As predicted - 100% of the Dems voted against no tax on tips and OT. Can't wait for the GOP to run with this. Dems hate actually working people. They only like billionaires and welfare recipients.

"#25 | Posted by jpw"

Which services are those?

"Is it a GOOD idea or a BAD idea to borrow $6 Trillion, to give $7.7 Trillion in new or renewed tax cuts, over half going to the world's richest 1%?"

So now you are going with the 1% vs. you .1% ridiculous claim you applied to the last tax cut. You are learning it seems.

"It's moments like these I refer to, when Republicans complain (and rightfully so) about debt. NOW's the chance to speak up.
#26 | Posted by Danforth"

Joe Biden just racked up $9T in debt in 4 years and you are now going to come here and pretend you care about the debt? GFY. You just want to hurt poor people - tax them so they stay poor and reliant on the government.

"So are you coming out foursquare against this NEW BORROWING or not?
#32 | Posted by Danforth"

I support corporate tax rates of 20%, I support tariffs to protect our jobs, I support eliminating taxes on tips and OT - hell, I support eliminating income taxes on people making under $100K/year. But, I would actually raise the top marginal tax rate. I would eliminate estate planning loopholes - which is the real way the billionaires escape 'paying their fair share'. I am not against maintaining the current level of revenue or even increasing it slightly.

But what we truly need is a massive gutting on the spending side and this included the DoD, USAID, DoE, and eliminating most - if not all - of the 3-letter agencies. I believe credit card rates should be capped at 18%, I believe the US government and state governments should restore spending to higher education with the caveats that 1.) tuition increases can only increase at the rate of inflation and 2.) programs reformed to offer a better ROI with certain programs ineligible for fed subsidized student loans. I believe that the AMA needs to be 'trust busted' to lower the costs of attending medical school and increase the number of talented people that are discouraged due to the residency programs (which amount to hazing) and the huge financial burden. I believe that race and gender should play ZERO role in hiring decisions. I believe that the government should set pharmaceutical prices indexed to what other countries are paying. I believe the government should offer some base form of universal healthcare (minimal level of service) and private insurance would more or less equate to disaster insurance. I believe that insurance should not be able to exclude people based on pre-existing conditions. I believe that there should be ZERO cash-assistance for able-bodies people. EBT should be eliminated replaced by government cheese and food distribution.

So, this is what I believe. I think it places me firmly in the policies of a 1990's era Democrat - because that is what I am. It is just the 1990's eras Democrats are considered MAGA because the 2025 Democrats have gone insane.

"#36 | Posted by Danforth"

I just told you what I am for and against. If your smooth brain can't understand it, please ask one of your liberal friends here to explain it to you or maybe one of your pretend 'tax preparer' clients. Sorry you can't fit me into some 'he is EVIL' box based on my beliefs because I would assume you agree with most of what I wrote - at least until Trump supports it to and you revert to your factory settings being against anything Trump.

Let's look at US government revenue from 2024 to 2027 assuming Trump's tax bill passes.

2024: $4.73T
2025(E): $4.6T
2026(E): $5.0T
2027(E): $5.3T

That equates to a 4% annual increase in revenue and this does not even factor in much higher growth that will occur with the tax cuts and other policies. I do not believe the government should need to grow revenue by 2x the rate of inflation each year. So, I am fine with the tax cuts. Now, I guess I would prefer to have 2025's collection be equal to 2024 so maybe need another $130B in revenue from raising taxes or reducing cuts. But in general, as collections are still expected to grow by 4% annually - I see no need whatsoever to not do this. The problem for the US is on the spending side of the equation - and we need DOGE to accelerate and cut deeper.

"So if inflation is 3%, that's 1% in real increase, correct?"

As I already stated, we are now dealing with Trump level inflation so we can assume 2% annual. The Biden inflation is behind us.

"much higher growth that will occur with the tax cuts and other policies."
Growth? Based on higher unemployment and loss of government revenues and services?!?"

You -------- scream until you are blue in the face that poor people spend all their money so any additional money in their pockets directly spurs economic growth. Did you forget that already -------? As a result of working class people getting more money in their pockets due to reduced taxes on tip and OT, it will spur the economy. As to the 'lower government revenues' - NO - in both absolute and inflation adjusted terms, the US government is COLLECTING MORE IN TAXES compared to the baseline year of 2024.

"Well, since you won't say if you're FOR or AGAINST borrowing trillions and trillions for tax giveaways
#40 | Posted by Danforth"

Well, for starters - your question starts with a false assumption. We are not borrowing a dime due to the tax cuts because our revenue is increasing. We are borrowing due to out of control spending. And as we have seen time and time again - giving the government more revenue DOES NOT lower the deficit - it just encourages the useless government to accelerate their pace of spending.

Since the year 2000 - US government spending has been about 1.5% higher than inflation EVERY YEAR - and yet, our deficits only balloon out of control due to liberal spending.

In 2021, US government spending excluding covid relief spending was $5.2T. In 2024, it was $6.75T - this is an annual increase of 9% in spending. Under no scenario would we increase US government revenue by 9% annually - and even if we did - we would still have an expanding deficit as spending is so much higher.

Under Trump/DOGE - spending from 2024 to 2026 is estimated to increase at a 1.8% rate - thus, we are actually closing the deficit. But the reality is that we need to have spending DECREASE - not just increase at a slower rate.

"#43 | Posted by REDIAL"

You honestly want to claim now that you never heard the ------- liberals on this website state that we need to provide tax relief and direct cash payments to poor people because it spurs the economy as they immediately spend it without saving as opposed to rich people that save most of it? You truly want to make that claim now?

It is funny, because Danforth is now arguing against that same logic unless he believes people making tips and working OT vs. salaried positions are so rich that they are not going to spend the extra money.