Latest tax changes in the BBB

[CoachKandSportsguy]

See the latest tax changes to the current BBB being voted on in the Senate. Unknown are any amendments altering this part

Means potentially more ROTH conversion ability at a lower tax rate but only if receiving SS

good luck out there, don’t be someone else’s exit liquidity!

[kingofbeer]

See the latest tax changes to the current BBB being voted on in the Senate. Unknown are any amendments altering this part

Means potentially more ROTH conversion ability at a lower tax rate but only if receiving SS

good luck out there, don’t be someone else’s exit liquidity!
Bonus deduction is great. But what good is it for seniors, if you are not paying any income tax.

[Aces4]

Bonus deduction is great. But what good is it for seniors, if you are not paying any income tax.

It casts a wider net for those low income seniors who are paying income taxes and are stretching to make ends meet. We know quite a few in that position. If you are not paying any income taxes at this point, you are already ahead in the tax dept.

[Bill14564]

Bonus deduction is great. But what good is it for seniors, if you are not paying any income tax.

If you make so little in SS and 401K deductions that you pay no income tax then you’re right. For most of us who do pay taxes on SS income, this could be worth about $1,300.

[Aces4]

The promise of no tax on Social Security benefits turned out to be a promise broken.

One can do just so much with just so much and it appears there is an attempt to aid those living on limited SS income.

[tophcfa]

The cynical part of me has me worried that this is a small bone that they are throwing out to seniors to soften the blow from future cuts to Medicare and/or Social Security benefits. I guess time will tell?

[Byte1]

The promise of no tax on Social Security benefits turned out to be a promise broken.

This is better. He didn't have the power to cut taxes on SS. Only congress could and they won't. More folks benefit from the higher deduction.....IF/IF congress passes this one. It's not looking sunny right now.

[Pballer]

This is better. He didn't have the power to cut taxes on SS. Only congress could and they won't. More folks benefit from the higher deduction.....IF/IF congress passes this one. It's not looking sunny right now.

How is this better? If I get $40,000 in SS benefits and it is not taxed, it is like getting a $40,000 deduction. Instead Congress is giving me a $4000 or $6000 deduction, and only if I don't have too much income, whoop de doo. I'm sure there are seniors who voted the way they did because of this promise; instead it turned out to be a bait and switch.

[Moderator]

Comments directed at other posters rather than the subject are against the terms of service.

Please refrain from engaging in any discussion that even suggests political themes.

[bmcgowan13]

CBO says it adds 3.9 TRILLION dollars to the deficient.

This is good...why?

[Lottoguy]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

[Pugchief]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

Define rich.

And while you're at it, what would be their "fair share"?

[CoachKandSportsguy]

How is this better? If I get $40,000 in SS benefits and it is not taxed, it is like getting a $40,000 deduction. Instead Congress is giving me a $4000 or $6000 deduction, and only if I don't have too much income, whoop de doo. I'm sure there are seniors who voted the way they did because of this promise; instead it turned out to be a bait and switch.

So you didn’t get everything you wanted, but you got 4,000 more in deductions and you are better off than last year, correct? It’s out of our control, so I give thanks for the increase deduction even though i haven’t started collecting, though past FRA.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It casts a wider net for those low income seniors who are paying income taxes and are stretching to make ends meet. We know quite a few in that position. If you are not paying any income taxes at this point, you are already ahead in the tax dept.

No, it really doesn't help low income seniors. We're not "ahead" in any department. If we were in a financial position to have to pay more tax, it'd mean we were earning a lot more income than we are now. That'd be a great thing.

The fact that we don't pay income tax means we're TOO POOR. There's nothing "ahead" about that.

Getting an additional $6000 bonus won't do us ANY good, at all. It gives people who are NOT poor a bonus, and poor people continue to be poor.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

One can do just so much with just so much and it appears there is an attempt to aid those living on limited SS income.

One thing they could do, is expand Medicaid for seniors heading into nursing homes or requiring palliative care at home.

People living on low income, have little to no tax burden in the first place. If by taking the standard deduction you'd end up getting a full refund on any taxes you've paid, with a net of zero -

then getting an additional $6000 deduction wouldn't change anything, at all. You'd still net zero.

There are seniors living right here in The Villages who would be in this situation. There are millions of seniors all around the country who would be in this situation.

[Aces4]

One thing they could do, is expand Medicaid for seniors heading into nursing homes or requiring palliative care at home.

People living on low income, have little to no tax burden in the first place. If by taking the standard deduction you'd end up getting a full refund on any taxes you've paid, with a net of zero -

then getting an additional $6000 deduction wouldn't change anything, at all. You'd still net zero.

There are seniors living right here in The Villages who would be in this situation. There are millions of seniors all around the country who would be in this situation.

That's right, those seniors are already getting a free tax ride and SS benefits. When does the government stop being responsible for everyone living the life of luxury? Let seniors go through their savings and assets and pay their way. Passing money down to children and in 5 years, the seniors get all those government goodies. I've seen it happen.

[Aces4]

No, it really doesn't help low income seniors. We're not "ahead" in any department. If we were in a financial position to have to pay more tax, it'd mean we were earning a lot more income than we are now. That'd be a great thing.

The fact that we don't pay income tax means we're TOO POOR. There's nothing "ahead" about that.

Getting an additional $6000 bonus won't do us ANY good, at all. It gives people who are NOT poor a bonus, and poor people continue to be poor.

I guess I need a definition of "too poor". If one is making ends meet and living a lifestyle in a nice community, I don't consider them poor or needing assistance. Many seniors don't pay income tax now and collect their SS benefits and are able to make ends meet. Why are we subsidizing that situation which many of our parents and grandparents lived through without handouts?

[Andyb]

Win, win!

[jimbomaybe]

No, it really doesn't help low income seniors. We're not "ahead" in any department. If we were in a financial position to have to pay more tax, it'd mean we were earning a lot more income than we are now. That'd be a great thing.

The fact that we don't pay income tax means we're TOO POOR. There's nothing "ahead" about that.

Getting an additional $6000 bonus won't do us ANY good, at all. It gives people who are NOT poor a bonus, and poor people continue to be poor.

Solution , don't be poor, market equites have produced over 8% over history, $200. a month investment over a working life of 35 years assuming a 6% compounded return you would have over 267 K

[NoMo50]

Like any bill making its way through Congress, the BBB will likely look very different once it has passed. Being massaged and tweaked, numerous times, by both the House and the Senate, could likely yield a ******* stepchild that does not resemble its original form. Remember, a camel is a horse built by a committee.

[oneclickplus]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

Actually, cutting spending is better than raising taxes on anyone including "the rich".

[Marmaduke]

Win, win!
We Deserve a Break, and we're feeling mighty "joyful".

It passed the Senate, going to the House. Looking good for '25!

[golfing eagles]

One thing they could do, is expand Medicaid for seniors heading into nursing homes or requiring palliative care at home.

People living on low income, have little to no tax burden in the first place. If by taking the standard deduction you'd end up getting a full refund on any taxes you've paid, with a net of zero -

then getting an additional $6000 deduction wouldn't change anything, at all. You'd still net zero.

There are seniors living right here in The Villages who would be in this situation. There are millions of seniors all around the country who would be in this situation.

EXACTLY!!!!

The bill includes a TAX BREAK. It is intended to ease the burden on seniors who are PAYING TAXES. It is not intended to be yet another welfare program or government freebie. If you are paying ZERO TAX, then you don't need TAX RELIEF

[Angelhug52]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.
That rich , according to the bbbwill still have big tax cuts. Our grandchildren and children who are not rich will still be hurting. May led to more mulitgeneatioal homes. Plus the reports are saying increase in homeless ?hunger?unemployment?poor unaffordable health care. Yep bbb will benfit some the rest.. not happening. For the record it will hurt those born and raised here in the USA.

[golfing eagles]

The rich , according to the bbb will still have big tax cuts. Our grandchildren and children who are not rich will still be hurting. May led to more mulitgeneatioal homes. Plus the reports are saying increase in homeless,hunger and unemployment and poor unaffordable health care. Yep bbb will benefit some the rest.. not happening. For the record it will hurt those born and raised here in the USA.

The "rich"??? Who are they??? Anyone who actually contributes to society by paying taxes, donating to charities, employing others and venturing capital?????

"The reports are saying....."---what "reports"? I think we can all guess the source of that misinformation.

This class warfare rhetoric has to end. The top 5% currently pay 65% of all taxes. And that's "fair"????? Forty-seven % pay no tax----and that's "fair". But by all means let's continue the populist rhetoric that started in 1933 and has only become worse since then.

[Ken D.]

I guess I need a definition of "too poor". If one is making ends meet and living a lifestyle in a nice community, I don't consider them poor or needing assistance. Many seniors don't pay income tax now and collect their SS benefits and are able to make ends meet. Why are we subsidizing that situation which many of our parents and grandparents lived through without handouts?
Amen

[Ken D.]

No, it really doesn't help low income seniors. We're not "ahead" in any department. If we were in a financial position to have to pay more tax, it'd mean we were earning a lot more income than we are now. That'd be a great thing.

The fact that we don't pay income tax means we're TOO POOR. There's nothing "ahead" about that.

Getting an additional $6000 bonus won't do us ANY good, at all. It gives people who are NOT poor a bonus, and poor people continue to be poor.
Curious, who's too blame for folks being poor?

[Topspinmo]

How is this better? If I get $40,000 in SS benefits and it is not taxed, it is like getting a $40,000 deduction. Instead Congress is giving me a $4000 or $6000 deduction, and only if I don't have too much income, whoop de doo. I'm sure there are seniors who voted the way they did because of this promise; instead it turned out to be a bait and switch.

If you got too much income in year need be taxed instead of using all exemptions lawyers put in so ones with too much get out paying taxes.

Any deduction in taxes is GOOD i don’t care how much or little person makes.

[Bill14564]

The "rich"??? Who are they??? Anyone who actually contributes to society by paying taxes, donating to charities, employing others and venturing capital?????

"The reports are saying....."---what "reports"? I think we can all guess the source of that misinformation.

This class warfare rhetoric has to end. The top 5% currently pay 65% of all taxes. And that's "fair"????? Forty-seven % pay no tax----and that's "fair". But by all means let's continue the populist rhetoric that started in 1933 and has only become worse since then.

Perhaps we can say “the rich” are those who will put any additional tax breaks into their investment accounts rather than into the economy. Give $1,000 to someone making less than say $100K and it will likely be spent. Give $1,000 to someone making more than $400K and they might not notice if they dropped it on the floor, they certainly aren’t going to spend it in Publix.

It would be interesting to see statistics on the percentage of income the top 5% make. Do the top 5% who pay 65% of taxes also receive 80% of income? Similarly, it would be interesting to see what their effective tax rate is. I looked but wasn’t able to find that in a quick search.

[Topspinmo]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

Funny how all sudden worried about debt. About 30 years too late for that ship to sale. All feel good programs ran up debt and they still don’t feel any better. I like how some bean counter predicts 3 plus trillion to debt in 10 years. Nobody can predict what going happen in 10 years let along 4, and we know what 4 years I’m talking about. Until stop the blame game and stop spending more than collected nothing going to change.

[LeRoySmith]

The "rich"??? Who are they???

I guess they are anyone who worked hard all their lives and were fiscally responsible.


This class warfare rhetoric has to end. The top 5% currently pay 65% of all taxes. And that's "fair"????? Forty-seven % pay no tax----and that's "fair". But by all means let's continue the populist rhetoric that started in 1933 and has only become worse since then.

I don't mind paying my share and I know that society has responsibilities that need to be met. I do have major heartburn with the tax dollars that are extracted from me being used for so many ridiculous things (foreign and domestic). The people that truly need help should get it, no questions asked. The people that have the ability to fend for themselves and won't are the worse kind of scum. Not only do they steal from us they steal from those truly in need. The welfare systems that have been put in place the past 50 or 60 years are criminal. The people that put those programs in place are the ones to blame for many of our problems, financially and socially.

The problem is those people can't and won't be punished or removed from their positions of power.

[Ptmcbriz]

I think it irresponsible to be adding trillions more to the debt. Why don’t we cut corporate welfare? The true definition of socialism. Why have we been subsidizing fossil fuels, agriculture, technology over and over for decades , yet a child getting a free lunch at school is the problem. The multi millionaire and billionaires are making record profits as CEO’s yet typically pay a much lower percentage in taxes due to many loopholes. If I pay 20% in taxes, then it’s reasonable for a billionaire to pay at least 20% but most pay a much smaller % due to deductions. The 20% impacting me, is the same impact on a billionaire. That money would would greatly increase the federal government’s income which would make our problems much less. A first world country takes care of its citizens. It’s only 3rd world countries that don’t take care of their citizens. That’s the benefit of living in a wealthy advanced country. The more poor and homeless you have the uglier the country becomes both physically and financially. It becomes much more crime ridden and dirty. First world countries all create safety nets for their citizens. That’s the benefit of an advanced country. Yet somehow we continue to go backwards towards the 1930’s when there were less protections for citizens and more abuse of citizens by corporations. This is crazy.

[Cuervo]

Look my problem with this BBB is not even its supporters truly know all that is in it.
I have no opinion if it is a Big Beautiful Bill or a Big Pile of Crap, I believe I've somewhat isolated myself from any damage.
But our elected official on both side of the isle should go over it 10 times before they vote yea or nay.
Putting an artificial deadline might sound like a good idea at the moment, but the American people are the ones that will suffer if all the i's are not dotted and the t's are not crossed.

[jimbomaybe]

Perhaps we can say “the rich” are those who will put any additional tax breaks into their investment accounts rather than into the economy. Give $1,000 to someone making less than say $100K and it will likely be spent. Give $1,000 to someone making more than $400K and they might not notice if they dropped it on the floor, they certainly aren’t going to spend it in Publix.

It would be interesting to see statistics on the percentage of income the top 5% make. Do the top 5% who pay 65% of taxes also receive 80% of income? Similarly, it would be interesting to see what their effective tax rate is. I looked but wasn’t able to find that in a quick search.
And factor in the difference between income and net worth, managing your investments to have the "income" you want the rest better positioned for growth , that by the way is a very positive thing for the economy that benefits everyone. The old adage is proven again and again " A fool and his money are soon parted". Those who have large wealth did something right to acquire that wealth , buy financing good ideas that grow the economy via productive enterprises , productivity, efficiency are why we have historically the highest standard of living for everyone

[golfing eagles]

Perhaps we can say “the rich” are those who will put any additional tax breaks into their investment accounts rather than into the economy. Give $1,000 to someone making less than say $100K and it will likely be spent. Give $1,000 to someone making more than $400K and they might not notice if they dropped it on the floor, they certainly aren’t going to spend it in Publix.

It would be interesting to see statistics on the percentage of income the top 5% make. Do the top 5% who pay 65% of taxes also receive 80% of income? Similarly, it would be interesting to see what their effective tax rate is. I looked but wasn’t able to find that in a quick search.

And just what do people think happens to money deposited into an "investment account"???? The CEO puts it under his mattress???? Corporate profits are either put back into expanding the business (more jobs, new construction), increasing salaries of workers, or by declaring a dividend, which then is reinvested and so on. Again, we need to dump the "rich and corporations are bad" rhetoric, and also realize that you cannot make the poor richer by making the rich poorer

And to answer your question, from the IRS:

"According to the latest IRS data, the top 1% of earners paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes in 2022. This underscores the extent to which the burden of the income tax system falls on taxpayers from the highest income groups.

Do the top 1% pay 40% of taxes?
The top 1% of earners typically pay much more in taxes than many other Americans. Nationwide, this group contributes 45% of total personal income taxes collected. However, the top 1% doesn't pay the same amount everywhere. Therefore, some states may be more dependent on this group than others for tax revenue.


What do the top 5% pay in taxes?
Most of the government's federal income tax revenue comes from the nation's top income earners. In 2021, the top 5% of earners — people with incomes $252,840 and above — collectively paid over $1.4 trillion in income taxes, or about 66% of the national total.


Did the top 5% pay 66% of all federal income taxes?
The top 5% pay more than 65% of federal income taxes, the highest 10% pay 75% of them and the top 25% are accountable for 89%. The bottom half of earners, who make below $46,627 a year, paid just 2% of federal personal income tax, according to the report.

Who pays 97% of all federal income taxes?
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of all federal individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3 percent."

And did they represent 80% of the income? Who cares, THEY EARNED IT, THEY WORKED FOR IT, AND THEY SUCCEEDED. Let's stop punishing success in this country and maybe we'll climb out of debt.

[Chateau]

Income tax paid on Social Security funds the Social Security Trust Fund.

We need to understand how that proposed change affects this funding mechanism and the impact, if any, on the projected Social Security Trust Fund shortfall

[Bill14564]

And just what do people think happens to money deposited into an "investment account"???? The CEO puts it under his mattress???? Corporate profits are either put back into expanding the business (more jobs, new construction), increasing salaries of workers, or by declaring a dividend, which then is reinvested and so on. Again, we need to dump the "rich and corporations are bad" rhetoric, and also realize that you cannot make the poor richer by making the rich poorer

And to answer your question, from the IRS:

"According to the latest IRS data, the top 1% of earners paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes in 2022. This underscores the extent to which the burden of the income tax system falls on taxpayers from the highest income groups.

Do the top 1% pay 40% of taxes?
The top 1% of earners typically pay much more in taxes than many other Americans. Nationwide, this group contributes 45% of total personal income taxes collected. However, the top 1% doesn't pay the same amount everywhere. Therefore, some states may be more dependent on this group than others for tax revenue.


What do the top 5% pay in taxes?
Most of the government's federal income tax revenue comes from the nation's top income earners. In 2021, the top 5% of earners — people with incomes $252,840 and above — collectively paid over $1.4 trillion in income taxes, or about 66% of the national total.


Did the top 5% pay 66% of all federal income taxes?
The top 5% pay more than 65% of federal income taxes, the highest 10% pay 75% of them and the top 25% are accountable for 89%. The bottom half of earners, who make below $46,627 a year, paid just 2% of federal personal income tax, according to the report.

Who pays 97% of all federal income taxes?
The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of all federal individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3 percent."

And did they represent 80% of the income? Who cares, THEY EARNED IT, THEY WORKED FOR IT, AND THEY SUCCEEDED. Let's stop punishing success in this country and maybe we'll climb out of debt.

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.

[Pat2015]

The cynical part of me has me worried that this is a small bone that they are throwing out to seniors to soften the blow from future cuts to Medicare and/or Social Security benefits. I guess time will tell?

There are no proposed cuts to Medicare though the premiums will continue to increase as they have every year. There’s also no proposed cuts to SS though there are changes that include increasing the retitement age which has been done before, making more income eligible for SS taxes, and an increased vigilance of detecting fraud and prosecution for those who commit fraud. No party is cutting SS checks as that would be political suicide.

[SoCalGal]

The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ&t=118s

[Aces4]

I think it irresponsible to be adding trillions more to the debt. Why don’t we cut corporate welfare? The true definition of socialism. Why have we been subsidizing fossil fuels, agriculture, technology over and over for decades , yet a child getting a free lunch at school is the problem. The multi millionaire and billionaires are making record profits as CEO’s yet typically pay a much lower percentage in taxes due to many loopholes. If I pay 20% in taxes, then it’s reasonable for a billionaire to pay at least 20% but most pay a much smaller % due to deductions. The 20% impacting me, is the same impact on a billionaire. That money would would greatly increase the federal government’s income which would make our problems much less. A first world country takes care of its citizens. It’s only 3rd world countries that don’t take care of their citizens. That’s the benefit of living in a wealthy advanced country. The more poor and homeless you have the uglier the country becomes both physically and financially. It becomes much more crime ridden and dirty. First world countries all create safety nets for their citizens. That’s the benefit of an advanced country. Yet somehow we continue to go backwards towards the 1930’s when there were less protections for citizens and more abuse of citizens by corporations. This is crazy.

Backwards? Lol, this country has been too generous to the poor in that we now have many more ablebodied who have found they can survive without working and many have taken the sad route of drugs.

People in the USA have become lazy so we had to bring in people who know how to work. And in 5 years or the next generation the US will have the same problem because that group of workers will have figured out the system of "getting a higher education" and not performing physical labor. Do you then bring in millions more to work to reach the same conclusion?

This touting of the poor is ridiculous when only a certain percentage of Americans are footing the bill for the rest. What did one think would happen when employers hire under the table and not providing healthcare benefits, decent wages, not paying into the SS system, no retirement benefits or 401 contributions to these off-the-record hirees.

Those poor you are mentioning are a good portion of that population along with those who work the system. Then we have the number of unwed mothers and fatherless children that need supporting. How about no children if you can't care for and feed them?

I am truly supportive of those who are poor and need extra help but there are millions of people in that hot air balloon basket that don't belong there and it ain't gonna fly no more.

[Bill14564]

There are no proposed cuts to Medicare though the premiums will continue to increase as they have every year. There’s also no proposed cuts to SS though there are changes that include increasing the retitement age which has been done before, making more income eligible for SS taxes, and an increased vigilance of detecting fraud and prosecution for those who commit fraud. No party is cutting SS checks as that would be political suicide.

The proposed changes that you mention are ideas to push out the date when benefits will need to be reduced. Neither party wants to do that but the math is pretty clear.

[jimbomaybe]

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.
The statistics are the point , not generated but lifted from the facts a factual response to who pays how much. Spend money on themselves OK , so what , other wise known as spreading the money around .

[golfing eagles]

Spoken as someone trying to justify and protect the 5%.

Disclosure: I am definitely not part of 5%. While I believe I will personally benefit from parts of this bill, my country will be severely damaged by it.

Who cares? If you want to stand on the 65% of overall payments then it’s important to know the other side of the equation, the percent of overall income.

It’s interesting that we can easily find data on how put upon the millionaire class is but it is difficult to learn how much they benefit for shouldering such a burden. It’s almost as if the statistics were generated specifically to prove a point.

NO, it's not important or relevant.

20% of $50 million is much more than 20% of $100,000---in fact. 9,980,000 more. As their income goes up, the amount of tax goes up, so the fact that they represent more of the total income is IRRELEVANT. But it's even much more unfair than that---as income goes up, so does the TAX RATE. So, to make the numbers real, 38% of $50 million is $ 19 million, 14% of $100,000 is $14,000.

The problem is that the top 5% could be taxed at 90% and it still wouldn't make any difference in the deficit or debt---but it would bring investment and venture capitalism to a grinding halt. People shouldn't be concerned over what their neighbor pays and pay THEIR FAIR SHARE themselves

[Bill14564]

The statistics are the point , not generated but lifted from the facts a factual response to who pays how much. Spend money on themselves OK , so what , other wise known as spreading the money around .

My earlier point was that the money wasn’t spent, it was hoarded.

I’m good with who pays how much but if you want that to mean something you also need to tell me how much they made (income, not unrealized gains). If 65% of net income before taxes paid 75% of the taxes then great. If 50% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then I have no complaint at all. But if 95% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then quit the dang whining!

The statistics are based on facts but both the facts and the statistics are incomplete.

Then there are always the “three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

[Pballer]

The Big Beautiful Pile of Crap bill is just that, a pile of crap. The middle class will be paying thousands more in big beautiful tariffs and getting back a fraction of that from grandiose promises that sounded good at the time but have restrictive conditions that leave you feeling that you have been suckered. Take the no tax on overtime promise. It turns out that a maximum of only $12,500 in overtime will be exempt from tax. I guess that was somehow left out of the promise. I'm sure the billionaire class got most of what they wanted in this bill though.

[jimbomaybe]

My earlier point was that the money wasn’t spent, it was hoarded.

I’m good with who pays how much but if you want that to mean something you also need to tell me how much they made (income, not unrealized gains). If 65% of net income before taxes paid 75% of the taxes then great. If 50% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then I have no complaint at all. But if 95% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then quit the dang whining!

The statistics are based on facts but both the facts and the statistics are incomplete.

Then there are always the “three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

Unrealized gain is just that , until it is realized it is speculative . not hoarding,
I don't see how "I" am whining ?

[golfing eagles]

My earlier point was that the money wasn’t spent, it was hoarded.

I’m good with who pays how much but if you want that to mean something you also need to tell me how much they made (income, not unrealized gains). If 65% of net income before taxes paid 75% of the taxes then great. If 50% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then I have no complaint at all. But if 95% of net income before taxes paid 65% of taxes then quit the dang whining!

The statistics are based on facts but both the facts and the statistics are incomplete.

Then there are always the “three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.”

And my point is that profit is not "hoarded", it is re-invested in the ways I already posted.

And again, how much income they have is IRRELEVANT. What's relevant is how much does the government TAKE AWAY from what they earned to give away to those who didn't produce.

I can't be any more clear.

[golfing eagles]

The Big Beautiful Pile of Crap bill is just that, a pile of crap. The middle class will be paying thousands more in big beautiful tariffs and getting back a fraction of that from grandiose promises that sounded good at the time but have restrictive conditions that leave you feeling that you have been suckered. Take the no tax on overtime promise. It turns out that a maximum of only $12,500 in overtime will be exempt from tax. I guess that was somehow left out of the promise. I'm sure the billionaire class got most of what they wanted in this bill though.

"Only" $12,500 in overtime is exempt??? ONLY????? At $20/hr that's 625 hours/yr or 12.5 hours/week given 2 weeks vacation. How much overtime does one think the average worker accumulates? Yes, some will work more, but ON AVERAGE????? And $12,500 exempt is far better than the current ZERO. Amazing how some use trite rhetoric to try to turn a good thing into a bad thing. That's the true pile of crap.

[Bill14564]

And my point is that profit is not "hoarded", it is re-invested in the ways I already posted.

And again, how much income they have is IRRELEVANT. What's relevant is how much does the government TAKE AWAY from what they earned to give away to those who didn't produce.

I can't be any more clear.

But you don’t know how much the govt. has taken away from what they have earned because you don’t know what they have earned. To you, this is IRRELEVANT while to me it is very RELEVANT. I can’t be any more clear.

[Aces4]

The Big Beautiful Pile of Crap bill is just that, a pile of crap. The middle class will be paying thousands more in big beautiful tariffs and getting back a fraction of that from grandiose promises that sounded good at the time but have restrictive conditions that leave you feeling that you have been suckered. Take the no tax on overtime promise. It turns out that a maximum of only $12,500 in overtime will be exempt from tax. I guess that was somehow left out of the promise. I'm sure the billionaire class got most of what they wanted in this bill though.

Maybe some effort should be made by some to go after those who are sucking the system dry and not producing any effort toward their care and well being. We don't live in a communist society. We have always felt if we really want something, we'd better get to work and figure out how to accomplish that goal and not sit and wait for the government to take care of our needs.

[golfing eagles]

But you don’t know how much the govt. has taken away from what they have earned because you don’t know what they have earned. To you, this is IRRELEVANT while to me it is very RELEVANT. I can’t be any more clear.

And why does one think that's what's relevant???? I've never asked my neighbors what they earned or how much they have. Why would anyone be so nosy???? Clear????

Unless someone thinks that the top 5% paying 65% of all taxes is somehow unfair to those paying less (or zero), it's none of their business.

[Bill14564]

Unrealized gain is just that , until it is realized it is speculative . not hoarding,
I don't see how "I" am whining ?

“Hoarding” referred to income, not unrealized gains.

At some level unrealized gains are more than speculative, they become leverage, but that is a whole other topic.

[golfing eagles]

“Hoarding” referred to income, not unrealized gains.

At some level unrealized gains are more than speculative, they become leverage, but that is a whole other topic.

So when those top 5% pay their tax representing 65% of all tax, they are "hoarding"? Hard to "hoard" the 35% the government leaves them.

[Aces4]

But you don’t know how much the govt. has taken away from what they have earned because you don’t know what they have earned. To you, this is IRRELEVANT while to me it is very RELEVANT. I can’t be any more clear.

How about the non-earners who are producing nothing, sucking off the system and pay NO taxes? Where is the indignation with that ugly fact?

I can't help but wonder why those hating our system don't seek systems that have the style of financial control they seek. I could help with the packing...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Solution , don't be poor, market equites have produced over 8% over history, $200. a month investment over a working life of 35 years assuming a 6% compounded return you would have over 267 K

We were doing that. And then, just over a year before spouse was going to retire from a mostly-obsolete skilled labor job he'd been doing for over 40 years, his company shut down the department. He was out of work, with zero income, and not old enough yet for social security. The mortgage company continued needing their payments. We put the house on the market, and it wasn't until a year later that it finally sold.

We had almost nothing left, at that point.

And, 35 years prior, neither of us was earning enough to put away $200/month. People with high-paying jobs are completely oblivious to what people with modest incomes have to go through in life.

To wit: 35 years prior to spouse's forced retirement, we hadn't even met. 35 years to spouse's retirement, it was 1984 and I was still a student in college, working two part-time jobs and busking in the subways of Boston to pay rent while I attended school full time. A year later I was working two other part time jobs, searching for full time work, and started paying back my student loans.

There was ZERO to save during these early years. I swear so many people I meet are just SO out of touch with the reality of working class America it's disheartening.

[Bill14564]

And why does one think that's what's relevant???? I've never asked my neighbors what they earned or how much they have. Why would anyone be so nosy???? Clear????

Unless someone thinks that the top 5% paying 65% of all taxes is somehow unfair to those paying less (or zero), it's none of their business.

I DO think the top 5% paying 65% of taxes is unfair IF they receive 90% of the net income.

You never asked your neighbors for that information because you always trusted they were in the same boat that you were (or that you were doing better and didn’t want to bring the issue up). The suspicion is that those in the top 5% are in an entirely different boat than most of the rest of the country.

Prove me wrong. Show me the fact-based statistics on earned income next to the statistics on taxes paid. Show me the statistics on effective tax rate across the board. Explain to me why one is so easy to find but the other is not.

[Pballer]

Is anybody concerned about the 500 billion dollar cuts to Medicare that may automatically be coming through the PAYGO Act (sequestration) due to the increase in deficits resulting from this bill?

[Bill14564]

So when those top 5% pay their tax representing 65% of all tax, they are "hoarding"? Hard to "hoard" the 35% the government leaves them.

You seem to be getting confused. As a whole they are paying 65% of all income tax collected. They are NOT paying 65% of their income as tax.

[Aces4]

We were doing that. And then, just over a year before spouse was going to retire from a mostly-obsolete skilled labor job he'd been doing for over 40 years, his company shut down the department. He was out of work, with zero income, and not old enough yet for social security. The mortgage company continued needing their payments. We put the house on the market, and it wasn't until a year later that it finally sold.

We had almost nothing left, at that point.

And, 35 years prior, neither of us was earning enough to put away $200/month. People with high-paying jobs are completely oblivious to what people with modest incomes have to go through in life.

We went through life with modest income and children and no college education, (that may have been our saving grace..).

What they need to teach kids in high school along with the STEM programs, is how to operate a saw, drill, wrecking bar, evaluate homes which may have lead or asbestos isuues, operate and use a tape measure, level, how to use a paint brush, how to tear out a wall and whether that wall is a support wall, how to load a dumpster, shingle, paint.. the list is large. I should add how to operate a sewing machine, mend, hem, gardening, etc.

DUMP the sports programs and get them out of the schools. They should be separate entities and the bill not footed by the public. They are so far out of whack at this point with costs and demands that educations is on standby when it comes to funding.

Colleges are turning out degreed students that can't even manage a budget and no life skills.

[jimbomaybe]

We were doing that. And then, just over a year before spouse was going to retire from a mostly-obsolete skilled labor job he'd been doing for over 40 years, his company shut down the department. He was out of work, with zero income, and not old enough yet for social security. The mortgage company continued needing their payments. We put the house on the market, and it wasn't until a year later that it finally sold.

We had almost nothing left, at that point.

And, 35 years prior, neither of us was earning enough to put away $200/month. People with high-paying jobs are completely oblivious to what people with modest incomes have to go through in life.


To wit: 35 years prior to spouse's forced retirement, we hadn't even met. 35 years to spouse's retirement, it was 1984 and I was still a student in college, working two part-time jobs and busking in the subways of Boston to pay rent while I attended school full time. A year later I was working two other part time jobs, searching for full time work, and started paying back my student loans.

There was ZERO to save during these early years. I swear so many people I meet are just SO out of touch with the reality of working class America it's disheartening.

Unfortunately some of the decisions you made did not workout

[Bill14564]

How about the non-earners who are producing nothing, sucking off the system and pay NO taxes? Where is the indignation with that ugly fact?

I can't help but wonder why those hating our system don't seek systems that have the style of financial control they seek. I could help with the packing...

The whole, “if you don’t like it then move” thing is getting really old.

I don’t hate the system, I dislike the part of the system that accepts donations in return for favorable modifications, and I really dislike the corruption.

I suspect that if it was ever attempted it to put names or actual numbers against those claims, it would be very difficult to show a large number of those who are sucking off the system. Are there cheaters and crooks! Of course there are but most likely not in the large numbers that are being implied.

Where did you get the idea that there were non-earners sucking off the system, was it from personal experience or did you hear it from someone who would rather you look at them rather than look at him? “Hey, look over there! Isn’t that terrible? *That* is what needs to be fixed, not this.”

[golfing eagles]

I DO think the top 5% paying 65% of taxes is unfair IF they receive 90% of the net income.

You never asked your neighbors for that information because you always trusted they were in the same boat that you were (or that you were doing better and didn’t want to bring the issue up). The suspicion is that those in the top 5% are in an entirely different boat than most of the rest of the country.

Prove me wrong. Show me the fact-based statistics on earned income next to the statistics on taxes paid. Show me the statistics on effective tax rate across the board. Explain to me why one is so easy to find but the other is not.

Because it is irrelevant except to satisfy the curiosity of some.

[Aces4]

Is anybody concerned about the 500 billion dollar cuts to Medicare that may automatically be coming through the PAYGO Act (sequestration) due to the increase in deficits resulting from this bill?

From the TaxPolicyCenter:

"ENFORCEMENT
The PAYGO rule has not been enforced consistently. For example, the 1997 budget act put in place a method, known as the SGR (the sustainable growth rate), for determining Medicare payments to physicians. Application of that formula threatened huge cuts in Medicare physician reimbursements. Congress prevented the payment rates determined by SGR from taking effect, but only for one year at a time. While Congress did pay for these one-year fixes, by limiting the fix to one year it did not need to pay the cost of the fix over the full budget window. When the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 replaced the SGR formula with a new system in 2015, Congress waived the PAYGO rules, exempting itself from paying for the entire cost of the new legislation. They again waived the PAYGO rules at the end of 2017 so that they did not have to pay for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.

It appears that PAYGO can no longer be considered an effective tool for imposing budget discipline."


I'm not losing any sleep.

[golfing eagles]

You seem to be getting confused. As a whole they are paying 65% of all income tax collected. They are NOT paying 65% of their income as tax.

No kidding, but they are paying millions while others pay nothing.

My 2 suggestions are either

a) flat rate tax so even those with low incomes have some skin in the game, rather than just supporting those that promise the most freebies, or

b) Unless you are a net taxpayer, you forfeit the right to vote.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

We went through life with modest income and children and no college education, (that may have been our saving grace..).

What they need to teach kids in high school along with the STEM programs, is how to operate a saw, drill, wrecking bar, evaluate homes which may have lead or asbestos isuues, operate and use a tape measure, level, how to use a paint brush, how to tear out a wall and whether that wall is a support wall, how to load a dumpster, shingle, paint.. the list is large. I should add how to operate a sewing machine, mend, hem, gardening, etc.

DUMP the sports programs and get them out of the schools. They should be separate entities and the bill not footed by the public. They are so far out of whack at this point with costs and demands that educations is on standby when it comes to funding.

Colleges are turning out degreed students that can't even manage a budget and no life skills.

I actually agree that sports should be optional and not part of any state budget. I ALSO think that there should be no such thing as "professional sports" at all. All these pro football players are recruited from schools. Schools get kickbacks. A school that doesn't produce recruits, doesn't get kickbacks. All that entire system has got to go. Right out the door. No pro sports = no high school recruits needed = no funding needed to support high school sports.

Has absolutely nothing to do with the current situation of this country, and has nothing to do with my post. I didn't play sports in college. I WORKED in college. Two part-time jobs, plus playing music in the subways for tips.

And if you have everyone learning all those things in college, who will be learning how to be doctors, dentists, nurses, and lawyers, scientists, researchers, and teachers? Who will be learning how to make clothing, and decorate homes, and create artwork and poetry? Who will learn the languages necessary to communicate with people in other countries when they go to do business deals on behalf of their corporation?

Do you want everyone to be a worker bee, with no one providing the sciences and "humanities" that make us human, and not just drones?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

No kidding, but they are paying millions while others pay nothing.

My 2 suggestions are either

a) flat rate tax so even those with low incomes have some skin in the game, rather than just supporting those that promise the most freebies, or

b) Unless you are a net taxpayer, you forfeit the right to vote.

Here's a thought - stop earning millions every year, and you won't have to pay so much in taxes. You've chosen to be wealthy. Enjoy your wealth.

I pay property tax, sales tax, and yes - I do PAY federal income tax on a few minor investments (I have 20 shares of Intel stock, it's like $1.60/year in income tax on the dividends). But because we earn less than $60k/year household, there's really nothing to tax after our standard deduction.

[golfing eagles]

Here's a thought - stop earning millions every year, and you won't have to pay so much in taxes. You've chosen to be wealthy. Enjoy your wealth.

I pay property tax, sales tax, and yes - I do PAY federal income tax on a few minor investments (I have 20 shares of Intel stock, it's like $1.60/year in income tax on the dividends). But because we earn less than $60k/year household, there's really nothing to tax after our standard deduction.

And therefore I should subsidize SOMEONE ELSE'S "fair share"?????

[thekatman]

The $6000 is adjusted downward after $175,000 when filing married jointly. And zeroes out at $250k.

[Dilligas]

The debt is going to send us to the stone ages. The rich must pay more taxes. It’s the only way to make a dent.
The rich pay 49% of all tax revenue currently...... so what is their 'fair share'.....?

[golfing eagles]

The $6000 is adjusted downward after $175,000 when filing married jointly. And zeroes out at $250k.

So, in other words, "the rich" are not getting this "tax cut" that the media is blabbing all over the airwaves (as usual).

[jimjamuser]

Define rich.

And while you're at it, what would be their "fair share"?
The US government could/should go back to the tax brackets of 1960, when there was a TRUE middle class. Today there is no middle class and that causes all our individual problems and makes the US weaker.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

So, in other words, "the rich" are not getting this "tax cut" that the media is blabbing all over the airwaves (as usual).

This SPECIFIC tax cut being discussed in THIS thread, is in regards to a break for seniors 65 or older.

It isn't the only tax cut for the wealthy. It is ONE tax cut for seniors, which may or may not apply to them at all, depending on their income (or lack thereof).

[Caymus]

The $6000 is adjusted downward after $175,000 when filing married jointly. And zeroes out at $250k.

The $6,000 is per taxpayer. A single filer would get it at an AGI of $75,000

[Aces4]

The whole, “if you don’t like it then move” thing is getting really old.

I don’t hate the system, I dislike the part of the system that accepts donations in return for favorable modifications, and I really dislike the corruption.

I suspect that if it was ever attempted it to put names or actual numbers against those claims, it would be very difficult to show a large number of those who are sucking off the system. Are there cheaters and crooks! Of course there are but most likely not in the large numbers that are being implied.

Where did you get the idea that there were non-earners sucking off the system, was it from personal experience or did you hear it from someone who would rather you look at them rather than look at him? “Hey, look over there! Isn’t that terrible? *That* is what needs to be fixed, not this.”

One needs to take the blinders off and get into the real world. There are large numbers of people living off the system, work in the ER near or in a large city. Then examine disability claims and follow up on the people "who can't work another day" in their life. Is disability a reality, oh yeah, but not close to the people who are sponging off that system.

For example, we watch constantly on clothing drives, turkey handouts at Thanksgiving, Christmas fundraisers, food banks, school supplies, (all which are important to the community), but the number of people in fine cars, great clothes, beautiful fingernails, tatoos, exceptional hairdos who have learned to suck off the public and spend their money frivolously is ridiculous. Those are just the tip of the iceberg. People don't want to work anymore. Thankfully, we still have a military and tradespeople to prop up our society.

[Aces4]

This SPECIFIC tax cut being discussed in THIS thread, is in regards to a break for seniors 65 or older.

It isn't the only tax cut for the wealthy. It is ONE tax cut for seniors, which may or may not apply to them at all, depending on their income (or lack thereof).

If one doesn't pay taxes, one doesn't need a cut. The tax cut will aid those seniors who are paying their fair share to start with.

[Byte1]

Taxing the "rich" more than anyone else is/should be unconstitutional. The country is discriminating against a group of citizens. There are two means of being "FAIR" when it comes to taxation; do away with income tax and charge a federal sales tax, OR charge one equal percentage rate for ALL income earned. Those that pay no taxes receive the most from our government and those that pay the most, receive the least. Sorry, but that is not equal treatment. By the way, with either idea the rich will still pay the most taxes.

[Aces4]

I actually agree that sports should be optional and not part of any state budget. I ALSO think that there should be no such thing as "professional sports" at all. All these pro football players are recruited from schools. Schools get kickbacks. A school that doesn't produce recruits, doesn't get kickbacks. All that entire system has got to go. Right out the door. No pro sports = no high school recruits needed = no funding needed to support high school sports.

Has absolutely nothing to do with the current situation of this country, and has nothing to do with my post. I didn't play sports in college. I WORKED in college. Two part-time jobs, plus playing music in the subways for tips.

And if you have everyone learning all those things in college, who will be learning how to be doctors, dentists, nurses, and lawyers, scientists, researchers, and teachers? Who will be learning how to make clothing, and decorate homes, and create artwork and poetry? Who will learn the languages necessary to communicate with people in other countries when they go to do business deals on behalf of their corporation?

Do you want everyone to be a worker bee, with no one providing the sciences and "humanities" that make us human, and not just drones?

Reading comprehension is important, reread my post and you will see I indicated the skillset I mentioned along with STEM should be provided in high school not college and if sports are eliminated, that leaves lots of money and time for the important things. In four years of high school, many of the skills I mentioned can be taught without huge time allowances along with other classes.

I could rephrase my answer as to you want everyone to be educated drones with no life skills for their personal welfare. Heaven forbid anyone should get dirt under their nails..

[jimjamuser]

That's right, those seniors are already getting a free tax ride and SS benefits. When does the government stop being responsible for everyone living the life of luxury? Let seniors go through their savings and assets and pay their way. Passing money down to children and in 5 years, the seniors get all those government goodies. I've seen it happen.
A fair and equitable government would NEVER stop being responsible for every one living a life to the best of their ability. A government of a Democracy should be willing to care for "the least among us". The idea is to tax the successful in order to provide minimal housing and food for the unsuccessful. Some people are born with birth defects and low intellect. That is no fault of their own. Being rich or even above average is a combination of LUCK and hard work.

[jimbomaybe]

“Hoarding” referred to income, not unrealized gains.

At some level unrealized gains are more than speculative, they become leverage, but that is a whole other topic.
Just how are the "hoarding" their income ? at the point that the gains are not just speculative they become factual, demonstrated and are taxed as such , how do you tax an unknown?

[jimjamuser]

Solution , don't be poor, market equites have produced over 8% over history, $200. a month investment over a working life of 35 years assuming a 6% compounded return you would have over 267 K
That's true, but medical bills and other unforeseeable events can ruin any savings plan. Here AGAIN the factor of LUCK comes into play.

[jimbomaybe]

That's true, but medical bills and other unforeseeable events can ruin any savings plan. Here AGAIN the factor of LUCK comes into play.
Certainly episodic problems happen and can set a person several years but not over a 35 - 40 years of working

[jimjamuser]

The "rich"??? Who are they??? Anyone who actually contributes to society by paying taxes, donating to charities, employing others and venturing capital?????

"The reports are saying....."---what "reports"? I think we can all guess the source of that misinformation.

This class warfare rhetoric has to end. The top 5% currently pay 65% of all taxes. And that's "fair"????? Forty-seven % pay no tax----and that's "fair". But by all means let's continue the populist rhetoric that started in 1933 and has only become worse since then.
Who are today's rich ? For the most part they are people whose family were rich for generations and they went to the best schools. Yes, a small % of the rich were "self-made". The original INTENT of America was that EACH generation must make their OWN way. Inheritance tax was supposed to force that to happen. But, each generation found ways to legally and illegally overcome that basic idea of each generation starting at zero wealth. Look at today's wealthiest individuals and very few were "self-made" without prior generational wealth support.

[jimjamuser]

Curious, who's too blame for folks being poor?
Birth defects for one factor. Poor health for another.

[golfing eagles]

Who are today's rich ? For the most part they are people whose family were rich for generations and they went to the best schools. Yes, a small % of the rich were "self-made". The original INTENT of America was that EACH generation must make their OWN way. Inheritance tax was supposed to force that to happen. But, each generation found ways to legally and illegally overcome that basic idea of each generation starting at zero wealth. Look at today's wealthiest individuals and very few were "self-made" without prior generational wealth support.

I missed that in constitutional law class. Could you please point that out in the Constitution (of the United States of America).

[jimjamuser]

And factor in the difference between income and net worth, managing your investments to have the "income" you want the rest better positioned for growth , that by the way is a very positive thing for the economy that benefits everyone. The old adage is proven again and again " A fool and his money are soon parted". Those who have large wealth did something right to acquire that wealth , buy financing good ideas that grow the economy via productive enterprises , productivity, efficiency are why we have historically the highest standard of living for everyone
Actually, US standard of living is only about 20th in the world. The top 10 is dominated by Scandinavian Countries. It is easy to look up.

[golfing eagles]

Birth defects for one factor. Poor health for another.

I don't think many would begrudge paying some tax to help the disabled, those with congenital birth anomalies or even those with true/serious mental issues. But I think many do not want to subsidize the lazy, the frauds, the scammers and the professional takers who suck at the government teat for generations on end with no end in sight. Those able-bodied individuals who CHOOSE not to work should be forced to get off their butt or forfeit their "benefits" and stop having 6 babies by 6 different fathers to get a larger welfare check so they can buy beer, cigarettes and lotto tickets. My father lived through the depression, remembered the family having 3 cents in the cupboard on Monday that had to last until Friday but never, EVER considered going "on the dole". Now, we have those individuals who not only received it but demand it and think that it is their God given right to mooch of the effort of others. Bring back the WPA work camps of the thirties and let them EARN those benefits and build something at the same time. I'd start by having them widen I-95 to 6 lanes through the Carolinas.

[Aces4]

A fair and equitable government would NEVER stop being responsible for every one living a life to the best of their ability. A government of a Democracy should be willing to care for "the least among us". The idea is to tax the successful in order to provide minimal housing and food for the unsuccessful. Some people are born with birth defects and low intellect. That is no fault of their own. Being rich or even above average is a combination of LUCK and hard work.

What a crock! No one said the truly disabled, severe birth defect, severe mental illness or defects shouldn't be cared for here. Teach your children there is no free ride or living out of someone else's wallet. The idea is not to tax the successful so the unsuccessful can live well without effort, ridiculous.

We would not have this mess now if the employable in the US looked for and obtained employment and also dumped the drugs. Talk to business owners who are looking for English speaking employees. Many, many young adults are so incapable of anything more than computer games and feeding their faces.

There was a construction business that hired a high school graduate who was interested in carpentry and schooling toward that goal. He worked ONE day at a home building site and quit, he said he didn't want to work that hard.:22yikes:

[Pballer]

The $6000 is adjusted downward after $175,000 when filing married jointly. And zeroes out at $250k.

Seniors really got screwed over on this one. No tax on tips phases out after $160,000/single. No tax on overtime phases out after $150,000/single or $300,000/couple. But the senior deduction phases out after only $75,000/single or $150,000/couple.

[jimbomaybe]

Actually, US standard of living is only about 20th in the world. The top 10 is dominated by Scandinavian Countries. It is easy to look up.
Great we can ship the "undocumented to Scandinavia , it would be in their best interest

[jimjamuser]

We were doing that. And then, just over a year before spouse was going to retire from a mostly-obsolete skilled labor job he'd been doing for over 40 years, his company shut down the department. He was out of work, with zero income, and not old enough yet for social security. The mortgage company continued needing their payments. We put the house on the market, and it wasn't until a year later that it finally sold.

We had almost nothing left, at that point.

And, 35 years prior, neither of us was earning enough to put away $200/month. People with high-paying jobs are completely oblivious to what people with modest incomes have to go through in life.

To wit: 35 years prior to spouse's forced retirement, we hadn't even met. 35 years to spouse's retirement, it was 1984 and I was still a student in college, working two part-time jobs and busking in the subways of Boston to pay rent while I attended school full time. A year later I was working two other part time jobs, searching for full time work, and started paying back my student loans.

There was ZERO to save during these early years. I swear so many people I meet are just SO out of touch with the reality of working class America it's disheartening.
That shows the difficulty of being middle class TODAY. In the 50s through 70s my father had a UNION job and without my mother working at all, he paid off his house and bought a new car every 3 years. THAT was how a TRUE middle class was better than this so-called middle class today.

[jimjamuser]

Certainly episodic problems happen and can set a person several years but not over a 35 - 40 years of working
That's true, but on the other side of the spectrum - you could have a 20 year old college student get involved in a hit and run accident. They end up blind and missing one leg and a hospital bill of 100 thousand dollars. Their job prospects are severely limited. Situations like that happen every day in the US. There has to be Government programs for someone like that because it could happen to anyone of US and at any time. That's why I believe that success is a combination of LUCK and hard work. A lot of successful people get all full of themselves believing that their success had nothing to do with luck. They pat themselves on the back and say, "look at me, I alone am responsible for my success". Personally, I am not inclined to believe them.

[Aces4]

Seniors really got screwed over on this one. No tax on tips phases out after $160,000/single. No tax on overtime phases out after $150,000/single or $300,000/couple. But the senior deduction phases out after only $75,000/single or $150,000/couple.

That's a screw job?...$75,000. single or $150,000. a year for old people with no children to raise, who have garnered the necessities of life and they need more? Whining about nothing!

[Aces4]

That's true, but on the other side of the spectrum - you could have a 20 year old college student get involved in a hit and run accident. They end up blind and missing one leg and a hospital bill of 100 thousand dollars. Their job prospects are severely limited. Situations like that happen every day in the US. There has to be Government programs for someone like that because it could happen to anyone of US and at any time. That's why I believe that success is a combination of LUCK and hard work. A lot of successful people get all full of themselves believing that their success had nothing to do with luck. They pat themselves on the back and say, "look at me, I alone am responsible for my success". Personally, I am not inclined to believe them.

Luck=Hard work unless you've won the gazillion dollar lottery.

[Aces4]

That's true, but on the other side of the spectrum - you could have a 20 year old college student get involved in a hit and run accident. They end up blind and missing one leg and a hospital bill of 100 thousand dollars. Their job prospects are severely limited. Situations like that happen every day in the US. There has to be Government programs for someone like that because it could happen to anyone of US and at any time. That's why I believe that success is a combination of LUCK and hard work. A lot of successful people get all full of themselves believing that their success had nothing to do with luck. They pat themselves on the back and say, "look at me, I alone am responsible for my success". Personally, I am not inclined to believe them.

Situations like that don't happen every day and college students should have health insurance unless they were depending on all that luck you were touting. There are successful people working every day who are missing a limb and they probably resent being outlined as worthless.

[Aces4]

That shows the difficulty of being middle class TODAY. In the 50s through 70s my father had a UNION job and without my mother working at all, he paid off his house and bought a new car every 3 years. THAT was how a TRUE middle class was better than this so-called middle class today.

Yeah, those crazy union jobs. The union had their place but the balance was lost, IMHO. We had friends where the husband worked for a city. His retirement payout was huge and complete health care coverage. No co-pays, hearing aids, vision, dental, everything included and it was a gold mine. Unfortunately, the city went under trying to keep up with those blue collar bennies. Took them a while to recover and retirement benefits were realigned since they were unsustainable.

[jimbomaybe]

That's true, but on the other side of the spectrum - you could have a 20 year old college student get involved in a hit and run accident. They end up blind and missing one leg and a hospital bill of 100 thousand dollars. Their job prospects are severely limited. Situations like that happen every day in the US. There has to be Government programs for someone like that because it could happen to anyone of US and at any time. That's why I believe that success is a combination of LUCK and hard work. A lot of successful people get all full of themselves believing that their success had nothing to do with luck. They pat themselves on the back and say, "look at me, I alone am responsible for my success". Personally, I am not inclined to believe them.
Hardly representative of the overall experience of the general population

[jimjamuser]

I missed that in constitutional law class. Could you please point that out in the Constitution (of the United States of America).
It is NOT SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the constitution, but the 14th amendment says basically that the US should avoid DEBT. Thomas Jefferson wrote many times that debt should be avoided. So did James Madison and George Washington. Basically, the Founding Fathers worried about responsible Fiscal management.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Taxing the "rich" more than anyone else is/should be unconstitutional. The country is discriminating against a group of citizens. There are two means of being "FAIR" when it comes to taxation; do away with income tax and charge a federal sales tax, OR charge one equal percentage rate for ALL income earned. Those that pay no taxes receive the most from our government and those that pay the most, receive the least. Sorry, but that is not equal treatment. By the way, with either idea the rich will still pay the most taxes.

Sure, let's play that game.

Instead of itemizing, which poor people can't do, and many non-poor somewhat middle-class can't do because the standard deduction is so high now...

Let's just impose a 2% PRE-deduction income tax on ALL adult Americans. No more student exemptions, no more child credits, no more tax cuts for the poor and middle-class or wealthy.

If you only earn $10,000 because you're a student working part time while attending school full time, you have to pay $200 at the end of the year to the IRS.

If you earn $1,000,000 because you're successful, you pay $20,000 to the IRS.

If you earn a billion dollars because you're super-successful, you have to pay $20 million to the IRS.

Lop those mandatory minimum payments off your gross income, cut a check, and send it in. And THEN you can itemize on whatever is left over.

[jimbomaybe]

A fair and equitable government would NEVER stop being responsible for every one living a life to the best of their ability. A government of a Democracy should be willing to care for "the least among us". The idea is to tax the successful in order to provide minimal housing and food for the unsuccessful. Some people are born with birth defects and low intellect. That is no fault of their own. Being rich or even above average is a combination of LUCK and hard work."
A fair and equitable government would NEVER stop being responsible for every one living a life to the best of their ability."
Yes of course the GOVERNMENT is responsible for my happiness as well as any thing that an unkind person would suggest is any failing on my part

[ElDiabloJoe]

That's true, but on the other side of the spectrum - you could have a 20 year old college student get involved in a hit and run accident. They end up blind and missing one leg and a hospital bill of 100 thousand dollars. Their job prospects are severely limited. Situations like that happen every day in the US. There has to be Government programs for someone like that because it could happen to anyone of US and at any time. That's why I believe that success is a combination of LUCK and hard work. A lot of successful people get all full of themselves believing that their success had nothing to do with luck. They pat themselves on the back and say, "look at me, I alone am responsible for my success". Personally, I am not inclined to believe them.

In the old days before everyone was forced to pay for all those that scream for help (whether fraudulently or legitimately), people had to rely on families and neighbors. Doing so kept people from acting stupid, or otherwise burning bridges with family, neighbors, and community. Back when everyone was a good citizen, partially because doing so kept bridges open.

Now, when people simply beg the guvmint for help, they also tell their parents, "F.You!" and are neighborhood tyrants.

Ahhhh, the simple days - when people were rewarded or held accountable in a myriad of ways for their actions. Great restraint on behavior that.

[rsmurano]

So much bad information. There are no cuts to SS, Medicare, or Medicaid. How do billionaires benefit from not taxes on overtime or tips? How many millionaires or billionaires get paid overtime or work for tips? NONE!
I’m also tired for catering to the so called poor. The only people we need to cater too are the veterans and handicapped, everybody else needs to work. If you want to live in poverty, that’s your choice, and you need to live with the consequences.
I’m all for entrepreneurs making what they can make. When I worked, I made much more than my counterparts because I was more valuable to the company. I didn’t feel bad.
Same goes for investing your money for retirement. Most people don’t or just give their money to an advisor hoping they will make them money. For me and my friends, we all spent many many hours learning how to invest so we should make more money for our retirement without feeling guilty.
We have so many bad programs that give moms more money for the more kids they have so they can just sit at home.
To be fair, the so called rich shouldn’t pay any more % of their income than anybody else in the USA. They should have implemented a flat tax decades ago, say 5-10% flat tax. If you don’t make much, you won’t pay much, and the 5-10% for the wealthy might be more than what they are paying now, probably not because they don’t make billion worth of income a year.
For all of us that planned to retire with financial freedom (should be everybody’s goal), the BBB is great since you have dividends, rental income and RMD’s. If you are working in a typical 8-5 job, the BBB would be much beneficial to you.
If you are poor, there are too many benefits already, the poor need to go to work.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Luck=Hard work unless you've won the gazillion dollar lottery.
Luck is when preparation and opportunity meet. Hard work is great preparation, and it helps create opportunities, bringing both ends of the equation closer together.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I don't think many would begrudge paying some tax to help the disabled, those with congenital birth anomalies or even those with true/serious mental issues. But I think many do not want to subsidize the lazy, the frauds, the scammers and the professional takers who suck at the government teat for generations on end with no end in sight. Those able-bodied individuals who CHOOSE not to work should be forced to get off their butt or forfeit their "benefits" and stop having 6 babies by 6 different fathers to get a larger welfare check so they can buy beer, cigarettes and lotto tickets. My father lived through the depression, remembered the family having 3 cents in the cupboard on Monday that had to last until Friday but never, EVER considered going "on the dole". Now, we have those individuals who not only received it but demand it and think that it is their God given right to mooch of the effort of others. Bring back the WPA work camps of the thirties and let them EARN those benefits and build something at the same time. I'd start by having them widen I-95 to 6 lanes through the Carolinas.

So in other words, white trash shouldn't be entitled to any benefits. Y'know, the ones who line up at the 7-11 to buy smokes, beer, lotto tickets, and have 6 babies from 6 different fathers. This is a novel idea and maybe a huge stretch but - what if - what if we expanded womens' health care for all these women, gave out free contraceptives? What if we mandated (and paid for) vasectomies for all males from the month after they hit puberty, until the day after their wedding? Then it could be reversed.

It'd be a whole lot cheaper than taxpayers covering the expense of those 6 kids in and out of ER because emergency rooms can't turn down patients, even if they're just there for the flu. I mean since you're taking away their health care, and they have 6 kids now and therefore need to be home and not working, they have no income - so SOMEONE has to keep those snot-nosed brats from infecting everyone at Walmart, hm?

[jimbomaybe]

Birth defects for one factor. Poor health for another.
The over all problem is hard work, determination and drive, as apposed to the much much smaller percentage you sight

[golfing eagles]

Who are today's rich ? For the most part they are people whose family were rich for generations and they went to the best schools. Yes, a small % of the rich were "self-made". The original INTENT of America was that EACH generation must make their OWN way. Inheritance tax was supposed to force that to happen. But, each generation found ways to legally and illegally overcome that basic idea of each generation starting at zero wealth. Look at today's wealthiest individuals and very few were "self-made" without prior generational wealth support.

I missed that in constitutional law class. Could you please point that out in the Constitution (of the United States of America).

It is NOT SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the constitution, but the 14th amendment says basically that the US should avoid DEBT. Thomas Jefferson wrote many times that debt should be avoided. So did James Madison and George Washington. Basically, the Founding Fathers worried about responsible Fiscal management.

If there's a train of thought that answers the question of "Intent of each generation to make its own way" in that reply, I seem to be missing it. Right now, the best way to avoid government debt is to drastically reduce the freebies given out.

[jimjamuser]

A flat tax is favored by the super wealthy. They should WANT to pay MORE than the average person because they have benefited so MUCH from the US economic system. All economists laugh about the idea of a flat tax. Just Google that.