2018 tax return

anonymousyam wrote:

Which is bulls~~~ which punishes Conservatives who live in blue states California, New York and New Jersey while being blue since 92 have a good number of Conservatives in them especially the ones away from the major Cities which Trumps bill still punishes. But the ultimate fact is that Trump’s tax cut was Socialism for the rich and f~~~ing the poor (while increasing taxes on the poor in about 7 to 8 years).

Make no mistake. Trump was punishing Democratic states that didn’t vote for him. It was a petty thing to do. And I got screwed as I live in one of those states. There are plenty of policies with Trump where I agree with him, but I have to call them like I see them. And this one was petty payback.

And let me take a minute to explain the reason for the state tax deduction. If you don’t give that deduction, then you are double taxing someone. Let’s say I make $10 and owe $1 to the state in taxes. Without that deduction, I am paying federal tax on $10, even paying tax on the $1 that went to the state. So on the money I pay to the state I’m paying more than a dollar in tax on that dollar.

anonymousyam wrote:

Untrue as Reganomics (what the Trump tax cut is based on) does not increase the checks of the average Worker rather those really rich (to any real degree so the Workers are not the ones better off). When you cut taxes on the rich you incentivise them to just hoard more of their money rather then forcing them to put it into the Business or pay a higher tax rate.

That certainly seems to be the case doesn’t it? CEO’s used to make like 50 times that of the average worker back when the top tax rate was 90%. Now it’s something like 900 times the average workers. When the tax rate was lowered on the “rich” they started paying themselves a s~~~ ton more because they got to keep more. Let’s take a guy like Jack Welsh from GE. He took hundreds of millions of dollars out of that company. He’s about as loaded as you can get for the guy that didn’t start the company. But how’s the company doing now? It’s in the toilet. He did a s~~~ job at creating the next generation of management that could preserve the wealth of the company. He was lucky that he ran the company through some really good times in the economy and stripped the company out of a s~~~ ton of money and then walked away.

Hate on AOC all you want, and I do on almost every issue. But I’m fine with a 70% tax rate on income over $10 million a year. It might slow down the raping of companies by the upper management.

I figure as long as I don’t have to pay in at the end of the year, I’ll be happy with whatever I get back. I did get quite a bit less back this year with my paycheck only slightly going up just a few dollars.

My return paid for the new shotgun I just bought, so was able to put that money back in the bank.

Hermit wrote:

Tic wrote:

Hermit wrote:

My return paid for the new shotgun I just bought.

What you get, bro

I got a Mossberg 930, 12 gauge semi-auto. Magazine holds 8 – 3″ shells, but I’ll probably just shoot 2 3/4. I’ve only shot it a little bit at some clays a couple weeks ago, but it seems to run pretty good. The one in this picture looks like a 24″ barrel. I got the 22″.

Nice boomstick! I have a 500-series, with adjustable stock and pistol grip.

Ranger One wrote:

Hermit wrote:

Tic wrote:

Hermit wrote:

My return paid for the new shotgun I just bought.

What you get, bro

I got a Mossberg 930, 12 gauge semi-auto. Magazine holds 8 – 3″ shells, but I’ll probably just shoot 2 3/4. I’ve only shot it a little bit at some clays a couple weeks ago, but it seems to run pretty good. The one in this picture looks like a 24″ barrel. I got the 22″.

Nice boomstick! I have a 500-series, with adjustable stock and pistol grip.

I can’t remember the brand, but my son bought a shotgun with a pistol grip and peep sights. I didn’t care for either. I love the pistol grips on my rifles, but it just didn’t feel right on a shotgun to me, so I have the traditional stock. The only thing I plan on adding to this shotgun is a tactical light, same as I have on my rifles. Most of the varmints I shoot are nocturnal as are most intruders.

My taxes paid (not return) was a little more than last year. I did earn a bit more. It also looks like something called the Personal Exemption (I may be getting this wrong) is no longer valid, and that made a different for me. I also do my mother’s taxes, and saw the similar effect. I’m not that upset about it, but not bothered by it either.

As far as their no longer being a state tax exemption, it may or may not be petty, but something that should have always been in place. States response to this should be to calculate state taxes based on income after federal taxes. But it’s all really just didn’t flavors of nonsense. The idea that one person should pay more for the same government services (taxes) than someone else is just morally wrong to me. A person’s income, value of property held, or dollar value of purchases doesn’t have any relationship to the government services they consume.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that federal government spending starting getting out of control around the same time income taxes were initiated. When you separate who pays for spending from who benefits from spending, it’s not at all surprising to see spending get out of control. Putting a 70% tax on the high wage earners is only going to exacerbate the issue, even if it does bring in more tax revenue. All it will do is encourage more spending by those who aren’t responsible for paying to ask more handouts.

I really don’t care how much CEOs make, it does not justify theft.

TaxGuy wrote:

And let me take a minute to explain the reason for the state tax deduction. If you don’t give that deduction, then you are double taxing someone. Let’s say I make $10 and owe $1 to the state in taxes. Without that deduction, I am paying federal tax on $10, even paying tax on the $1 that went to the state. So on the money I pay to the state I’m paying more than a dollar in tax on that dollar.

So let’s look at it another way. High SALT areas should be providing more services for its citizens. For example, I live in a town with high property taxes, but one of the benefits is a town truck drives around to every house once a week and picks up garbage. The town next to me has lower taxes. If they want someone to pick up their garbage, they have to pay a private company. Why should I essentially get to write off the cost of garbage pick up just because its rolled into my taxes where as my neighbors in the next town over don’t?

TaxGuy wrote:

It was a petty thing to do. And I got screwed as I live in one of those states

And Trump does it despite the fact millions of People in Blue states voted for him (by Blue i mean Hillary won there such as those i mentioned)

There are plenty of policies with Trump where I agree with him

I can see that but the only Policy he did that i support is the Prison reform other then that he lied about being almost a Centrist Democrat especially with his coming budget for 2020 in where Medicare, Social Security and the other Social programs are getting cut despite his bulls~~~ promise (which helped him win) that he would not cut it. In my opinion Trump is not a Political person with no really rock hard or firm views and if you go back to the 90’s and 2000’s Trump is a Centrist Democrat and since he won the Republican party (which is dogs~~~) he has now morphed into a Republican.

So on the money I pay to the state I’m paying more than a dollar in tax on that dollar.

What is worse is the cutting of deductions Workers use while enabling the really rich as the richer you are the less taxes you seem to pay in this Country (especially if you make most of your money via Capital gains).

When the tax rate was lowered on the “rich” they started paying themselves a s~~~ ton more because they got to keep more

That is the point of those tax cuts to begin with, with the Republicans using the lie that the money will trickle down and that they will hire more Workers and pay them higher wages when in Reality that never happens rather they spew the lie to get the Workers to vote for it (even if no Women voted the amount of rich men is so small that the Working class would outvote them for a more progressive tax system unless the Republican dream were to kick in where they could restrict voting to the richer class).

He was lucky that he ran the company through some really good times in the economy and stripped the company out of a s~~~ ton of money and then walked away.

The way Business works is the Management can strip the assets from the Company for their own personal use (increasing the debt and likelyhood of folding) my best example is of Toys R Us to while the Investors tried some bulls~~~ blaming the Young People for not having the Kids the actual reason it fell was a Leveraged buyout in which Private Investors used debt to buy the Company, profit off of the debt and walk away scott free without a load of debt on them (it was the Companies debt despite them causing it).

But I’m fine with a 70% tax rate on income over $10 million a year. It might slow down the raping of companies by the upper management.

The problem with it is it does not go far enough and the rich will still be able to buy Politicans to cut taxes again. So while they have to go into shadier s~~~ to dodge that tax we still have Oil Billionaries happy to contribute to both Republican and Democratic parties.