Drumpf!!!!! Orange Man Bad!!!! also, how do you spell personal accountabilitee?

[Superman]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amer...ore-to-irs-under-trump-tax-law-194900782.html

American taxpayers paid over $90 billion more under Trump tax law
Kristin Myers
Yahoo Finance June 4, 2019

Despite the majority of Americans receiving a tax cut, the IRS pulled in an additional $93 billion for 2018 from taxpayers on individual income taxes than it did for 2017, according to new data from the IRS. This is in part thanks to the Treasury Department processing 1.5% more individual returns for 2018 than 2017.

After the passage of Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the IRS encouraged taxpayers to update their withholdings, but few did. More than halfway through 2018, after the law took effect, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) warned that more Americans would owe money to the IRS under the new law while those receiving refunds would decrease. In the end, many Americans saw modest increases in their paychecks throughout the year, but didn’t notice.

Instead, as people filed, many bemoaned getting smaller-than-anticipated refunds or even being hit with a “surprise” tax bill.

The IRS collected $1.97 trillion in gross collections (the amount before refunds) for 2018. That figure stood at roughly $1.87 trillion for 2017. Refunds did increase this year — but not by much. The IRS refunded about $398 billion to taxpayers for 2018. For 2017, it was roughly $386 billion.

And after refunds, the IRS collected about $93 billion more from individual American taxpayers than it did in 2017. Interestingly, that number stands close to the tax break amount that corporations received from the TCJA in 2018. Last year, big businesses paid $91 billion less in taxes than they had in 2017, prior to the new law’s passage.

 

[Sarge]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amer...ore-to-irs-under-trump-tax-law-194900782.html

American taxpayers paid over $90 billion more under Trump tax law
Kristin Myers
Yahoo Finance June 4, 2019

Despite the majority of Americans receiving a tax cut, the IRS pulled in an additional $93 billion for 2018 from taxpayers on individual income taxes than it did for 2017, according to new data from the IRS. This is in part thanks to the Treasury Department processing 1.5% more individual returns for 2018 than 2017.

After the passage of Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the IRS encouraged taxpayers to update their withholdings, but few did. More than halfway through 2018, after the law took effect, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) warned that more Americans would owe money to the IRS under the new law while those receiving refunds would decrease. In the end, many Americans saw modest increases in their paychecks throughout the year, but didn’t notice.

Instead, as people filed, many bemoaned getting smaller-than-anticipated refunds or even being hit with a “surprise” tax bill.

The IRS collected $1.97 trillion in gross collections (the amount before refunds) for 2018. That figure stood at roughly $1.87 trillion for 2017. Refunds did increase this year — but not by much. The IRS refunded about $398 billion to taxpayers for 2018. For 2017, it was roughly $386 billion.

And after refunds, the IRS collected about $93 billion more from individual American taxpayers than it did in 2017. Interestingly, that number stands close to the tax break amount that corporations received from the TCJA in 2018. Last year, big businesses paid $91 billion less in taxes than they had in 2017, prior to the new law’s passage.

The part I highlighted in red could be problematic. It looks like the American taxpayer directly paid for the corporate tax cut. I know it has to do with not updating the withholding and stuff like that. But I promise you the left is going to seize on that and say "We told you it was a corporate tax cut, and you would foot the bill."

 

[IndySteel]

They collected more because more people are employed.

 

[21STEELERS21]

So if the tax law is revenue neutral, how do we pay the increasing debt? Fiscal year 2018 budget deficit 779 Billion, projected 2019 budget deficit 1 trillion.

Any household knows that if you have increasing debts, you have to have increasing income to pay for it.

I smell a big tax increase in our future. I guess Dems will get blamed when they have to fix the mess again.

 

[Steeltime]

So if the tax law is revenue neutral, how do we pay the increasing debt? Fiscal year 2018 budget deficit 779 Billion, projected 2019 budget deficit 1 trillion.

Any household knows that if you have increasing debts, you have to have increasing income to pay for it.

I smell a big tax increase in our future. I guess Dems will get blamed when they have to fix the mess again.

The national debt has nothing - NOTHING, AT ALL, EVER, WHATSOEVER, AT ALL, NOTHING - to do with revenues:

Annual Federal Tax Revenues

FY 2020 - $3.64 trillion, budgeted.
FY 2019 - $3.44 trillion, estimated.
FY 2018 - $3.33 trillion.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
FY 2009 - $2.10 trillion.
FY 2008 - $2.52 trillion.
FY 2007 - $2.57 trillion.
FY 2006 - $2.4 trillion.
FY 2005 - $2.15 trillion.
FY 2004 - $1.88 trillion.
FY 2003 - $1.72 trillion.
FY 2002 - $1.85 trillion.
FY 2001 - $1.99 trillion.
FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion.
FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
FY 1990 - $1.03 trillion.
FY 1989 - $991 billion.
FY 1988 - $909 billion.
FY 1987 - $854 billion.
FY 1986 - $769 billion.
FY 1985 - $734 billion.
FY 1984 - $666 billion.
FY 1983 - $601 billion.
FY 1982 - $618 billion.
FY 1981 - $599 billion.
FY 1980 - $517 billion.
FY 1979 - $463 billion.
FY 1978 - $399 billion.
FY 1977 - $356 billion.
FY 1976 - $298 billion.
FY 1975 - $279 billion.
FY 1974 - $263 billion.
FY 1973 - $231 billion.

https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762

The deficit is caused by ... wait for it ... SPENDING. Say it with me - S-p-e-n-d-i-n-g.

The vast majority of such spending is for social security, Medicare, and interest. Those three payments combine for about 2/3 of Federal spending.

https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s-federal-government-spending-3305763

Tax revenues are booming. Federal receipts are rising quite a bit. But the obligation as baby boomers retire and begin taking social security and going on Medicare is driving the spending. Which is of course just ******* great for me - I pay a mountain of social security taxes ($15,000 per year) for the past 14 years plus the next two before retirement, plus the maximum for the previous 19 years ($7500 per year). So I have paid and will pay in $380,000 in social security taxes over the past 35 years, and what do I have to show for it? Nothing, really. If I could have kept my money and put it in my 401k with the money already in that account, I would be able to retire in about 18 months and live comfortably.

But nope. The almighty and all-knowing Fed knows better how to manage my retirement, via a system headed towards bankruptcy, unless we tax the **** out of Generation X and the millenials.

Wonder if those ladies know what the socialist security system is set to do to them ...

 

[Sarge]

So if the tax law is revenue neutral, how do we pay the increasing debt?

Stop spending. It really is that simple.

The government cannot be all things to everyone, even if they taxed the entire nation 100%.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Revenues minus spending = surplus or deficit

Cutting spending is not a cure all. All government spending supports a job somewhere, whether its a senior citizen spending their SS check at a restaurant, a government contractor getting paid to
build military equipment, or the government employing someone directly. When you cut spending, revenues end up dropping as well. You have to balance out taxing and spending. When deficits are
constantly rising, there is no balance and your headed for a reckoning.

 

[Vader]

Revenues minus spending = surplus or deficit

Cutting spending is not a cure all. All government spending supports a job somewhere, whether its a senior citizen spending their SS check at a restaurant, a government contractor getting paid to
build military equipment, or the government employing someone directly. When you cut spending, revenues end up dropping as well. You have to balance out taxing and spending. When deficits are
constantly rising, there is no balance and your headed for a reckoning.

You can't be this ignorant.. please just stop. Please go take an economics course or at least go to high school and sneak into the econ courses... for ***** sake.

You could raise Social Security ages which would keep people working longer (so please stop the stupid, inane, ignorant comment about spending SSI checks at restaurants). Cutting spending by doing this wouldn't end up dropping revenues at all. There are also many government agencies that are just not needed. The dept of education is a joke. The dept. of energy ETC...

According to you it would be better if everyone worked for the government. But it doesn't work that way.

 

[wig]

The government cannot be all things to everyone, even if they taxed the entire nation 100%.

AOC sneers at your lack of economic acumen!

Everyone knows that the RICH will pay for everything! You must be RICH! Otherwise you would be on board with the plan!

 

[deljzc]

Revenue definitely went down according to that chart.

For the government to make $3.25 trillion in 2015 and $3.44 trillion in 2019 is a much smaller increase than GNP growth over the same time frame (even with Obama's sluggish economy his last 2 years in office). The reason it didn't go up in 2018 and 2019 like the economy did is because of Trump's tax cut.

I'm fine with it, although I didn't like the top-end tax cut or think it was necessary (it was necessary to get the votes in Congress). Now that the economy is humming, the revenue gains are even going to overcome the short-term flat line from the tax cuts. That is how tax cuts work. Short term deficit increase as revenue flat lines and spending continues to rise until the economy and revenue catch up.

Note that democrats do the same thing except their fiscal plan is to bump up spending. That increases deficits short term until their spending kick starts the economy and revenues (again) catch up.

I prefer plan A (republicans) vs. plan B (democrats) just because over time it keeps government smaller and once government spends on something, it's impossible to take it away (as opposed to how easy a tax cut is taken back if needed). That's fundamentally why I'm a fiscal conservative and republican when it comes to philosophical spending ideas. Neither REALLY reduces the deficit and neither really solves the deficit problem (unfortunately). You just hope either party in power doesn't FUBAR the whole thing up completely. I certainly don't think what Trump is doing is FUBAR. Obama's $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009 and $1.3 trillion deficit in 2010 and 2011 is certainly (especially when you consider inflation and value of the dollar) more closer to FUBAR than now. It's not even logical to argue otherwise.

I mean, my lord, Obama was borrowing/spending 65% MORE than revenue. Right now it's 20-25% MORE than revenue. Think about how different that is.

 

[Superman]

AOC sneers at your lack of economic acumen!

Everyone knows that the RICH will pay for everything! You must be RICH! Otherwise you would be on board with the plan!

Vader posted that from his own personal Death Star.

 

[DBS1970]

Revenues minus spending = surplus or deficit

Cutting spending is not a cure all. All government spending supports a job somewhere, whether its a senior citizen spending their SS check at a restaurant, a government contractor getting paid to
build military equipment, or the government employing someone directly. When you cut spending, revenues end up dropping as well. You have to balance out taxing and spending. When deficits are
constantly rising, there is no balance and your headed for a reckoning.

Ummmm No.

Dollars spent in the private sector have many times the economic effect of dollars spent by the government. I will let Burgundy educate you on that.

 

[Steeltime]

Revenue definitely went down according to that chart. For the government to make $3.25 trillion in 2015 and $3.44 trillion in 2019 is a much smaller increase than GNP growth over the same time frame (even with Obama's sluggish economy his last 2 years in office). The reason it didn't go up in 2018 and 2019 like the economy did is because of Trump's tax cut.

The Federal revenues declined 2008-2014 due to the Obama economy, i.e., dreadful employment, income, median income, etc. and resulting declining tax revenues.

The revenues are going to be higher in 2019 than ever before due to the exploding economy. Tax cuts can reduce revenues, but a targeted tax cut that triggers massive economic growth more than pays for itself. It really is no different than a private company putting items on sale. Do we believe that companies do so because they want to lose money? Of course not.

Selling 9,000 widgets at $12 profit per widget generates more profit than selling 6,000 widgets at $17 profit per widget.

 

[hamster]

The Federal revenues declined 2008-2014 due to the Obama economy, i.e., dreadful employment, income, median income, etc. and resulting declining tax revenues.

.

Sorry to have to correct you, but anything bad that happened during the Obama years was Bush's fault.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Any household knows that if you have increasing debts, you have to have increasing income to pay for it.

Households can't print their own money though.

I smell a big tax increase in our future. I guess Dems will get blamed when they have to fix the mess again.

Funniest thing I'll read all week and it's only Monday.

 

[Troglodyte]

You could raise Social Security ages which would keep people working longer (so please stop the stupid, inane, ignorant comment about spending SSI checks at restaurants).

You would think that they already would have raised the age... oh that’s right... they did!

 

[Vader]

You would think that they already would have raised the age... oh that’s right... they did!

When social security was set up as a ponzi scheme people's life expectancy was around the same as the retirement age. I guess you think it still is at this moment? Did they raise it to where it should be? Or are you just sounding out stupid **** to hear your gums rattle?

 

[Ironcitysteelers]

Stop spending. It really is that simple.

The government cannot be all things to everyone, even if they taxed the entire nation 100%.

I keep telling my wife to stop spending. Not sure why I don’t get more sex?

 

[ZonaBurgh]

So if the tax law is revenue neutral, how do we pay the increasing debt? Fiscal year 2018 budget deficit 779 Billion, projected 2019 budget deficit 1 trillion.

Any household knows that if you have increasing debts, you have to have increasing income to pay for it.

I smell a big tax increase in our future. I guess Dems will get blamed when they have to fix the mess again.

I don't recall you harping on the national debt 4 years ago. I admit that I could be wrong, so please list your rants from the Obama administration.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

When social security was set up as a ponzi scheme people's life expectancy was around the same as the retirement age.

My mother only worked full-time for three years in her life as a schoolteacher and quit when I was born. Today she collects far more in Social Security than she made in her working life.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

My mother only worked full-time for three years in her life as a schoolteacher and quit when I was born. Today she collects far more in Social Security than she made in her working life.

That's OK, I paid into SS for over 50 years, I don't mind.

 

[oneforthebus]

I don't recall you harping on the national debt 4 years ago. I admit that I could be wrong, so please list your rants from the Obama administration.

It's great isn't? The libs are all deficit hawks now, oh except they want to elect people who have plans to spend 2,3 or 4 times our current federal budget on new programs. But it's ok, the money fairy will pay for it.

 

[Vader]

My mother only worked full-time for three years in her life as a schoolteacher and quit when I was born. Today she collects far more in Social Security than she made in her working life.

I've worked since I was 16 (Worked for cash before that during the summers). I'm almost 49 now. I won't collect a fraction (or any) of what I put in but I'm glad it is going to someone dedicated to raising their family.

 

[hamster]

I've worked since I was 16 (Worked for cash before that during the summers). I'm almost 49 now. I won't collect a fraction (or any) of what I put in but I'm glad it is going to someone dedicated to raising their family.

You sound like someone that grows cauliflower.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

It's great isn't? The libs are all deficit hawks now, oh except they want to elect people who have plans to spend 2,3 or 4 times our current federal budget on new programs. But it's ok, the money fairy will pay for it.

Everyone is in favor of smaller government when their side is not in charge.