Economics is a harsh mistress

[brenthutch 383]

Just who do you think pays cooperate taxes? 

[yobnoc 142]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Just who do you think pays cooperate taxes? 

Probably people who can spell "corporate."

And um...corporations? 

If they didn't stand to gain billions upon billions of dollars, why would they send their team of lobbyists to capitol hill to bribe lawmakers - oops, I mean "contribute to campaigns" - to have their rates lowered? 

Buying a politician is the wisest investment one can make. 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

22 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Both, I own some rental properties, I am paying a mortgage on some rental properties and I (actually we) are paying a mortgage on our primary residence. 

Apparently your situation is such that the limits on property tax and interest deductions aren't negatives. Are property values are still rising in your area against those headwinds?

[brenthutch 383]

Thank you spelling Nazi, but FYI corporations just pass their tax costs onto the consumer, which is tantamount to a highly regressive tax. (I don't mean to "Mansplain" but that means that the poor and middle class will be disproportionally impacted)

 

Edited October 23, 2019 by brenthutch

[yobnoc 142]

7 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Thank you spelling Nazi, but FYI corporations just pass their tax costs onto the consumer, which is tantamount to a highly regressive tax. (I don't mean to "Mansplain" but that means that the poor and middle class will be disproportionally impacted)

 

Please explain what the benefit is of lowering corporate tax rates then?  Why do corporations invest so heavily in buying politicians to lower their rates?  If it's ultimately the consumer that pays them, what does it matter? Your argument doesn't hold up to the barest amount of scrutiny.

[brenthutch 383]

12 minutes ago, yobnoc said:

Please explain what the benefit is of lowering corporate tax rates then?  Why do corporations invest so heavily in buying politicians to lower their rates?  If it's ultimately the consumer that pays them, what does it matter? Your argument doesn't hold up to the barest amount of scrutiny.

Your lack of understanding is profound and not worthy of a response.  Check into your local community collage, take some basic econ and business classes and get back to me. 

Edited October 23, 2019 by brenthutch

[yobnoc 142]

20 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Your lack of understanding is profound and not worthy of a response.  Check into your local community collage, take some basic econ and business classes and get back to me. 

Projection at its finest.

 

It's "college."  Check out yours and take a basic English Composition class.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

36 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Your lack of understanding is profound and not worthy of a response.  Check into your local community collage, take some basic econ and business classes and get back to me. 

 Come on man, if you need to go there at least have the balls to go big and get a warning from the mods. Also, editing is for fixing spelling errors not making them. 

[yoink 321]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Thank you spelling Nazi, but FYI corporations just pass their tax costs onto the consumer, which is tantamount to a highly regressive tax. (I don't mean to "Mansplain" but that means that the poor and middle class will be disproportionally impacted)

 

You're oversimplifying.

Some companies will do that. Others will use it as a reason to innovate and change their processes and procedures to keep their profit margin stable while holding the same price point. Those companies that just pass the tax directly onto the consumer suddenly find themselves being priced out of the market and with decreasing market shares in a more competitive environment.

It's the very basis of that capitalism schtick that you keep banging on about. I thought you understood this?

Edited October 23, 2019 by yoink

[normiss 622]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Wow, I can not even begin to figure out how to answer that.  Please flesh out how tax cuts hurt the middle class.  As a member of the middle class I can certainly appreciate the  extra $5K+ my family has benefited from.  Please explain how I have been harmed.  

It cost me an extra $12,000 for that bullshit tax "cut".

I expect next year to be worse as we loose a few more benefits of write-offs while the wealthy gain more.

[brenthutch 383]

I will call bullshit on this one, show me how a tax cut cost you $12,000.

[turtlespeed 212]

10 hours ago, normiss said:

It cost me an extra $12,000 for that bullshit tax "cut".

I expect next year to be worse as we loose a few more benefits of write-offs while the wealthy gain more.

Taking a page from yobnoc's:

Its "lose" - according to Brenthutch - 

You should probably look into some English courses at your nearest community college.

Just sayin'

Oh, I suppose I should add that you may have meant otherwise.  Did you mean that you were actually going to set that $12K free?

[normiss 622]

7 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I will call bullshit on this one, show me how a tax cut cost you $12,000.

I paid 12k more in federal taxes last year than the previous year. 
That’s all the proof you get from me. 
no reason to lie about it. 
Skymama was not happy. 

[kallend 1,623]

1 minute ago, normiss said:

I paid 12k more in federal taxes last year than the previous year. 
That’s all the proof you get from me. 
no reason to lie about it. 
Skymama was not happy. 

It's your own fault for not being a billionaire.

[normiss 622]

8 minutes ago, kallend said:

It's your own fault for not being a billionaire.

I want to laugh but suddenly I feel sad.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

50 minutes ago, normiss said:

I paid 12k more in federal taxes last year than the previous year. 
That’s all the proof you get from me. 
no reason to lie about it. 
Skymama was not happy. 

Do you mind disclosing if any of the increase was due to the changes in interest rate and property tax deductions?

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, normiss said:

I paid 12k more in federal taxes last year than the previous year. 
That’s all the proof you get from me. 
no reason to lie about it. 
Skymama was not happy. 

You mean we shouldn't subpoena your tax records? You mean they are private?

 

[yobnoc 142]

58 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

You mean we shouldn't subpoena your tax records? You mean they are private?

 

I give you full permission to subpoena my taxes.  Oh wait: you can't.  Because you lack the investigative authority or reasonable suspicion that I've committed some sort of financial fraud. 

Congress doesn't have either of those problems.  Try harder.  Do better.

[turtlespeed 212]

4 minutes ago, yobnoc said:

I give you full permission to subpoena my taxes.  Oh wait: you can't.  Because you lack the investigative authority or reasonable suspicion that I've committed some sort of financial fraud. 

Congress doesn't have either of those problems.  Try harder.  Do better.

Obviously they do.

[yobnoc 142]

5 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Obviously they do.

The courts certainly don't agree with your position thus far.

[kallend 1,623]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

You mean we shouldn't subpoena your tax records? You mean they are private?

 

I don't recall his going on TV and stating very clearly that he WOULD release them.  Unlike a certain presidential candidate.

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

I don't recall his going on TV and stating very clearly that he WOULD release them.  Unlike a certain presidential candidate.

Why does anyone care?

 

Would you support the same treatment of a Clinton?

This is Trump's birth certificate scandal.

Edited October 24, 2019 by turtlespeed

[normiss 622]

5 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Do you mind disclosing if any of the increase was due to the changes in interest rate and property tax deductions?

Some of each, fewer business deductions, lower health care deductions, fewer legal fees to deduct, just seems like the entire process changed enough that it hurt more than it has in YEARS.

A number of credits were simply gone. At least for me, us, home based business, and business/non-reimbursable employee expenses, non-reimbursed medical.

It was also the most difficult process to file I've had before. The temptation to drink while filing was intense!

[JoeWeber 2,299]

31 minutes ago, normiss said:

Some of each, fewer business deductions, lower health care deductions, fewer legal fees to deduct, just seems like the entire process changed enough that it hurt more than it has in YEARS.

A number of credits were simply gone. At least for me, us, home based business, and business/non-reimbursable employee expenses, non-reimbursed medical.

It was also the most difficult process to file I've had before. The temptation to drink while filing was intense!

I don't see how the new law doesn't negatively impact property values in the future. Reduced property tax and interest rate deductions reduce the amount a borrower can pay to buy a house. The change in home equity loan interest deductions now mean your home equity is almost as unavailable as your 401K; that is yes to the new bedroom but no to the new boat. That also impacts the value of a home. Seems to me that anyone in the middle-ish area of the economy should be taking into account the actual value of their home.  Not just today, but also when happily ever after arrives. They might conclude that the couple of grand in new tax law benefit they are spending today is simply spending their home equity.

[normiss 622]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

I don't see how the new law doesn't negatively impact property values in the future. Reduced property tax and interest rate deductions reduce the amount a borrower can pay to buy a house. The change in home equity loan interest deductions now mean your home equity is almost as unavailable as your 401K; that is yes to the new bedroom but no to the new boat. That also impacts the value of a home. Seems to me that anyone in the middle-ish area of the economy should be taking into account the actual value of their home.  Not just today, but also when happily ever after arrives. They might conclude that the couple of grand in new tax law benefit they are spending today is simply spending their home equity.

We bought 10 years ago, fortunately on a short. It's more than doubled in value, for now. We have stellar credit and went with a 15 year loan. We're in a great place on the home ownership, for now anyway.

Aaannnddd, I'm changing jobs again.

I'm actually amazed I survive this long working for a church owned company. Preachers open our network meetings. It's creepy AF. Feels cultist.