More than 400 millionaires tell Congress: Don’t cut our taxes

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

8 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  One and a half trillion is just for this single bill, and we won't know for ten years what the actual cost is, but likely it will be significantly more than that. I don't really get your angle on this. There is no reason to be adding debt for a bill like this at this time. I thought you were against it when Obama did it. Now you are OK with it because Trump is not adding as much?

 

   BTW, Obama's single largest contribution to the debt was his tax cut, which itself was an extension of Bush's tax cuts. That single measure added almost 1 trillion in 2011 and 2012. The problem with every administration since Reagan, is that everyone knows how to cut taxes. They just don't know how to cut spending.

By god son, we agree on something

 

Nice job blaming Obamas  debt on bush

 

Its Bush's fault 

[Umka36 781]

13 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    If you send more than you owe the IRS will send you a check back, so it can't be done that way. You could elect to file in a way that you owe more (ie. married filing separately, standard deduction vs itemized, not taking eligible deduction etc.), but I'm not aware of any way to volunteer donations to the IRS, or to specifically direct payments to be used toward the debt.

 

  The national debt was the main point of this article, I think. It isn't saying reducing taxes is bad, it is saying reducing taxes by increasing federal spending (and debt) in an otherwise healthy economy is bad. If we could reduce taxes and federal spending at the same time that would be great. However this plan does not do that.

Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt

 

https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454

[Steeleballz 7,550]

10 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

By god son, we agree on something

 

Nice job blaming Obamas  debt on bush

 

Its Bush's fault 

 

  I don't think you can dispute, they both did a heck of a job on that.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

5 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  I don't think you can dispute, they both did a heck of a job on that.

Korrect

[jayjayj 571]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   It's foolish to fall for the line that only republicans care about the national debt. And those who were taken can't seem to figure it out even when the proof is in front of them. Republicans don't care about the debt, they are just better liars and seem to to have followers more eager to believe the baloney. 

 

  As I've told you before, search for my posts about the debt. Unlike republicans, I don't flip flop. If a simple search to verify something is beyond your capabilities, it's probably not worth responding to you. 

You take things way too personal, as if I care about how you personally feel about something.  I was referring to the author of the article.  If I decide to call you out, you'll know it.  

 

I do love your attempt at a personal insult though - very typically liberal on your part.     

[Dashinka 24,493]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   It's foolish to fall for the line that only republicans care about the national debt. And those who were taken can't seem to figure it out even when the proof is in front of them. Republicans don't care about the debt, they are just better liars and seem to to have followers more eager to believe the baloney. 

 

  As I've told you before, search for my posts about the debt. Unlike republicans, I don't flip flop. If a simple search to verify something is beyond your capabilities, it's probably not worth responding to you. 

Has anyone said that the debt is not a problem.  As you said, spending needs to be cut, but the implication is to keep taxes high since we are governed by a swamp with no fiscal responsibility.  Taxes should be set at a reasonable level which seems to be what they are trying to do, and congress needs to cut the size of the government to live within their means.  The other option to just keep raising taxes to pay for bigger and bigger government is not palatable except for maybe these millionaires.  By the way, most of these folks are just signing on to this for potential “goodwill” they think they might get while all along they are asking their CPAs how to minimize their tax bills.

[Dashinka 24,493]

41 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  One and a half trillion is just for this single bill, and we won't know for ten years what the actual cost is, but likely it will be significantly more than that. I don't really get your angle on this. There is no reason to be adding debt for a bill like this at this time. I thought you were against it when Obama did it. Now you are OK with it because Trump is not adding as much?

 

   BTW, Obama's single largest contribution to the debt was his tax cut, which itself was an extension of Bush's tax cuts. That single measure added almost 1 trillion in 2011 and 2012. The problem with every administration since Reagan, is that everyone knows how to cut taxes. They just don't know how to cut spending.

Then don’t pass anything else.  Gridlock in congress can be a good thing.

[jayjayj 571]

50 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

well 1.5 over the next 10 years would be a lot better than Obamas 9 over 8 years 

They'll never admit how bad Obama was for our economy and our country.  Absolutely one of the worst Presidents we've ever had.  It is like trying to argue with a wall.

[smilesammich 10,727]

basically trump and maga millionaires are the only rich folk with a pure heart and love of country..

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

53 minutes ago, jayjayj said:You take things way too personal, as if I care about how you personally feel about something.  I was referring to the author of the article.  If I decide to call you out, you'll know it.  

 

I do love your attempt at a personal insult though - very typically liberal on your part.     

 

   Just as the over reaction at nothing is very typically consevative on your part. If I decide to insult you personally, you'll know it. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

54 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Has anyone said that the debt is not a problem.  As you said, spending needs to be cut, but the implication is to keep taxes high since we are governed by a swamp with no fiscal responsibility.  Taxes should be set at a reasonable level which seems to be what they are trying to do, and congress needs to cut the size of the government to live within their means.  The other option to just keep raising taxes to pay for bigger and bigger government is not palatable except for maybe these millionaires.  By the way, most of these folks are just signing on to this for potential “goodwill” they think they might get while all along they are asking their CPAs how to minimize their tax bills.

 

   The implication is don't add federal debt to fund a tax cut. If they can't budget a tax cut, don't do it. 

 

   We live in a society. Some people are more socially responsible than others.  I don't care what the "millionaires" personal reasons are for signing on to this, but they are right.

[jayjayj 571]

22 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Just as the over reaction at nothing is very typically consevative on your part. If I decide to insult you personally, you'll know it. 

Wow! You are so witty tonight. You must win every debate with that superior liberal intellect. You're arguments are amazing! 

[bcking 3,157]

2 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

well 1.5 over the next 10 years would be a lot better than Obamas 9 over 8 years 

You do realize that a single bill is not responsible for all of the national debt adding during an 8 year Presidency, right?

 

The clarifying questions that need to be asked on these forums sometimes...

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, jayjayj said:

You take things way too personal, as if I care about how you personally feel about something.  I was referring to the author of the article.  If I decide to call you out, you'll know it.  

 

I do love your attempt at a personal insult though - very typically liberal on your part.     

Where is the personal insult?

 

He was talking about Republicans. Just like you were talking about the author of the article. 

 

Pot, meet Kettle.

[Dashinka 24,493]

35 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   The implication is don't add federal debt to fund a tax cut. If they can't budget a tax cut, don't do it. 

 

   We live in a society. Some people are more socially responsible than others.  I don't care what the "millionaires" personal reasons are for signing on to this, but they are right.

People that say Socialism doesn’t work are right as well, but no one ever seems to listen to them either.