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

[Steeleballz 7,550]

More than 400 American millionaires and billionaires are sending a letter to Congress this week urging Republican lawmakers not to cut their taxes.

The wealthy Americans, which include doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs and CEOs, say the GOP is making a mistake by reducing taxes on the richest families at a time when the the nation’s debt is high and inequality is back at the worst level since the 1920s.

The letter calls on Congress to not to pass any tax bill that adds to the debt and that “further exacerbates inequality.” Instead of cutting taxes of the wealthy, the letter tells Congress to raises taxes on rich people like them. It is being released publicly this week, as Republicans debate legislation which would add $1.5 trillion to the debt to pay for widespread tax cuts for businesses and individuals.

 

The letter was put together by Responsible Wealth, a group that advocates for progressive causes. Signers include Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream founders Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, fashion designer Eileen Fisher, billionaire hedge fund manager George Soros and philanthropist Steven Rockefeller, as well as many individuals and couples who aren’t household names but have at least $1 million in assets.

“I think a tax cut is absurd,” said Robert “Bob” Crandall, a former American Airlines CEO who now lives in Florida and added his name to the letter. Republicans are “saying we can’t afford to spend money, but we can afford to give rich people a huge tax break. This makes no sense,” Crandall said.

 

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/13/400-millionaires-tell-congress-dont-cut-our-taxes/

[eieio 1,594]

These millionaires are such phonies. There is no law that states they cannot pay more. If they were serious they would just pony up the money and send it in. They are just playing politics. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, eieio said:

These millionaires are such phonies. There is no law that states they cannot pay more. If they were serious they would just pony up the money and send it in. They are just playing politics. 

 

    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.

[eieio 1,594]

8 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.

You think wrong. It was a letter put together by lefties to complain they don’t want a tax cut. Nothing but pure politics put together by professional liars.

 

Maybe be we could pool some money together so they could find a CPA that would be able to find a way so they could pay more?

These poor millionaires....so dumb they can’t figure out the system.

 

Only idiots would fall for this scam letter.

[jayjayj 571]

11 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.

Liberals now care about the national debt?  AHAHAHAHA  

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Reminds me of a Chris Rock joke , and I paraphrase

 

If you got 50 million and your ex wife gets half you still got 25 million, no big deal.

 

If you got 30,000 and your ex- wife gets half, you might have to kill that (fill in the blank)

 

 

 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

35 minutes ago, jayjayj said:

Liberals now care about the national debt?  AHAHAHAHA  

 

   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. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 hours ago, eieio said:

You think wrong. It was a letter put together by lefties to complain they don’t want a tax cut. Nothing but pure politics put together by professional liars.

 

Maybe be we could pool some money together so they could find a CPA that would be able to find a way so they could pay more?

These poor millionaires....so dumb they can’t figure out the system.

 

Only idiots would fall for this scam letter.

 

    Most economists I've heard have said this tax plan is a fools errand. Perhaps all the economists who back up what the letter contends are the idiots. I highly doubt it though. More likely the idiots are the simple minded partisans who complain about the debt for 8 years when the Democrats are in office, then think it's OK once someone like Trump comes along with his populist rubbish. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

4 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    Most economists I've heard have said this tax plan is a fools errand. Perhaps all the economists who back up what the letter contends are the idiots. I highly doubt it though. More likely the idiots are the simple minded partisans who complain about the debt for 8 years when the Democrats are in office, then think it's OK once someone like Trump comes along with his populist rubbish. 

Cause Obama cared

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/national-debt-deficit-added-under-president-barack-obama-2017-1

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

      

 

 

True 

https://www.snopes.com/national-debt-trump/

 

Has the National Debt Fallen by $102 Billion Since Donald Trump's Inauguration?

[smilesammich 10,727]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

      

 

 

True 

https://www.snopes.com/national-debt-trump/

 

Has the National Debt Fallen by $102 Billion Since Donald Trump's Inauguration?

you left out something important..

 

Quote

Causes

The Truth Division, a conservative, openly pro-Trump web site, clearly attributes this decline in the national debt to the president, claiming he and his administration are “undoing the government’s rampant spending” and “keeping his promises regarding fiscal responsibility”. However, the article does not cite any examples of actions taken by Donald Trump which would support this conclusion. 

Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, dismissed any claims that President Trump is responsible: 

Trump hasn’t legislated anything that would have any impact on the fiscal accounts, so it simply doesn’t make sense on the face it. 

Instead, Bernstein told us, the cause of the drop in the debt is simple — the federal debt ceiling that has been in place since March 2017.

If you look at a plot of the total debt right now, it’s holding steady at the limit, because to go over the limit is unconstitutional. So you either have to engage in extraordinary measures or eventually default, and the latter is unimaginable so right now Treasury is engaged in the former.

That is, they are delaying or suspending various payments that need to be made, particularly within some of their intra-governmental accounts… By those measures, they can hold the national debt where it is for a certain amount of time. 

Eventually, Bernstein says, the debt ceiling will have to be lifted, and the payments that had been delayed will cause the national debt to increase once again. 

That pattern can be seen in this chart, which shows the national debt from January 2011 up to the end of July 2017. There are four flat lines showing four periods during which the debt ceiling was frozen: from May to August 2011; May to October 2013; March to October 2015; and the ongoing period since March 2017. 

Conclusion

The Truth Division article accurately describes the extent to which the national debt fell between the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2017 and the end of July of the same year. And it rightly describes this fall as “surprising”, since it ranks among the very largest 131-day declines in the national debt since July 1993, both in absolute and percentage terms. 

Similarly, the decline in both components of the national debt — public debt and intragovernmental holdings — was highly significant between 20 January and 27 July 2017, both in absolute and percentage terms, and as we have shown, the national debt has fallen by an estimated 2.25 percent since Inauguration Day — even when measured against the size of the overall Unites States economy. Whether or not any actions or decisions made by Donald Trump have caused or contributed to these historically remarkable declines in the debt is a question that goes beyond the scope of this particular fact check.

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

Cause Obama cared

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/national-debt-deficit-added-under-president-barack-obama-2017-1

 

   Yes he did. He's not the only one. I haven't seen any politician do anything about it. Republicans can blame Democrats and Democrats can blame Republicans till the end of time. It's not going to solve the problem.

 

   The issue I presented is that now with a healthy economy and the party of fiscal responsibility  controlling all 3 branches of government, you actually have a chance to do something about it. If they choose not too fine, but keep their hypocrite mouths shut about it going foreward. By their actions, the Republicans are simply admitting they don't give a damn about the debt, so don't pretend to give a damn next time a Democrat is in office.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

      

 

 

True 

https://www.snopes.com/national-debt-trump/

 

Has the National Debt Fallen by $102 Billion Since Donald Trump's Inauguration?

 

  The national debt fell because they hit the damn debt ceiling and couldn't spend any more. Unfortunately that's temporary.  The middle of the road is not a good place to fall asleep man. They are about to add 1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and basing that prediction on forecasts that most economists predict have no chance of happening. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  The national debt fell because they hit the damn debt ceiling and couldn't spend any more. Unfortunately that's temporary.  The middle of the road is not a good place to fall asleep man. They are about to add 1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and basing that prediction on forecasts that most economists predict have no chance of happening. 

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

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

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

 

  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.