Hey SPEED this poll is for you...DEM POLL!!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

that Poll is at least a year too early to have any meaning. ....

You mean like the one a couple of weeks before 2016 fall election?

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

The tax reform package was supposed to pay for itself according to Trump. It hasn't happened. As I said, the estimate is that the tax reform will add $1.4 trillion to the deficit.

The majority of the people who benefited most from the tax reform did not need the additional money. The people who needed the money the most did not get enough to make a difference. I support the cut in taxes for corporations but not as much as they got. In other words, when you say the government must cut spending, they also should not have added $1.4 trillion to the deficit for a tax cut that brought little tax relief to those that needed it the most.

Are you the arbitrator of who needs the tax cuts and who doesn't...please point to a valid article that shows a group of tax payers that didn't get a tax cut.

Hell there were article of masses of people crying about not getting as big of a refund as previous years...because they PAYED LESS IN TAXES!! Anytime there is a tax cuts you and your buddies on the left scream....TAX CUT FOR THE RICH...FUCK THEY PAY THE MOST!!

You have fallen into the class warfare trap that the LSM set decades ago. The evil richhhhhh....they stole it form the pooooor. Wealth is generated not taken from the poooooor. Please explain the 1.4 trillion that was add to the debt because the Gumment had to give money back to the PEOPLE THAT IT BELONGS TO!! DON"T FEED THE BEAST!!! I never heard you say the GUMMENT should do with less, and you say you're not a socialist.

I love your pompous arrogance as to who should get tax cuts and how much and what is too much...you should run for congress.
I'm surprised that you didn't say...as some of the LSM...they should have giving more EITC to the people that don't pay taxes to begin with.

You state over and over..."you don't know my political ideology". Just read your posts like the ones on this thread SPEED...it doesn't take an analytical genius to figure it out. Do do believe in sharing the wealth and that there come a time when you have or made too much money...your man Obummer does.

P.S. Which one of the Presidential hopefuls doesn't want bigger Gumment, pandering to "special interest groups" and giving away shit loads of money....DO TELL SPEED...cause you know that's a winning platform.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bb1961

Are you the arbitrator of who needs the tax cuts and who doesn't...please point to a valid article that shows a group of tax payers that didn't get a tax cut.

Hell there were article of masses of people crying about not getting as big of a refund as previous years...because they PAYED LESS IN TAXES!! Anytime there is a tax cuts you and your buddies on the left scream....TAX CUT FOR THE RICH...FUCK THEY PAY THE MOST!!

You have fallen into the class warfare trap that the LSM set decades ago. The evil richhhhhh....they stole it form the pooooor. Wealth is generated not taken from the poooooor. Please explain the 1.4 trillion that was add to the debt because the Gumment had to give money back to the PEOPLE THAT IT BELONGS TO!! DON"T FEED THE BEAST!!! I never heard you say the GUMMENT should do with less, and you say you're not a socialist.

I love your pompous arrogance as to who should get tax cuts and how much and what is too much...you should run for congress.
I'm surprised that you didn't say...as some of the LSM...they should have giving more EITC to the people that don't pay taxes to begin with.

You state over and over..."you don't know my political ideology". Just read your posts like the ones on this thread SPEED...it doesn't take an analytical genius to figure it out. Do do believe in sharing the wealth and that there come a time when you have or made too much money...your man Obummer does.

P.S. Which one of the Presidential hopefuls doesn't want bigger Gumment, pandering to "special interest groups" and giving away shit loads of money....DO TELL SPEED...cause you know that's a winning platform.

This has been discussed before but you continue to ignore facts.
Approximately 15% of taxpayers did not see a decrease in their taxes but that is not the important point.

Certainly if there is a 2% across-the-board tax decrease those making more will benefit more in true dollars. However, the people at the upper end of the income scale get a larger percentage decrease in their taxes than those at the lower end of the income scale.

"The Tax Policy Center has released distributional estimates of the conference agreement for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as filed on December 15, 2017. We find the bill would reduce taxes on average for all income groups in both 2018 and 2025. In general, higher income households receive larger average tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income, with the largest cuts as a share of income going to taxpayers in the 95th to 99th percentiles of the income distribution. On average, in 2027 taxes would change little for lower- and middle-income groups and decrease for higher-income groups. Compared to current law, 5 percent of taxpayers would pay more tax in 2018, 9 percent in 2025, and 53 percent in 2027."

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/feat...s-and-jobs-act

The rest of your comments are BS and irrelevant to this point. All I'm pointing out is that anyone who says the tax reform bill of 2017 favored the middle class income earners at the expense of the upper class income earners is WRONG.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You mean like the one a couple of weeks before 2016 fall election?

How about the polls right before the 2018 fall elections. Nailed it!! Except for Rasmussen.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

How about the polls right before the 2018 fall elections.

Was there a POTUS election in 2018? Midterms are not relevant.

The one in 2018 certainly wasn't, now was it, as far as the House is concerned, except to demonstrate the World the DNC's stupidity and obsession. Enjoy ....





I don't recall ever observing anyone who embraces the concept of being correct in the wrongness of an irrelevant decision as you do, but hey .... drowning people grab at straws!!!!!!!!!! And that's about all those loons are .... "straws"!!!! Can't even get an impeachment indictment out of the House!!!!!!!!!!!!

On the OTHER HAND!!!!!!!!!



An excellent legal scholar, family man, who married a nonsibling.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Was there a POTUS election in 2018? Midterms are not relevant.

The one in 2018 certainly wasn't, now was it, as far as the House is concerned, except to demonstrate the World the DNC's stupidity and obsession. Enjoy ....





I don't recall ever observing anyone who embraces the concept of being correct in the wrongness of an irrelevant decision as you do, but hey .... drowning people grab at straws!!!!!!!!!! And that's about all those loons are .... "straws"!!!! Can't even get an impeachment indictment out of the House!!!!!!!!!!!!

On the OTHER HAND!!!!!!!!!



An excellent legal scholar, family man, who married a nonsibling.

In 2010 the mid-term elections returned control of the House to the Republicans. In 2018 the mid-term elections returned control of the House to the Democrats. In both cases, very significant.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You mean like the one a couple of weeks before 2016 fall election?

Just for fun I went back to the predictions for the 2008 and 2012 elections for POTUS, House, and Senate.

2008

Source: http://election.princeton.edu/2008/1...ions-for-2008/

POTUS Prediction: Obama 352 electoral votes, McCain 186
POTUS Actual: Obama 365 electoral votes, McCain 173
House prediction: 257 Democrats, 178 Republicans
House actual: 257 Democrats, 178 Republicans
Senate prediction: 58 Democrats 42 Republicans
Senate actual: 59 Democrats, 41 Republicans

2012

http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...on-2012-final/
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...-election-eve/

POTUS Prediction: Obama 303 electoral votes, Romney 235
POTUS Actual: Obama 332 electoral votes, Romney 206
House prediction: 205 Democrats, 230 Republicans
House actual: 201 Democrats, 234 Republicans
Senate prediction: 55 Democrats 45 Republicans
Senate actual: 55 Democrats, 45 Republicans

I would call the predictions for 2008 and 2012 to be somewhere between very accurate and outstandingly accurate.

[LexusLover]

Was Trump running for office or in the White House? No. You're flailing.

But that's what drowning people often do.

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

This has been discussed before but you continue to ignore facts.
Approximately 15% of taxpayers did not see a decrease in their taxes but that is not the important point.

Certainly if there is a 2% across-the-board tax decrease those making more will benefit more in true dollars. However, the people at the upper end of the income scale get a larger percentage decrease in their taxes than those at the lower end of the income scale.

"The Tax Policy Center has released distributional estimates of the conference agreement for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as filed on December 15, 2017. We find the bill would reduce taxes on average for all income groups in both 2018 and 2025. In general, higher income households receive larger average tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income, with the largest cuts as a share of income going to taxpayers in the 95th to 99th percentiles of the income distribution. On average, in 2027 taxes would change little for lower- and middle-income groups and decrease for higher-income groups. Compared to current law, 5 percent of taxpayers would pay more tax in 2018, 9 percent in 2025, and 53 percent in 2027."

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/feat...s-and-jobs-act

The rest of your comments are BS and irrelevant to this point. All I'm pointing out is that anyone who says the tax reform bill of 2017 favored the middle class income earners at the expense of the upper class income earners is WRONG.

Says the king of BS'ers
As usual your TDS wins the day....

Changes to the Tax Code
"President Trump signed the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" into law on Dec. 22., 2017, bringing sweeping changes to the tax code. The polls have shown that how you feel about the $1.5+ trillion overhauls depends largely on your opinion of Trump's presidency. Individually, how the changes have been felt depending on factors like your income level, filing status and deductions. If you live in a high-tax state with soaring property values, you may have paid more in taxes in 2019".

This pretty much explains you skewed logic...
"Overhaul depends largely on your opinion of Trump's presidency".
They must know you SPEED!!
Maybe you need to study up a little more SPEED...you didn't factor in this.
This is FACT SPEED!!

"Individually, how the changes have been felt depending on factors like your income level, filing status and deductions. If you live in a high-tax state with soaring property values, you may have paid more in taxes in 2019".

I like the higher tax state and soaring property values that you failed to take into account...you do tend to do that a lot.
Again you're wrong SPEED.

You still haven't told us why "socialism" is a pejorative...I hope that term doesn't offend you.
If it does, I understand...socialism offends me!!

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Was Trump running for office or in the White House? No. You're flailing.

But that's what drowning people often do.

So why do you believe that polls with Trump running for office or in the White House would be incorrect as opposed to other polls? He was in the WH in 2018 and polls were amazingly accurate.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bb1961

Says the king of BS'ers
As usual your TDS wins the day....

Changes to the Tax Code
"President Trump signed the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" into law on Dec. 22., 2017, bringing sweeping changes to the tax code. The polls have shown that how you feel about the $1.5+ trillion overhauls depends largely on your opinion of Trump's presidency. Individually, how the changes have been felt depending on factors like your income level, filing status and deductions. If you live in a high-tax state with soaring property values, you may have paid more in taxes in 2019".

This pretty much explains you skewed logic...
"Overhaul depends largely on your opinion of Trump's presidency".
They must know you SPEED!!
Maybe you need to study up a little more SPEED...you didn't factor in this.
This is FACT SPEED!!

"Individually, how the changes have been felt depending on factors like your income level, filing status and deductions. If you live in a high-tax state with soaring property values, you may have paid more in taxes in 2019".

I like the higher tax state and soaring property values that you failed to take into account...you do tend to do that a lot.
Again you're wrong SPEED.

You still haven't told us why "socialism" is a pejorative...I hope that term doesn't offend you.
If it does, I understand...socialism offends me!!

Wrong yet again. Not MY opinion alone. I cited one totally independent source which explained why the tax reform favored the rich over the middle class. Certainly it is impossible to make statements that are true 100% of the time. Conditions obviously vary from person to person, family to family. But the FACT remains that the tax reform law, on average, favored the rich over those in the middle and lower income tax brackets. The cited article explains that perfectly.

I would be happy to cite the research done by many other independent organizations that point out the same. If you can cite a single third party source that states that the tax reform package was more beneficial to the middle/lower income taxpayers than upper income taxpayers, please do so rather than simply give me your opinion. Until then, it is your OPINION vs. FACTS.

I'm sorry if socialism offends you. Tough. Social Security is socialism and I love it. I support programs like Medicaid and food stamps for those in need. I support child labor laws, minimum wages, and maximum hour laws which are socialism. On the other hand, I reject other proposals made by a few politicians on the left.

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Wrong yet again. Not MY opinion alone. I cited one totally independent source which explained why the tax reform favored the rich over the middle class. Certainly it is impossible to make statements that are true 100% of the time. Conditions obviously vary from person to person, family to family. But the FACT remains that the tax reform law, on average, favored the rich over those in the middle and lower income tax brackets. The cited article explains that perfectly.

I would be happy to cite the research done by many other independent organizations that point out the same. If you can cite a single third party source that states that the tax reform package was more beneficial to the middle/lower income taxpayers than upper income taxpayers, please do so rather than simply give me your opinion. Until then, it is your OPINION vs. FACTS.

I'm sorry if socialism offends you. Tough. Social Security is socialism and I love it. I support programs like Medicaid and food stamps for those in need. I support child labor laws, minimum wages, and maximum hour laws which are socialism. On the other hand, I reject other proposals made by a few politicians on the left.

Again this quote that I posted IS A FACT...those that hate Trump will find something to tar and feather him for.
The economy is doing great...why is that SPEED...couldn't have anything to do with tax policy. You and ALL you buddies on the left know that tax cuts only add to the debt and wreck the economy...but time and time again it's proven that tax cut stimulate the economy.

Your good buddy Obummer said that the jobs that left were never coming back...remember that SPEED?? He also said the economy we have now wasn't possible. The last democrap President that cut taxes was Kennedy...why is it that democrap Presidents love to raise taxes and Republican Presidents love to cut them?? I know it couldn't have anything to do with giving back people more of their money...because we all know that the ALL MIGHTY Gumment knows how to spend OUR money better than we do.

Again...who are you to dictate who deserves what and who doesn't...this is text book LIBERALISM!! As for SS IT IS GOING INSOLVENT...there is no "lock box" as Al Bore said. When there is more people collecting than paying in your precious SS is tits up...that is unless the Gumment taxes us into oblivion.
The liabilities that are coming due are going to be a BITCH for the Gumment...what is your precious Gumment going to do than SPEED??

This from the last paragraph of your post:

I'm sorry if socialism offends you. Tough.

Tell that to the people of Venezuela...I'm sure they will have a completely different take than you. You're right things are VERY "tough" for them.


Social Security is socialism and I love it.

As I said it is going BROKE and only HIGHER taxes will rescue it.


I support programs like Medicaid and food stamps for those in need.

I support helping the less fortunate also...but those Gumment programs are ripe with fraud and corruption.


I support child labor laws

In this country there hasn't been as problem with this in MANY MANY years...a non issue!!


minimum wages

Every job has a value...you should know this. Competition in this capitalist country should dictate wages not the Gumment!!
Congrads...a Bernie supporter!! Curious SPEED what should the "minimum" wage be??


and maximum hour laws which are socialism.

There you go again...telling people how much they should have...it's none of your business!! Congrads you are correct this is SOCIALISM...and you embrace it!! Curious SPEED what should the "maximum" wage be??


On the other hand, I reject other proposals made by a few politicians on the left.

Do tell what Socialist/Liberal proposals you don't like...