There are 10 types of people in this world, those who know binary and those who don't.
Not sure I like it, even though I might benefit from it. Lots of questions:
Why shift the burden from urban to rural areas? Why shift the burden from (on-average) high-earners (with more earning potential) to lower ones? Wouldn't this incentivize even more people to live in those areas--is that good environmental policy? This seems designed to benefit blue people over red people--so I'd imagine lots of political pushback on that front, as well. Is it also a shift of tax burden based on state and local high tax rates--so that people in states that have high tax rates get a cut to federal tax while those who have lower taxes get no cut?
Yet another bullshit "targeted" tax cut scheme. Everyone needs to pay more taxes, across the board. Even me. Most everyone should have (more) skin in the game.
@bradstevens Two politicians from NY who represent several of the wealthiest counties in the country.
This is just more bullshit like the push to increase SALT deductions. You live where you live and you vote for the things that raise your taxes. Deal with your own shit and stop splashing it around on everyone else.
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
If government can't ever manage to spend less, which I have always wanted to happen, then as Mark said, we all ought to pay more in taxes. Not keen on the zip code plan though.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Yet another bullshit "targeted" tax cut scheme. Everyone needs to pay more taxes, across the board. Even me. Most everyone should have (more) skin in the game.
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
“"This bipartisan bill would help lower taxes for families in high-cost areas [like Long Island] by accounting for regional differences in the cost of living and ensuring taxpayers can keep more of what they earn,"
Does this make a lick of sense to anybody? The wealthy living in expensive zip codes keep exactly the same of what they earn as anybody else. They just choose to spend it on things that raise the cost of living in certain zip codes; like big homes and fancy cars. If they don’t like it they should move to an area where the residents have an old car up on blocks in th driveway and a fridge full of beer on the front porch next to the old couch.
There is no reason to subsidize these folks’ lifestyles.
“"This bipartisan bill would help lower taxes for families in high-cost areas [like Long Island] by accounting for regional differences in the cost of living and ensuring taxpayers can keep more of what they earn,"
Does this make a lick of sense to anybody? The wealthy living in expensive zip codes keep exactly the same of what they earn as anybody else. They just choose to spend it on things that raise the cost of living in certain zip codes; like big homes and fancy cars. If they don’t like it they should move to an area where the residents have an old car up on blocks in th driveway and a fridge full of beer on the front porch next to the old couch.
There is no reason to subsidize these folks’ lifestyles.
I don't appreciate you denigrating my neighborhood like that.
Yet another bullshit "targeted" tax cut scheme. Everyone needs to pay more taxes, across the board. Even me. Most everyone should have (more) skin in the game.
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
OneEyedUndertaker found the following as taken from your post rather interesting.
Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt.
OEU , when you refer to those who have mismanaged the money given to them, are you talking about bureaucrats? Bureacrats, who while executing the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by Presidents somehow spent more than Congress allocated?
I ask this because it has long been my belief that the bureaucrats don't have the constitutional authority to tax, borrow, or determine spending levels. These responsibilities lie entirely with elected Presidents and Congress wo are elected by We The People. Given this, don't We The People from both parties share in the blame for our elected representatives running deficits for decades? Let us face it, we like low taxes and big spending.
Yet another bullshit "targeted" tax cut scheme. Everyone needs to pay more taxes, across the board. Even me. Most everyone should have (more) skin in the game.
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
OneEyedUndertaker found the following as taken from your post rather interesting.
Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt.
OEU , when you refer to those who have mismanaged the money given to them, are you talking about bureaucrats? Bureacrats, who while executing the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by Presidents somehow spent more than Congress allocated?
I ask this because it has long been my belief that the bureaucrats don't have the constitutional authority to tax, borrow, or determine spending levels. These responsibilities lie entirely with elected Presidents and Congress wo are elected by We The People. Given this, don't We The People from both parties share in the blame for our elected representatives running deficits for decades? Let us face it, we like low taxes and big spending.
Thanks for the civics lesson, but what’s your point as it relates to my post? We should encourage more waste? We should give them unlimited funds to piss away? Efforts to reduce waste are unneeded? If your wife runs up too much credit card debt don’t try to get her to cut back because you married her?
As the lefties on this board are fond of telling me,
“ackSHualLy Blue states heavily subsidize red states”
Im not sure what voodoo math is being done to reach that conclusion but it’s a statement of fact I’m told.
In that vein, I see no reason why Brad and I shouldn’t get some much welcome tax relief from this measure while you Hoosiers pony up your “fair share”.
Thanks for the civics lesson, but what’s your point as it relates to my post? We should encourage more waste? We should give them unlimited funds to piss away? Efforts to reduce waste are unneeded? If your wife runs up too much credit card debt don’t try to get her to cut back because you married her?
OEU you state, If your wife runs up too much credit card debt don’t try to get her to cut back because you married her?
Picking up on the credit card example, assume you have the full constitutional authority to determine how your wife spends the family money with your responsibility being to earn the income. You also authorize the wife to use the credit card for expenditures which exceed the income you provide. The credit card spending authorized includes the purchase of tools needed to build bird houses which you plan to sell to in order to balance the family budget.
When the bird house scheme doesn't bring in the necessary income to balance the budget, do you blame the wife and find another wife? I would 😀 .
OEU, please excuse me, it is TGIF and I am celebrating the year 1835 when President Andrew Jackson actually paid off the national debt. The last President to do this.
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
LOL. That whole "waste, fraud, abuse" trope gets thrown out all the time as the key toward lowering the deficit. It's right up there with "trickle down economics" and "tax cuts result in greater revenue" as the righties favorite fantasies. Neither "tax less/spend less" or "tax more/spend more" work in the real world, and no one has the stones to promote "tax more/spend less." The only thing that might be possible is to hold spending level and grow the economy -- and resulting tax revenues -- enough to close the gap. But yeah, even that is a pipe dream. We're fucked. Glad I'm on my way out.
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
LOL. That whole "waste, fraud, abuse" trope gets thrown out all the time as the key toward lowering the deficit. It's right up there with "trickle down economics" and "tax cuts result in greater revenue" as the righties favorite fantasies. Neither "tax less/spend less" or "tax more/spend more" work in the real world, and no one has the stones to promote "tax more/spend less." The only thing that might be possible is to hold spending level and grow the economy -- and resulting tax revenues -- enough to close the gap. But yeah, even that is a pipe dream. We're fucked. Glad I'm on my way out.
Me too if you’re too dumb or partisan to acknowledge the billions in fraud & waste. You’re the problem. It’s not a trope, it’s real, factual, & reported on daily. Good riddance…
The government’s income isn’t the problem(maybe?) it’s the spending. Giving more money to them will just mean more waste. Many are convinced eliminating fraud will get us close to balancing the budget. I can’t say that’s true, but I’d sure like to see that focused more on than giving more money to be mismanaged by the people that brought us $40 trillion in debt. It’s like someone saying they need more money to pay the credit card bill rather than looking to spend less in the first place.
LOL. That whole "waste, fraud, abuse" trope gets thrown out all the time as the key toward lowering the deficit. It's right up there with "trickle down economics" and "tax cuts result in greater revenue" as the righties favorite fantasies. Neither "tax less/spend less" or "tax more/spend more" work in the real world, and no one has the stones to promote "tax more/spend less." The only thing that might be possible is to hold spending level and grow the economy -- and resulting tax revenues -- enough to close the gap. But yeah, even that is a pipe dream. We're fucked. Glad I'm on my way out.
Me too if you’re too dumb or partisan to acknowledge the billions in fraud & waste. You’re the problem. It’s not a trope, it’s real, factual, & reported on daily. Good riddance…
There will be dancing in the cemetery once I'm covered up.