Tax Bill is a loser

Political discussions
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by houndawg »

JohnStOnge wrote:That "Dear Leader" thing with the Republican congressmen/senators taking turms praising Trump was really creepy.

The Republican Party has serious problems. That was creepy and I think it likely it was perceived by most people as creepy.
I think its freaking hilarious. I bet that by this time next year Ryan will have sucked Trump off on national TV. :nod:
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

CAA Flagship wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote:
The price is continued destruction of the credibility of the Republican Party and Conservatism. Short term gain in exchange for long term loss. HUGE long term loss. The Black Sabbath tune "Hand of Doom" comes to mind.
Loss? They're playing against the Cleveland Browns, cryin out loud. :lol:
They're playing against the team that is in the catbird seat long term. Unless something significantly changes the underlying dynamics it's not a question of IF the Republican Party is consigned to permanent minority status. It's a question of...well...you know.

And the Republicans are accelerating the process right now.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

93henfan wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote:
The price is continued destruction of the credibility of the Republican Party and Conservatism. Short term gain in exchange for long term loss. HUGE long term loss. The Black Sabbath tune "Hand of Doom" comes to mind.
Broken record much? :lol:

Let me know if you’re ever in DC or DE. I’ll help you work up some new material.
Regardless. It's an accurate record. And I think you really know it. For the Republican Party, in historical terms, the graveyard is near.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
93henfan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 56357
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:03 pm
Location: Slower Delaware

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by 93henfan »

JohnStOnge wrote:
93henfan wrote:
Broken record much? :lol:

Let me know if you’re ever in DC or DE. I’ll help you work up some new material.
Regardless. It's an accurate record. And I think you really know it. For the Republican Party, in historical terms, the graveyard is near.
Trump has nothing to do with demographics. Mud people are reproducing at a much faster rate than we are, and we know they are beholden to their Democrat masters for their handouts. It's a beautiful racket. Kudos to Dems for seeing that 50 years ago.
Delaware Football: 1889-2012; 2022-
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Ivytalk »

93henfan wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote:
Regardless. It's an accurate record. And I think you really know it. For the Republican Party, in historical terms, the graveyard is near.
Trump has nothing to do with demographics. Mud people are reproducing at a much faster rate than we are, and we know they are beholden to their Democrat masters for their handouts. It's a beautiful racket. Kudos to Dems for seeing that 50 years ago.
That’s right. Better get those high-IQ people busy putting the pole in the hole. Even Goebbels saw that problem coming.
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by kalm »

Baldy wrote:
kalm wrote:
Reagans Director of OMB for 4 years and one of the founding fathers of supply side economics admitted THEY didn't understand the numbers...let that sink in... :lol:

Ravi Batra is a lefty no doubt but I'm pretty sure he's on board with capitalism as long as it's regulated correctly. I noticed you didn't dispute his numbers. :coffee:
Gannon pretty much hit the nail on the head regarding Stockman. He wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he was one hell of a negotiator. :nod:

Batra, on the other hand, is a clown show. He is in no way "on board" with capitalism. As I said, he is a fervent anti-capitalist. He is a scholar of the PROUT school of economic chaos and disorder. They are of the belief that capitalism will collapse due to inequality and in its place would be a system that puts limits on the accumulation of wealth, and that material goods are common property. That may seem normal to you, but yeah the guy is a nut bag. :nod:
I had to read up on Batra and PROUT as I only remember Batra's stints on the Thom Hartmann show years ago and at that time he didn't seem anti-capitalist as much as as anti- Wall Street and monopoly. He's an interesting fellow and I will admit that the PROUT school is about as pie in the sky as Trickle Down Theory.... :lol:

Regarding Stockman, I take back the comment that he was a true believer. I went and read most of Greider's long piece - The Education of David Stockman from 1981. Stockman was clearly a starve the beast kind of conservative and was willing to roll up his sleeves and sharpen the scalpel. The problem was in trying to balance the budget on the heals of the Reagan tax cuts. The numbers he was referring to reflected the variances in budgeting from department to department. It seemed like he fully understand that the supply siders projected increases in GDP would not create enough revenue to match the tax cuts. And the markets agreed.

In any event, Stockman is certainly well-qualified to speak on this debate. He was in the belly of the beast and was charged with actually making the theories work unlike the theorists. :nod:
Stockman had thought "Chapter II" would help him on two fronts: it would provide substantially increased revenues and thus help reduce the huge deficits of the next three years; but it would also mollify liberal critics complaining about the cuts in social welfare, because it was aimed primarily at tax expenditures (popularly known as "loopholes") benefiting oil and other business interests. "We have a gap which we couldn't fill even with all these budget cuts, too big a deficit," Stockman explained. "Chapter II comes out totally on the opposite of the equity question. That was part of my strategy to force acquiescence at the last minute into a lot of things you'd never see a Republican administration propose. I had a meeting this morning at the White House. The President wasn't involved, but all the other key senior people were. We brought a program of additional tax savings that don't touch any social programs. But they touch tax expenditures." Stockman hesitated to discuss details, for the package was politically sensitive, but it included elimination of the oil-depletion allowance; an attack on tax-exempt industrial-development bonds; user fees for owners of private airplanes and barges; a potential ceiling on home-mortgage deductions (which Stockman called a "mansion cap," since it would affect only the wealthy); some defense reductions; and other items, ten in all. Total additional savings: somewhere in the neighborhood of $20 billion. Stockman was proud of "Chapter II" and also very nervous about it, because, while liberal Democrats might applaud the closing of "loopholes" that they had attacked for years, powerful lobbies—in Congress and business—would mobilize against it.

Artful as it was, the Jones resolution was, according to Stockman, a series of gimmicks: economic estimates and accounting tricks. "Political numbers," he called them. But Stockman was not critical of Jones for these budget ploys, because he cheerfully conceded that the administration's own budget numbers were constructed on similar shaky premises, mixing cuts from the original 1981 budget left by Jimmy Carter with new baseline projections from the Congressional Budget Office in a way that, fundamentally, did not add up. The budget politics of 1981, which produced such clear and dramatic rhetoric from both sides, was, in fact, based upon a bewildering set of numbers that confused even those, like Stockman, who produced them.

"None of us really understands what's going on with all these numbers," Stockman confessed at one point. "You've got so many different budgets out and so many different baselines and such complexity now in the interactive parts of the budget between policy action and the economic environment and all the internal mysteries of the budget, and there are a lot of them. People are getting from A to B and it's not clear how they are getting there. It's not clear how we got there and it's not clear how Jones is going to get there."

These "internal mysteries" of the budget process were not dwelt upon by either side, for there was no point in confusing the clear lines of political debate with a much deeper and unanswerable question: Does anyone truly understand, much less control, the dynamics of the federal budget intertwined with the mysteries of the national economy? Stockman pondered this question occasionally, but since there was no obvious remedy, no intellectual construct available that would make sense of this anarchical universe, he was compelled to shrug at the mystery and move ahead. "l'm beginning to believe that history is a lot shakier than I ever thought it was," he said, in a reflective moment. "In other words, I think there are more random elements, less determinism and more discretion, in the course of history than I ever believed before. Because I can see it."...............

"I put together a list of twenty social programs that have to be zeroed out completely, like Job Corps, Head Start, women and children's feeding programs, on and on. And another twenty-five that have to be cut by 50 percent: general revenue sharing, CETA manpower training, etcetera, etcetera. And then huge bites that would have to be taken out of Social Security. I mean really fierce, blood-and-guts stuff—widows' benefits and orphans' benefits, things like that. And still it didn't add up to $40 billion. So that sort of created a new awareness of the defense budget ...

"Once you set aside defense and Social Security, the Medicare complex, and a few other sacred cows of minor dimension, like the VA and the FBI, you have less than $200 billion worth of discretionary room—only $144 billion after you cut all the easy discretionary programs this year."...........

Stockman himself had been a late convert to supply-side theology, and now he was beginning to leave the church. The theory of "expectations" wasn't working. He could see that. And Stockman's institutional role as budget director forced him to look constantly at aspects of the political economy that the other supply-siders tended to dismiss. Whatever the reason, Stockman was creating some distance between himself and the supply-side purists; eventually, he would become the target of their nasty barbs. For his part, Stockman began to disparage the grand theory as a kind of convenient illusion—new rhetoric to cover old Republican doctrine.

"The hard part of the supply-side tax cut is dropping the top rate from 70 to 50 percent—the rest of it is a secondary matter," Stockman explained. "The original argument was that the top bracket was too high, and that's having the most devastating effect on the economy. Then, the general argument was that, in order to make this palatable as a political matter, you had to bring down all the brackets. But, I mean, Kemp-Roth was always a Trojan horse to bring down the top rate."

A Trojan horse? This seemed a cynical concession for Stockman to make in private conversation while the Reagan Administration was still selling the supply-side doctrine to Congress. Yet he was conceding what the liberal Keynesian critics had argued from the outset—the supply-side theory was not a new economic theory at all but only new language and argument to conceal a hoary old Republican doctrine: give the tax cuts to the top brackets, the wealthiest individuals and largest enterprises, and let the good effects "trickle down" through the economy to reach everyone else. Yes, Stockman conceded, when one stripped away the new rhetoric emphasizing across-the-board cuts, the supply-side theory was really new clothes for the unpopular doctrine of the old Republican orthodoxy. "It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,'" he explained, "so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... an/305760/
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by BDKJMU »

Has there ever been a year that in the year after tax cuts went into effect, the federal government brought in less revenue?
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

BDKJMU wrote:Has there ever been a year that in the year after tax cuts went into effect, the federal government brought in less revenue?
Possibly after the first Bush tax cuts in 2001 (see https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s- ... ue-3305762). Revenues were $2.03 trillion in 2000, $1.99 trillion in 2001, $1.85 trillion in 2002, and $1.72 trillion in 2003.

But I think it's really hard to tease out. In general revenues trend towards increasing as population grows. It's more a matter of trying to compare what we think we would've gotten without the tax cut vs. what we got with the tax cut.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

The chart below shows the growth in revenues over a 12 year period in our history. As you can see it's a generally increasing trend. Can you tell when a significant change in tax policy took place? Answer in terms of the sequence of years during the period (1 through 12).

Image
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

Well, since nobody ventured an answer I'll tell you guys what my previous post is. It's Federal revenues 1977 - 1988. It's fiscal years so it doesn't exactly match up but basically years 1 through 4 are Carter while years 5 through 12 are Reagan. What it shows is that revenues increased at a faster rate under Carter than they did under Reagan.

Total revenue during the Reagan years was $5.8 trillion. Had the rate of increases remained what it was during the Carter years it would've been $6.1 trillion.

The point is that the idea that the Revenue situation in terms of what the trend was did NOT improve after the Reagan tax cuts. Republicans are literally telling the truth when they say revenues increased after the Reagan tax cuts. But that's misleading. The general trend in US government revenue is always increasing. There are a few years where it has gone down from one year to the next. But that is rare. What the Republicans don't tell you is that the rate of increase actually decreased after Reagan's tax cut. There's no suggestion, at all, that the tax cuts resulted in an increase in revenues over what they would have been under whatever the status quo was at the time.

Don't get me wrong. I supported the Reagan tax cuts. I thought they were going to go along with cuts in government spending. But the idea that Reagan's tax cut showed that you can improve revenues by cutting taxes is a myth. A very popular myth. But a myth.

BTW you could do 1978 through 1981 as the Carter years vs. 1982 through 1989 as the Reagan years because of the fiscal year thing. But it doesn't change the basic picture. Total revenue during 1982 through 1989 was $5.8 trillion and if it has risen each year at the 1978 through 1981 rate it would've been $7.1 trillion.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19273
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Soon to be Eden Prairie...

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Chizzang »

Anybody interested on an Over/Under on John going back to endlessly posting on "The Gay Agenda" in 2018..?


:+1:

I'm thinking by May or June we'll be off Trump and back on some of his favorites
Q: Name something that offends Republicans?
A: The actual teachings of Jesus
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

Chizzang wrote:Anybody interested on an Over/Under on John going back to endlessly posting on "The Gay Agenda" in 2018..?


:+1:

I'm thinking by May or June we'll be off Trump and back on some of his favorites
It's "The Homosexual Agenda." If you use the term "Gay" you're giving in to it. Part of the agenda is succeeding in getting people to use terminology that obscures the reality of the situation. Even in scientific literature.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
Ibanez
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 60482
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:16 pm
I am a fan of: Coastal Carolina

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Ibanez »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Chizzang wrote:Anybody interested on an Over/Under on John going back to endlessly posting on "The Gay Agenda" in 2018..?


:+1:

I'm thinking by May or June we'll be off Trump and back on some of his favorites
It's "The Homosexual Agenda." If you use the term "Gay" you're giving in to it. Part of the agenda is succeeding in getting people to use terminology that obscures the reality of the situation. Even in scientific literature.
You’re so queer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Ivytalk »

JohnStOnge wrote:
Chizzang wrote:Anybody interested on an Over/Under on John going back to endlessly posting on "The Gay Agenda" in 2018..?


:+1:

I'm thinking by May or June we'll be off Trump and back on some of his favorites
It's "The Homosexual Agenda." If you use the term "Gay" you're giving in to it. Part of the agenda is succeeding in getting people to use terminology that obscures the reality of the situation. Even in scientific literature.
Boy, if Trump was a homosexual, you’d REALLY hate the guy. :lol:
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
HI54UNI
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12387
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:39 pm
I am a fan of: Firing Mark Farley
A.K.A.: Bikinis for JSO
Location: The Panther State

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by HI54UNI »

Ivytalk wrote:
JohnStOnge wrote:
It's "The Homosexual Agenda." If you use the term "Gay" you're giving in to it. Part of the agenda is succeeding in getting people to use terminology that obscures the reality of the situation. Even in scientific literature.
Boy, if Trump was a homosexual, you’d REALLY hate the guy. :lol:
Yet he likes lesbo Hillary. :roll:
If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism. Ronald Reagan, 1975.

Progressivism is cancer

All my posts are satire
User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19273
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Soon to be Eden Prairie...

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Chizzang »

HI54UNI wrote:
Ivytalk wrote: Boy, if Trump was a homosexual, you’d REALLY hate the guy. :lol:
Yet he likes lesbo Hillary. :roll:
I'm not sure that hating somebody less then somebody else qualifies as liking them..?
A subtlety that seems to be lost a quite a few people around here

Example:
I didn't vote for Jill Stein because "I liked her"

:geek:
Q: Name something that offends Republicans?
A: The actual teachings of Jesus
CAA Flagship
4th&29
4th&29
Posts: 38526
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:01 pm
I am a fan of: Old Dominion
A.K.A.: He/His/Him/Himself
Location: Pizza Hell

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by CAA Flagship »

Chizzang wrote: I'm not sure that hating somebody less then somebody else qualifies as liking them..?
A subtlety that seems to be lost a quite a few people around here

Example:
I didn't vote for Jill Stein because "I liked her"

:geek:
Liar

http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/ ... n#p1059738

:kisswink:
CAA Flagship
4th&29
4th&29
Posts: 38526
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:01 pm
I am a fan of: Old Dominion
A.K.A.: He/His/Him/Himself
Location: Pizza Hell

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by CAA Flagship »

The Trump Train rolls on. :rockon: :rockon:

Apple says it will make a "direct contribution" of more than $350 billion to the U.S. economy over the next five years. The company plans to make new investments as well as purchase materials from American companies. Apple said it estimates that it will spend $55 billion this year on American suppliers and manufacturers, with payments going to over 9,000 companies.

Apple is bringing a lot of money home

Also mentioned in the announcement is that Apple expects a tax bill of about $38 billion in repatriation tax payments because of changes from the recently passed tax legislation.

Based on that figure, at the new repatriation tax rate of 15.5%, Apple is repatriating $245 billion dollars, according to a CNBC estimate. That would be nearly all of the overseas cash Apple currently holds.

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-bu ... ees-2018-1
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9609
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Baldy »

CAA Flagship wrote:The Trump Train rolls on. :rockon: :rockon:

Apple says it will make a "direct contribution" of more than $350 billion to the U.S. economy over the next five years. The company plans to make new investments as well as purchase materials from American companies. Apple said it estimates that it will spend $55 billion this year on American suppliers and manufacturers, with payments going to over 9,000 companies.

Apple is bringing a lot of money home

Also mentioned in the announcement is that Apple expects a tax bill of about $38 billion in repatriation tax payments because of changes from the recently passed tax legislation.

Based on that figure, at the new repatriation tax rate of 15.5%, Apple is repatriating $245 billion dollars, according to a CNBC estimate. That would be nearly all of the overseas cash Apple currently holds.

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-bu ... ees-2018-1
Image
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by SDHornet »

But the polls...

:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Col Hogan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12230
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:29 am
I am a fan of: William & Mary
Location: Republic of Texas

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Col Hogan »

Boy, this tax bill really sucks...apparently Apple is going to pay about $38 BILLION in taxes to bring home all the money they have stashed overseas...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-a ... years.html
“Tolerance and Apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.” Aristotle

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
CAA Flagship
4th&29
4th&29
Posts: 38526
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:01 pm
I am a fan of: Old Dominion
A.K.A.: He/His/Him/Himself
Location: Pizza Hell

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by CAA Flagship »

Col Hogan wrote:Boy, this tax bill really sucks...apparently Apple is going to pay about $38 BILLION in taxes to bring home all the money they have stashed overseas...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-a ... years.html
Dammit, Hogie. It's right there a couple of posts above. :pissed: :pissed:

:lol:
User avatar
Col Hogan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 12230
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:29 am
I am a fan of: William & Mary
Location: Republic of Texas

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by Col Hogan »

CAA Flagship wrote:
Col Hogan wrote:Boy, this tax bill really sucks...apparently Apple is going to pay about $38 BILLION in taxes to bring home all the money they have stashed overseas...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-a ... years.html
Dammit, Hogie. It's right there a couple of posts above. :pissed: :pissed:

:lol:
Ehh...I need the post count...

:oops: :oops: :oops:
“Tolerance and Apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.” Aristotle

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

Well my effective tax rate went up; at least as indicated by withholding. Not by much. 0.1%. But up.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Tax Bill is a loser

Post by JohnStOnge »

What? Nobody else has checked to see how much better off they are thanks to the tax reform bill passing?
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
Post Reply