Costello

2024-05-11 02:02:38 UTC

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio

Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the economy
would be declining permanently.

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-
for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

pothead

2024-05-11 02:14:52 UTC

Post by Frank Costello
Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the economy
would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-
for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Well I live in a high, out of control tax state, NY.
So typically my SALT deduction is quite high and of course the Trump tax cuts capped that so I
thought I was screwed.

As it turned out I actually did better with the increased SD and other incentives so I am happy.
And that is true of most people, especially those who live in states that don't have budgets out of
control like NYS.

Is it perfect?
No.
But for the average bloke it's a good thing.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

Dave Wainwright

2024-05-11 20:34:20 UTC

Report Mar 27, 2023 Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the
Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-
for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Well I live in a high, out of control tax state, NY. So typically my
SALT deduction is quite high and of course the Trump tax cuts capped
that so I thought I was screwed.
As it turned out I actually did better with the increased SD and
other incentives so I am happy. And that is true of most people,
especially those who live in states that don't have budgets out of
control like NYS.
Is it perfect? No. But for the average bloke it's a good thing.

The problem is out of control Democrat spending that produces little to
no benefit to the American public.

Fred Barchetta

2024-05-11 11:47:52 UTC

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.

Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal government’s
poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that are decades in the
making.

The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.

Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget deficit,
*and one year’s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than the entire
10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*

The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.

Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Baxter

2024-05-11 14:53:09 UTC

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâs poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâs projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Skeeter

2024-05-11 16:46:49 UTC

In article <v1o0ol$234sp$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ€?s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ€?s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

Michael A Terrell

2024-05-11 17:30:41 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ€?s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ€?s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree?

No — because that's what it is.

It's actually a shame, because it didn't used to be. Heritage once was a
respectably conservative outfit. Liberals may not have agreed with their policy
positions, but Heritage analysts and opinion writers made reasonable and
defensible cases for them. They were never strident. Something changed a few
years ago, and they turned much harder right. It's worth noting that Heritage is
the leading group planning Trump's fascist administration if he wins:

What would a second Trump term look like? His bluster on the stump — “I am
your retribution”—contrasts with a first term in office where his menace was
mitigated by his sloth, ignorance and incompetence. But don’t count on that
if he wins in the fall.

This time, the right is intent on turning Trumpism into a governing agenda.
The Heritage Foundation, the right’s premier policy institute, has launched a
multimillion-dollar Project 2025 to recruit, train and plant MAGA operatives
throughout the government, and arm them with clear marching orders.

Project 2025 includes four elements: The 900-plus-page Mandate for
Leadership: The Conservative Promise details the right’s agenda for each
major department and agency in the federal government; the Playbook, a still
secret compilation of executive orders and initiatives for the first 180 days
of the administration; a right-wing “LinkedIn” designed to recruit and vet
thousands of MAGA movement operatives to staff the government; and a
Presidential Administration Academy to train them on how to operate.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/will-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-turn-trumpism-into-a-governing-agenda/

Trump has already said he's going to be a dictator. Forget that stinking "day
one" bullshit — he means *starting on* day one and continuing for the entire term.

He's not going to win. We're going to stop him. YTIW

Skeeter

2024-05-11 17:40:58 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ€?s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ€?s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree?

No ? because that's what it is.
It's actually a shame, because it didn't used to be. Heritage once was a
respectably conservative outfit. Liberals may not have agreed with their policy
positions, but Heritage analysts and opinion writers made reasonable and
defensible cases for them. They were never strident. Something changed a few
years ago, and they turned much harder right. It's worth noting that Heritage is
What would a second Trump term look like? His bluster on the stump ? ?I am
your retribution??contrasts with a first term in office where his menace was
mitigated by his sloth, ignorance and incompetence. But don?t count on that
if he wins in the fall.
This time, the right is intent on turning Trumpism into a governing agenda.
The Heritage Foundation, the right?s premier policy institute, has launched a
multimillion-dollar Project 2025 to recruit, train and plant MAGA operatives
throughout the government, and arm them with clear marching orders.
Project 2025 includes four elements: The 900-plus-page Mandate for
Leadership: The Conservative Promise details the right?s agenda for each
major department and agency in the federal government; the Playbook, a still
secret compilation of executive orders and initiatives for the first 180 days
of the administration; a right-wing ?LinkedIn? designed to recruit and vet
thousands of MAGA movement operatives to staff the government; and a
Presidential Administration Academy to train them on how to operate.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/will-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-turn-trumpism-into-a-governing-agenda/
Trump has already said he's going to be a dictator. Forget that stinking "day
one" bullshit ? he means *starting on* day one and continuing for the entire term.

You don't know what he meant. "go peacefully".

He's not going to win. We're going to stop him. YTIW

"you' wont be doing anything.

Michael A Terrell

2024-05-11 18:55:40 UTC

On 5/11/2024 10:40 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child

Post by Skeeter
says...

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ€?s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ€?s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree?

You don't know what he meant.

We all know what he meant. He meant he intends to rule as a dictator. That's
what he meant and means.

He's not going to win. We're going to stop him. YTIW

"you' wont be doing anything.

Wrong, you stupid shit-4-braincell.

Dave Wainwright

2024-05-11 20:39:25 UTC

Post by Michael A Terrell

Post by Skeeter
says...

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ€?s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ€?s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree?

No — because that's what it is.

Right is right.

Post by Michael A Terrell
It's actually a shame, because it didn't used to be. Heritage once was a
respectably conservative outfit. Liberals may not have agreed with their
policy positions, but Heritage analysts and opinion writers made
reasonable and defensible cases for them. They were never strident.
Something changed a few years ago, and they turned much harder right.
It's worth noting that Heritage is the leading group planning Trump's

They didn't change. The leftist agendas increased pressure so they
compensated.

Post by Michael A Terrell
   What would a second Trump term look like? His bluster on the stump —
“I am
   your retribution”—contrasts with a first term in office where his
menace was
   mitigated by his sloth, ignorance and incompetence. But don’t count
on that
   if he wins in the fall.
   This time, the right is intent on turning Trumpism into a governing
agenda.
   The Heritage Foundation, the right’s premier policy institute, has
launched a
   multimillion-dollar Project 2025 to recruit, train and plant MAGA
operatives
   throughout the government, and arm them with clear marching orders.
   Project 2025 includes four elements: The 900-plus-page Mandate for
   Leadership: The Conservative Promise details the right’s agenda for
each
   major department and agency in the federal government; the Playbook,
a still
   secret compilation of executive orders and initiatives for the first
180 days
   of the administration; a right-wing “LinkedIn” designed to recruit
and vet
   thousands of MAGA movement operatives to staff the government; and a
   Presidential Administration Academy to train them on how to operate.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/will-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-turn-trumpism-into-a-governing-agenda/
Trump has already said he's going to be a dictator. Forget that stinking
"day one" bullshit — he means *starting on* day one and continuing for
the entire term.

No he didn't, Ball.

Post by Michael A Terrell
He's not going to win. We're going to stop him. YTIW

Who's "we"? You and a herd of midgets?

Baxter

2024-05-11 23:38:56 UTC

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.

Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-
foundation-think-tank.html

=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ideal America if one of
their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its 2025 Presidential
Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded by the far-right think
tank Heritage Foundation and supported by more than 80 organizations,
many well-known for their extreme positions, and for pushing hate and
Christian nationalism.

https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for-
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

Skeeter

2024-05-12 00:06:23 UTC

In article <v1ovif$2a2f4$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-
foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America if one of
their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its 2025 Presidential
Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded by the far-right think
tank Heritage Foundation and supported by more than 80 organizations,
many well-known for their extreme positions, and for pushing hate and
Christian nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for-
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it. He has
over 100.000 people at his rally.

Baxter

2024-05-12 03:12:01 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-
foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America if one
of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its 2025
Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded by the
far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and supported by more than
80 organizations, many well-known for their extreme positions, and
for pushing hate and Christian nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for-
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it. He
has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

Skeeter

2024-05-12 12:46:29 UTC

In article <v1pc20$2go26$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-
foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America if one
of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its 2025
Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded by the
far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and supported by more than
80 organizations, many well-known for their extreme positions, and
for pushing hate and Christian nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for-
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it. He
has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

I watched it you moron. It looked like a huge concert.

Baxter

2024-05-12 19:41:03 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-herita
ge- foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America if
one of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its
2025 Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded
by the far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and supported by
more than 80 organizations, many well-known for their extreme
positions, and for pushing hate and Christian nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for
- american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it. He
has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

I watched it you moron. It looked like a huge concert.

What drugs you imbibing?
=================
Harry Sisson
@harryjsisson
WOW! Trump supporters began to LEAVE Trumps speech in New Jersey while
he was still speaking! Even they couldnt take it anymore! This rally was
a massive failure and a total waste of money by Trumps campaign.

============

And did you hear when he praised Hannibal Lecter?
=======
The late, great Hannibal Lecter is a wonderful man, Trump said at his
rally in Wildwood, New Jersey on Saturday after asking the crowd if
anyone had seen Silence of the Lambs.

Skeeter

2024-05-12 21:00:53 UTC

In article <v1r60e$2uu9f$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage
Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-herita
ge- foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America if
one of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in its
2025 Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is spearheaded
by the far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and supported by
more than 80 organizations, many well-known for their extreme
positions, and for pushing hate and Christian nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for
- american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it. He
has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

I watched it you moron. It looked like a huge concert.

What drugs you imbibing?
=================
Harry Sisson
@harryjsisson
WOW! Trump supporters began to LEAVE Trump?s speech in New Jersey while
he was still speaking! Even they couldn?t take it anymore! This rally was
a massive failure and a total waste of money by Trump?s campaign.
============
And did you hear when he praised Hannibal Lecter?
=======
?The late, great Hannibal Lecter is a wonderful man,? Trump said at his
rally in Wildwood, New Jersey on Saturday after asking the crowd if
anyone had seen ?Silence of the Lambs.?

I know what I saw and what I heard. You sound like Rudy. I saw it and
the crowd was there till it was over.

You and your source have the Hannibal remark out of context again.

Baxter

2024-05-12 21:40:31 UTC

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the
Heritage Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing
agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-her
ita ge- foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America
if one of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in
its 2025 Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is
spearheaded by the far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and
supported by more than 80 organizations, many well-known for
their extreme positions, and for pushing hate and Christian
nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-
for -
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it.
He has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

I watched it you moron. It looked like a huge concert.

What drugs you imbibing?
=================
Harry Sisson
@harryjsisson
WOW! Trump supporters began to LEAVE Trump?s speech in New Jersey
while he was still speaking! Even they couldn?t take it anymore! This
rally was a massive failure and a total waste of money by Trump?s
campaign.
============
And did you hear when he praised Hannibal Lecter?
=======
?The late, great Hannibal Lecter is a wonderful man,? Trump said at
his rally in Wildwood, New Jersey on Saturday after asking the crowd
if anyone had seen ?Silence of the Lambs.?

I know what I saw and what I heard. You sound like Rudy. I saw it and
the crowd was there till it was over.

I saw the video - they were leaving while he was still blathering
https://twitter.com/harryjsisson/status/1789451036379201710?
cxt=HBwW3IKy5ZKPtNUxAAAA&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

Post by Skeeter
You and your source have the Hannibal remark out of context again.

Nope, entirely in context.

Skeeter

2024-05-12 21:56:09 UTC

In article <v1rd0e$30bpq$***@dont-email.me>, ***@baxcode.com
says...

Post by Skeeter
says...

Post by Baxter
Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Because you don't agree? Who told you it was?

They say so themselves.
Also, they are in the tank for tRump
=========
By placing its people throughout the administration, the
Heritage Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing
agenda.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-her
ita ge- foundation-think-tank.html
=============
Project 2025
The far right has made public its plans for an ?ideal? America
if one of their allies wins the 2024 presidential election in
its 2025 Presidential Transition Project. Project 2025 is
spearheaded by the far-right think tank Heritage Foundation and
supported by more than 80 organizations, many well-known for
their extreme positions, and for pushing hate and Christian
nationalism.
https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-
for -
american-authoritarianism/?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIn__r7-
GGhgMVOy2tBh0LjQyREAMYASAAEgIQWPD_BwE

What's your point? I knew you would have to bring Trump into it.
He has over 100.000 people at his rally.

You believe that lie? BTW, you wearing diapers now too?

I watched it you moron. It looked like a huge concert.

What drugs you imbibing?
=================
Harry Sisson
@harryjsisson
WOW! Trump supporters began to LEAVE Trump?s speech in New Jersey
while he was still speaking! Even they couldn?t take it anymore! This
rally was a massive failure and a total waste of money by Trump?s
campaign.
============
And did you hear when he praised Hannibal Lecter?
=======
?The late, great Hannibal Lecter is a wonderful man,? Trump said at
his rally in Wildwood, New Jersey on Saturday after asking the crowd
if anyone had seen ?Silence of the Lambs.?

I know what I saw and what I heard. You sound like Rudy. I saw it and
the crowd was there till it was over.

I saw the video - they were leaving while he was still blathering
https://twitter.com/harryjsisson/status/1789451036379201710?
cxt=HBwW3IKy5ZKPtNUxAAAA&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

Post by Skeeter
You and your source have the Hannibal remark out of context again.

Nope, entirely in context.

Did you watch and listen? I bet not. You believe what your handlers tell
you. I saw it.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-12 21:39:38 UTC

On Sun, 12 May 2024 19:41:03 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
And did you hear
people

https://www.fairus.org/issues/illegal-immigration

Visa Overstays
While the government grants over a million green cards each year that provide permanent residence status, most visas issued are temporary in nature (i.e. nonimmigrant visas) and specify a period of time the alien may stay in the United States. For example, typical tourist or business visas (B1/B2 visa) permit aliens to stay in the U.S. no longer than six months in a given year. If an alien stays beyond that period, he or she falls “out of status.”

Unfortunately, a sizeable portion of illegal aliens in the U.S. consists of aliens overstaying their visas. While estimates have varied over the years, recent numbers suggest that visa overstays account for as much as 40 percent of the illegal alien population. According to the most recent data provided by the Department of Homeland Security, in Fiscal Year 2022, nearly 854,000 nonimmigrant visitors violated the terms of their visas and overstayed in the United States.[1] Over the past four years, the total rate of visa overstays (as a proportion of those expected to depart) has increased, up from 1.21 percent in Fiscal Year 2019 to 3.67 percent in Fiscal Year 2022.[2]

In addition to visa overstayers, aliens who do not require a visa or arrive from Visa Waiver Program (VWP) countries also overstay the allowed time. VWP nationals visiting the U.S. on business or pleasure in Fiscal Year 2022 accounted for nearly 100,000 overstays.

Size and Cost of Illegal Alien Population
FAIR estimates that at least 16.8 million illegal aliens resided in the
United States as of June 2023.[3] Illegal aliens impose significant
costs on U.S. taxpayers – ranging from shelter, health care,
educational benefits, welfare and tax credits, and incarceration costs.
At the start of 2023, the net cost of illegal immigration for United
States taxpayers – at the federal, state, and local levels – was at
least $150.7 billion.[4]

Fast Facts
There are at least 16.8 million illegal aliens in the United States as of the beginning of 2023.[5]
In Fiscal Year 2023, a record 3.2 million encounters with illegal aliens were recorded at America’s borders.
The majority of illegal aliens are from Latin and Central America. The most commonly encountered nations of origin for illegal immigrants encountered in Fiscal Year 2023 included Mexico, Venezuela, Guatemala, Honduras and Cuba.
Between Fiscal Year 2022-2023, there was a 60 percent increase in illegal aliens encountered in family units.
In Fiscal Year 2023 alone, nearly 138,000 unaccompanied children were encountered at our borders. That is an average of 378 per day.
In Fiscal Year 2022, there were 853,955 overstays, at a rate of 3.67 percent of all visitors.
For nonimmigrants who entered on a student or exchange visitor visa (F, M, or J visa) in Fiscal Year 2022, the overstay rate was 3.5 percent. More than 9,000 Chinese nonimmigrants overstayed, accounting for more than 16% of all student and exchange overstays reported.
Illegal migration costs the American taxpayer approximately $182.1
billion annually as of the beginning of 2023. Illegal aliens only
contribute around $31.4 billion in taxes at the state and federal
levels, meaning that illegal immigration costs American taxpayers a net
of at least $150.7 billion annually.[6]

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-12 21:40:32 UTC

On Sun, 12 May 2024 03:12:01 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
You believe that
people

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-12 21:40:53 UTC

On Sat, 11 May 2024 23:38:56 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
They say so themselves.
people

Dave Wainwright

2024-05-11 20:36:24 UTC

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
government’s poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one year’s projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

But they're right. Even Paul Krugman grudgingly admits so now.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-11 21:57:14 UTC

On Sat, 11 May 2024 14:53:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
Heritage is

https://www.fairus.org/issues/illegal-immigration

In each of the last fiscal years (FY), a new record was set for illegal immigration in the U.S. In FY 2021, the number of illegal aliens encountered at our borders was 1.957 million. In FY 2022, the number of encounters was 2.767 million. In FY 2023, it was 3.201 million. For comparison, between 2012 and 2020, a period overlapping two different Presidential administrations, there was an average of 560,000 encounters per year.

Currently, there are no signs that illegal immigration will slow. In December 2023, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) encountered over 371,000 illegal aliens at our borders in a single month, the highest ever recorded figure. This has set the U.S. on track to have yet another record year of illegal immigration in FY 2024.

The total number of illegal aliens encountered since Fiscal Year 2020 now stands at over 9.4 million illegal encounters. In addition to those encountered, illegal aliens enter between ports of entry and evade law enforcement, with an estimated number of “gotaways” above 1.7 million since President Biden took office.

Categories of Illegal Aliens Encountered at our Borders
CBP classifies illegal aliens encountered at our borders into four categories 1) Single Adults; 2) Family Unit Aliens; 3) Unaccompanied Children/Single Minors; and 4) Accompanied Minors.

According to CBP, a “Family Unit” represents the number of individuals (either a child under 18 years old, parent or legal guardian) apprehended with a family member by the U.S. Border Patrol. “Unaccompanied Alien Children” are defined in statute as those, under the age of 18, who have no lawful immigration status in the United States and who do not have a parent or legal guardian in the United States available to provide care and physical custody. An “Accompanied Minor” represents a child accompanied by a parent or legal guardian and the parent or legal guardian is either a U.S. citizen, Lawful Permanent Resident, or admissible noncitizen, and the child is determined to be inadmissible.

While single adults make up the majority of encounters, there were
455,338 children (outside of family units) encountered by CBP in the
last three years.

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-11 22:18:05 UTC

On Sat, 11 May 2024 14:53:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
propaganda mill.

Baxter

2024-05-11 23:53:33 UTC

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
Size and Cost of Illegal Alien Population
FAIR estimates that at least 16.8 million illegal aliens resided in
the United States as of June 2023.[3] Illegal aliens impose
significant costs on U.S. taxpayers â ranging from shelter, health
care, educational benefits, welfare and tax credits, and incarceration
costs. At the start of 2023, the net cost of illegal immigration for
United States taxpayers â at the federal, state, and local levels
â was at least $150.7 billion.[4]

===========
Undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollars each year in
taxes. In spite of their undocumented status,

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/topics/tax-contributions

=============
Immigrants in the U.S. contributed more than $330.7 billion in federal
income taxes in 2019, and over $492 billion dollars in total taxes
(including state, municipal, and sales taxes). The Tax Foundation
estimates that American and immigrant taxpayers paid $1.6 trillion in
individual income taxes in 2019. In this context, its important to note
that immigrants made up only 13.5% of the U.S. population in 2020,
meaning that immigrants make an outsized contribution to the U.S. revenue
system.

https://www.boundless.com/blog/boundless-releases-2022-immigrant-income-
taxation-report/

============
MYTH #4: Immigrants increase the budget deficit and government debt.

FACT: Immigrants in the United States have about a net zero effect on
government budgets they pay about as much in taxes as they consume in
benefits.

https://www.carnegie.org/our-work/article/15-myths-about-immigration-
debunked/

============
Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Greater Share of Income in State and Local
Taxes Than Top Earners

https://www.cbpp.org/blog/unauthorized-immigrants-pay-greater-share-of-
income-in-state-and-local-taxes-than-top-earners

============
The economic impact of undocumented immigrants in the United States is
challenging to measure and politically contentious. Research shows that
undocumented immigrants increase the size of the U.S. economy/contribute
to economic growth, enhance the welfare of natives, contribute more in
tax revenue than they collect,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_immigrants_in_th
e_United_States

Jonathan Ball's dismay

2024-05-12 21:40:43 UTC

On Sat, 11 May 2024 23:53:33 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Baxter
Undocumented immigrants are
people

Scout

2024-05-13 11:53:03 UTC

Post by Jonathan Ball's dismay
Size and Cost of Illegal Alien Population
FAIR estimates that at least 16.8 million illegal aliens resided in
the United States as of June 2023.[3] Illegal aliens impose
significant costs on U.S. taxpayers â?" ranging from shelter, health
care, educational benefits, welfare and tax credits, and incarceration
costs. At the start of 2023, the net cost of illegal immigration for
United States taxpayers â?" at the federal, state, and local levels
â?" was at least $150.7 billion.[4]

===========
Undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollars each year in
taxes. In spite of their undocumented status,
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/topics/tax-contributions

So do other criminals.. but they are still criminals and their proceeds are
the result of crime.

Baxter admits that illegal immigration is a big problem.

Scout

2024-05-13 11:50:37 UTC

Report Mar 27, 2023
Tax Cuts Are Primarily Responsible for the Increasing Debt Ratio
Without the Bush and Trump tax cuts, debt as a percentage of the
economy would be declining permanently.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-respon
sible- for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Myth No. 6: The tax cuts caused the federal budget deficit.
Democrats and many Republicans rightly worried that the Tax Cuts and
Jobs Act would contribute unnecessarily to the national debt. However,
claims that the tax cuts are responsible for the federal
governmentâ?Ts poor fiscal health are a misdiagnosis of trends that
are decades in the making.
The TCJA did increase the budget deficit, but the law is not the
underlying cause of the unsustainable U.S. budget. The systemic gap
between revenues and expenditures is driven by sustained growth in
mandatory spending programs since the 1970s.
Repealing the 2017 tax cuts would not change the trajectory of
increasing federal budget deficits. The tax cuts (even if made
permanent) represent only about 16% of the pre-pandemic budget
deficit, *and one yearâ?Ts projected deficit in 2030 is larger than
the entire 10-year cost of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed*
The 2017 tax cuts represented critical structural reforms to the U.S.
tax code that will need to be made permanent in the coming years.
Setting the record straight on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is crucial to
ensuring Congress chooses to keep taxes low and make the 2017 reforms
permanent.
Reversing the tax cuts based on a mischaracterization of the true
effects would make the economic recovery from COVID-19 much more
challenging by increasing costs for American businesses and families.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/debunking-6-myths-about-the-t
ax-cuts-and-jobs-act

Heritage is a conservaturd propaganda mill.

Prove it.. or is that what you call anything that doesn't agree with your
beliefs?

Sam

2024-05-11 03:05:17 UTC

Post by Ford Prefect
$4.6 billion per year (4.6B/year * 10 years =
4.6T).

$4.6B a year X 10 years = $46.0B

Scout

2024-05-11 11:54:50 UTC