Will your federal taxes be going up or down next year?

[avromie7]

This is 100% fact. Would anyone like to put some money on it instead of just flapping your gums?

We can go in circles as many times as you want, this was debunked many times here.

[shapsam]

This is 100% fact. Would anyone like to put some money on it instead of just flapping your gums?

But as it was discussed multiple times, there was a reason why it had to be done this way.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

But as it was discussed multiple times, there was a reason why it had to be done this way.

You can claim there was a reason and we can argue that all you want. We can also argue there was a hundred different ways to do the tax bill where that wouldn't be the case. What you can't argue is what Sanders said is 100% correct!!!

[avromie7]

You can claim there was a reason and we can argue that all you want. We can also argue there was a hundred different ways to do the tax bill where that wouldn't be the case. What you can't argue is what Sanders said is 100% correct!!!

It does not prove that either one was a priority. They are both very important and it was definitely balanced in the best way possible.

But go ahead and keep spinning it the way you want.

[aygart]

You can claim there was a reason and we can argue that all you want. We can also argue there was a hundred different ways to do the tax bill where that wouldn't be the case. What you can't argue is what Sanders said is 100% correct!!!

But the point he and you are trying to make from it is 100% false.

[henche]

Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, prefaced his weekend tweets by posing a question Thursday.

“Doesn’t it tell us a lot about Republican priorities,” Sanders asked, “when the tax breaks for corporations are permanent, while the tax cuts for working families expire at the end of 8 years?”

I'll take it over the dems who controlled for 8 yeasts and only raised costs on middle class

[ChaimMoskowitz]

But the point he and you are trying to make from it is 100% false.

The point I have made from the beginning is this benefits the rich/corporations more than the low/middle class. You agree with me so I am confused why you are arguing this point.

I hope now you are not now trying to spin it as the R's care more about the low/middle class than the rich/corporations. That would be laughable!!!

[avromie7]

The point I have made from the beginning is this benefits the rich/corporations more than the low/middle class. You agree with me so I am confused why you are arguing this point.

I hope now you are not now trying to spin it as the R's care more about the low/middle class than the rich/corporations. That would be laughable!!!

That was debunked too. It all depends how you define benefit, I think the most accurate way to define benefit is by how much someone's taxes went down as a percentage, because those who pay more will obviously get a bigger cut in dollars. The middle class definitely gets a bigger percentage of their taxes cut.

[aygart]

The point I have made from the beginning is this benefits the rich/corporations more than the low/middle class. You agree with me so I am confused why you are arguing this point.

I hope now you are not now trying to spin it as the R's care more about the low/middle class than the rich/corporations. That would be laughable!!!

Straw man alert!

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Straw man alert!

Are you claiming you didn't say rich/corporations get the biggest benefit?

[aygart]

Are you claiming you didn't say rich/corporations get the biggest benefit?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Typical response from someone who twists the facts. If you believe they are not getting the biggest benefit then why did you say it?

[aygart]

Typical response from someone who twists the facts. If you believe they are not getting the biggest benefit then why did you say it?

It is not the underlying numbers but the logical fallacies you use to take them where you do.

[ExGingi]

Typical response from someone who twists the facts. If you believe they are not getting the biggest benefit then why did you say it?

What do you mean when you say rich/corporations? Is that the rich (definition?), the corporations, or the rich devided by the corporations (please explain how you do that math)?

Why wouldn't every single American be happy that this tax bill gives a huge break to corporations (and other businesses)?

Think about almost every place you spend your money. Do you really think the corporations just pay the taxes out of their own excess? When they have higher expenses (including tax expenses) it is passed on to the consumers/end users. Oh, and by the way, those tax dollars aren't usually employed very efficiently to benefit the populace.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

It is not the underlying numbers but the logical fallacies you use to take them where you do.

We can discuss should they get a bigger benefit all you want. What is not up for discussion is you agreeing with me that rich/corporations get the biggest benefit from this bill. IIRC you based this on them paying the most to begin with. Do I need to find your post or do you concede? 

[shapsam]

We can discuss should they get a bigger benefit all you want. What is not up for discussion is you agreeing with me that rich/corporations get the biggest benefit from this bill. IIRC you based this on them paying the most to begin with. Do I need to find your post or do you concede? 

Ok, what's the problem with the "rich/corporations" getting the biggest benefit?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Ok, what's the problem with the "rich/corporations" getting the biggest benefit?

The bill was promoted and sold as for the middle working class. Any reasonable person would take that to mean they were getting the most benefit/help. Now you can argue all you want if they should get the most benefit/help but that doesn't change the fact of what this bill really is.

[aygart]

The bill was promoted and sold as for the middle working class. Any reasonable person would take that to mean they were getting the most benefit/help. Now you can argue all you want if they should get the most benefit/help but that doesn't change the fact of what this bill really is.

So your issue is with the rhetoric used to market it?

[avromie7]

The bill was promoted and sold as for the middle working class. Any reasonable person would take that to mean they were getting the most benefit/help. Now you can argue all you want if they should get the most benefit/help but that doesn't change the fact of what this bill really is.

And here we are again, back where we were 100 times already, but you still ignore the facts. The middle class got the biggest tax cut. Additionally, there are a bunch of different things going on in this tax bill, there are middle class tax cuts, and there are corporate tax cuts, they are completely separate but we're joined together as one big tax reform.

 Why are you still running around whining like a child that someone else got more?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

So your issue is with the rhetoric used to market it?

I have said probably close to a hundred times that my main reason (issue for you) is because most of the benefits go to the rich/corporations. You can argue or spin all you want but it doesn't change the fact the rich/corporations benefit the most. You agree the rich/corporations benefit the most. You look foolish trying to say now they don't.