Tax reform

[Js1 86924]

When will rubes stop believing the lie that *insert republican policy* will pay for itself?

[CooterBrown 18272]

When will rubes stop believing the lie that *insert republican policy* will pay for itself?

80% of adults can’t balance a checkbook. You expect them to understand taxes and fiscal policy?

[Js1 86924]

4 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

 

80% of adults can’t balance a checkbook. You expect them to understand taxes and fiscal policy?

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me over 3 decades, shame on....Hillary?

[zork 629]

 

probably just a blip.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-27/u-s-gdp-growth-hits-4-1-fastest-since-2014-in-win-for-trump

Quote

...

The annualized rate of gains in gross domestic product was just shy of the 4.2 percent median forecast in a Bloomberg survey. It followed first-quarter growth of 2.2 percent that was revised from 2 percent, the Commerce Department reported Friday. Consumer spending grew 4 percent, more than estimated, while nonresidential business investment climbed at a 7.3 percent clip.

...

 

 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

26 minutes ago, zork said:

 

probably just a blip.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-27/u-s-gdp-growth-hits-4-1-fastest-since-2014-in-win-for-trump

 

 

Below expectations, ouch. Not even close to Obama's best quarter (5.2%). That's got to sting Trump. 

[Js1 86924]

3 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Below expectations, ouch. Not even close to Obama's best quarter (5.2%). That's got to sting Trump. 

Spending in anticipating of a trade war and tariffs? Woot.

Consumer savings down? Woot.

[Biff Tannen 46060]

It will trickle down though.  I'm sure of it.  This time.

[zork 629]

Better than last quarter.  Like I said, probably just a blip.

[yoladu 4187]

Definitely Good news.

I am the type who believes the government number/reports. I know there are others that don't.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

"U.S. Growth Hits 4.1%, Fastest Since 2014" 

And this time, the numbers are real, unlike those fake numbers during the terrible Obama years. 

[zork 629]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

"U.S. Growth Hits 4.1%, Fastest Since 2014" 

And this time, the numbers are real, unlike those fake numbers during the terrible Obama years. 

Last quarter was still Obama, this quarter it is Trump.

Edited July 27, 2018 by zork
But we are reportedly at the end of the long cycle and due for a recession so it is likely a blip

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, zork said:

Last quarter was still Obama, this quarter it is Trump.

2014 was Obama too. 

[zork 629]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

2014 was Obama too. 

So we'll see what Trump's numbers are 6 years in?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

2 minutes ago, zork said:

So we'll see what Trump's numbers are 6 years in?

Luckily we'll never have to see what Trump's numbers looked like 6 years in after taking over during a massive economic depression. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

8 minutes ago, zork said:

So we'll see what Trump's numbers are 6 years in?

Likely will be an inmate ID number by then. 

[zork 629]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Luckily we'll never have to see what Trump's numbers looked like 6 years in after taking over during a massive economic depression. 

The unwinding of the massive QE to infinity(can't remember how many rounds there were) during the Obama years, as it begins the affect it will have, could have a similar effect unless the whatever caused the blip continues to overwhelm the start of the unwinding that has started to a certain extent.  Just a blip, probably.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Nah Trump got this, and when it crashes it's Obama's fault.  You've got it all figured out. 

[zork 629]

1 minute ago, Lagunamadre said:

Likely will be an inmate ID number by then. 

Patiently waiting for that.  But let's keep this on topic for economic news, taxes, GDP, etc.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

1 minute ago, zork said:

Patiently waiting for that.  But let's keep this on topic for economic news, taxes, GDP, etc.

OK, no jokes, got it.

 

[zork 629]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Nah Trump got this, and when it crashes it's Obama's fault.  You've got it all figured out. 

The Fed is responsible for the QE to infinity, buying back our own bonds to keep rates low. (but exploding the debt) The point was Obama was graced with QE to infinity while Trump is going to get the unwinding of that.  Will the stimulus Trump is trying with less regulation and Ryan's/Trump's tax bill overcome the end of the business cycle and Fed actions? 

I'm guessing the business cycle is going to business cycle which is why I am downplaying the >4% GDP number as a blip.

Edited July 27, 2018 by zork

[zork 629]

1 minute ago, Lagunamadre said:

OK, no jokes, got it.

 

Just saying there are plenty of threads on that and want to keep this one more economic inclined.  I gave you rep for the joke.  I laughed at your turn of the joke.

[Biff Tannen 46060]

9 minutes ago, zork said:

Just a blip, probably.

[Js1 86924]

Blip

blip

blip

blip

blip

[wildcat09 29555]

10 minutes ago, zork said:

The unwinding of the massive QE to infinity(can't remember how many rounds there were) during the Obama years, as it begins the affect it will have, could have a similar effect unless the whatever caused the blip continues to overwhelm the start of the unwinding that has started to a certain extent.  Just a blip, probably.

I'm impressed by your ability to both fuck up affect/effect and get it right within 9 words.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

"Graced."  Lulz.  There's nothing advantageous about inheriting the 2008 economy vs. the 2016 economy.   Trump's temporary goosing of the economy is going to make the inevitable recession worse and the recovery more difficult.  The tax bill is turning out exactly like economists predicted and not at all delivering on the administration's claims.   The deficit is skyrocketing.   Trump's trade war is so disastrous he's had to pause it until after the elections.  Blaming the fed for trying to control the steering on this out-of-control train is absurd. 

[zork 629]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

I'm impressed by your ability to both fuck up affect/effect and get it right within 9 words.

I'm not proofreading and doing other things while replying quickly.  gimmee a break.

[TwiceHorn 31983]

On 7/11/2018 at 8:38 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Yeah, imagine what it would be like if we spent less on healthcare paperwork. What a nightmare that would be.

Not trying to be a dick, really, but have you seen the amount of paperwork CMS generates?  Holy fuck.  Ross Perot got rich off that shit and so did Darwin Deason and several others.  Relapse is right, medical administration is, intentionally or otherwise, a giant jobs program.  So is defense.

I am prepared for, and grudgingly endorse heavy  government involvement in healthcare, but to think that it will make things more administratively efficient is absurd.

Edited July 27, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[David Dennison 19440]

34 minutes ago, zork said:

So we'll see what Trump's numbers are 6 years in?

He's not going to get re-elected.

[zork 629]

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

"Graced."  Lulz.  There's nothing advantageous about inheriting the 2008 economy vs. the 2016 economy.   Trump's temporary goosing of the economy is going to make the inevitable recession worse and the recovery more difficult.  The tax bill is turning out exactly like economists predicted and not at all delivering on the administration's claims.   The deficit is skyrocketing.   Trump's trade war is so disastrous he's had to pause it until after the elections.  Blaming the fed for trying to control the steering on this out-of-control train is absurd. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/fed-plan-to-unwind-its-balance-sheet-didnt-skip-a-beat-2018-3

It is not exactly stimulus enhancing while also in a interest rate rising environment(rates raising  by fed to keep growth/inflation in check).  Not the same certainly, but worth mentioning as a headwind to growth along with the end of the cycle that will happen at some point.  Trump said the way to get rid of the debt was to grow our way out.  Not sure it can happen with the viable contraints by the Fed but it doesn't help the massive and growing debt which could explode with interest rates rising.  Not tiddlywinks for sure.  The Fed will come up with something to fix it.

[David Dennison 19440]

[Brisketexan 106610]

I am a farmer.  I know that sound planning requires that I set aside some of my harvest for 1) stored food, so I can eat it through the winter, which ALWAYS comes, and 2) seed stock, so I can plant next year's crop.

Because even when there's a bumper crop to harvest, we KNOW that winter will come, and we will need to eat stored food then, and we KNOW that we need to have sufficient seed to plant the next crop.

What we're seeing from the admin and its tax reform plan now is akin to a farmer in January gorging on all of his stored grain and seed stock, and saying "look how much I weigh!  I'm fatter and happier than any farmer has ever been in January!"  Great.  Wonderful.  How are we gonna feel in late February, when we have no stored food?  How are we going to feel in April, when we have no seed stock to plant the next crop?

That's what we've done with this "tax reform."  Every economist of note called EXACTLY this result - a temporary short-term fattening.....followed by massive deficits.  Their predictions are all coming true.  Only a Trumpkin looks down at our short-term bulging belly and celebrates.  The rest of the sane world knows what's coming.

[zork 629]

24 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I am a farmer.  I know that sound planning requires that I set aside some of my harvest for 1) stored food, so I can eat it through the winter, which ALWAYS comes, and 2) seed stock, so I can plant next year's crop.

Because even when there's a bumper crop to harvest, we KNOW that winter will come, and we will need to eat stored food then, and we KNOW that we need to have sufficient seed to plant the next crop.

What we're seeing from the admin and its tax reform plan now is akin to a farmer in January gorging on all of his stored grain and seed stock, and saying "look how much I weigh!  I'm fatter and happier than any farmer has ever been in January!"  Great.  Wonderful.  How are we gonna feel in late February, when we have no stored food?  How are we going to feel in April, when we have no seed stock to plant the next crop?

That's what we've done with this "tax reform."  Every economist of note called EXACTLY this result - a temporary short-term fattening.....followed by massive deficits.  Their predictions are all coming true.  Only a Trumpkin looks down at our short-term bulging belly and celebrates.  The rest of the sane world knows what's coming.

"blip" is not celebrating.  More blip agreeance:

Quote

Here are comments on Friday’s GDP report that showed economic growth of 4.1% in the second quarter, the fastest pace in nearly four years.

See: U.S. economy accelerates to 4.1% rate in second quarter, fastest in almost 4 years.

• “Overall, these are definitely big numbers, but not unexpectedly so, and should not alter views on the Fed or the second-half outlook much (inventories will be rebuilt in Q3, but exports will likely be softer).” — Avery Shenfeld, CIBC Economics.

• “In one line: Looks great; won’t last,” said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist for Pantheon Macroeconomics. “Looking ahead, the big stories for Q3 will be the slowdown in consumption — Q3 probably was boosted by the tax cuts, but the incremental cash flow effect is now zero — and the reversal of the Q2 inventory and trade swings. With investment and government spending growing steadily, that means our initial working assumption for Q3 growth is about 3%.”

...

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/gdp-looks-great-but-pace-wont-last-economists-say-2018-07-27

 

This one is interesting:

Quote

• “There were one-offs contributing to durable goods consumption and foreign trade, but there is real strength here. Watch for upward revisions to Q3 growth estimates, especially in inventories.” — Chris Low, FTN Financial.

 

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by zork
added last quote

[Js1 86924]

The one celebrating is DJT.

[zork 629]

15 minutes ago, Js1 said:

The one celebrating is DJT.

Agreed.  He is predicting more to come from the reports I've seen.  We'll see.

[sidis 9990]

1 hour ago, zork said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/fed-plan-to-unwind-its-balance-sheet-didnt-skip-a-beat-2018-3

It is not exactly stimulus enhancing while also in a interest rate rising environment(rates raising  by fed to keep growth/inflation in check).  Not the same certainly, but worth mentioning as a headwind to growth along with the end of the cycle that will happen at some point.  Trump said the way to get rid of the debt was to grow our way out.  Not sure it can happen with the viable contraints by the Fed but it doesn't help the massive and growing debt which could explode with interest rates rising.  Not tiddlywinks for sure.  The Fed will come up with something to fix it.

if you're going to purposefully overheat already heated short-run aggregate demand for idiotic, pyrrhic political victories and overly simplistic bloomberg headlines...you cannot expect the last few remaining adults in the room that are paying attention to not try and act to avoid a disastrous inflationary consequence both in currency valuation and asset price bubbles.

[zork 629]

1 hour ago, sidis said:

if you're going to purposefully overheat already heated short-run aggregate demand for idiotic, pyrrhic political victories and overly simplistic bloomberg headlines...you cannot expect the last few remaining adults in the room that are paying attention to not try and act to avoid a disastrous inflationary consequence both in currency valuation and asset price bubbles.

I don't have all the answers.  I put the bloomberg article up to just notate the GDP numbers in the thread.  Ho Hum for now as I mentioned.

The Fed doing the QE games to recover from the RE bomb of 2008 was masterful in some respects and possibly just delaying the inevitable bust due to logarithmic growth of the debt, perhaps.  Growing our way out without too much inflation is preferred to depression in my opinion.  Pulling the reins on spending somehow given the political environment seems out of the question. 

[sidis 9990]

37 minutes ago, zork said:

I don't have all the answers.  I put the bloomberg article up to just notate the GDP numbers in the thread.  Ho Hum for now as I mentioned.

The Fed doing the QE games to recover from the RE bomb of 2008 was masterful in some respects and possibly just delaying the inevitable bust due to logarithmic growth of the debt, perhaps.  Growing our way out without too much inflation is preferred to depression in my opinion.  Pulling the reins on spending somehow given the political environment seems out of the question. 

no one has all the answers.

growing our way out of what?  debt?  lol.  this stupid cut in conjunction with previous budget plan is going to cost us over a trillion dollars a year over the next decade...so unless the "taxable gdp" increases by approximately 80 trillion dollars over that time...we aren't growing our way out of anything.   and the "without too much inflation" is kind of the important aspect.  providing keynesian-like "stimulus" in a time where said economic theory would call for SRAD cooling measures due to the (mostly positive) consequences of stimulating our way out of a deep recession is...umm, well...whatever.  aligning yourself with the idiotic, trumpian argument that the fed is acting in a way to mitigate the success of "his economic policies" is not going to be taken seriously.

i guess the good news inflation-wise is that this utterly moronic tax cut will only really benefit those who already had too much money to do anything with it prior to the changes so switzerland, monaco, and the yacht/civil aviation manufacturing labor markets are possibly the only ones who are going to run any real risk there.

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not trying to be a dick, really, but have you seen the amount of paperwork CMS generates?  Holy fuck.  Ross Perot got rich off that shit and so did Darwin Deason and several others.  Relapse is right, medical administration is, intentionally or otherwise, a giant jobs program.  So is defense.

I am prepared for, and grudgingly endorse heavy  government involvement in healthcare, but to think that it will make things more administratively efficient is absurd.

CMS is a disaster. And for the record I do not think that a single payer or government payer is the best way to go. I do think we would have greater efficiency if the market was aligned around the delivery of care instead of the profitable expansion and duplication of payment and diagnostic process and paperwork.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[Biff Tannen 46060]

Somewhat related, my wife's practice was bought out by an equity firm (since they know so much about medicine) and they keep hiring middle managers for some reason.  She now has a local office manager, a regional office manager, and a central texas office manager.  No one knows what they actually do.

[zork 629]

1 hour ago, sidis said:

[snip]

  aligning yourself with the idiotic, trumpian argument that the fed is acting in a way to mitigate the success of "his economic policies" is not going to be taken seriously.

{snip}

Not saying that at all although Trump is, I agree.

I'm just pointing out the fact that the Fed is at the beginning of the process to attempt to unfuck the QE inventory that was taken on during the post 2008 timeframe till early 2017.(see businessinsider link up above, lots of cool informative graphs BTW) 

That is going to be painful at a time when the economy is likely to slow due to end of business cycle.  However, the Trump, Ryan, attempts at extending the growth cycle to  allow that yuge Fed action to get more normalized might be better for all concerned.  If, and it is a big if, less regulated business along with yuge capital expenditure tax breaks can continue to stimulate the economy to more >3% growth for an extended time(maybe also, might be, more free trade after the world gives in to fairer trade(don't laugh)).  

Then maybe the Fed will have some tools to coax the economy back when the inevitable recession occurs.  Whether that is more QE, lowering rates back after they have raised them in the coming year, whatever.  

 

WRT trillion dollar deficits:  any attempt to cut whether people or programs has been met with ridicule or whining.   Interest rates are rising which is not helping the debt servicing costs.   There has been little if any even holding the line on Government spending growth to any department.   Nothing is ever cut any more. 

So there has to be a way to out grow the spending growth or there is no way to contain the debt which, without massive QE that only marginally helps the more you do it to keep rates artificially low(and adds even more to the debt), will cause the higher costs of interest expense on our debt to spiral(credit rating cuts, and cuts due to lack of expected ability to service debt) making it even more untenable. 

There isn't enough taxable income to make that side work and it would really kill growth.  

We have to grow.

[sidis 9990]

12 minutes ago, zork said:

Not saying that at all although Trump is, I agree.

I'm just pointing out the fact that the Fed is at the beginning of the process to attempt to unfuck the QE inventory that was taken on during the post 2008 timeframe till early 2017.(see businessinsider link up above, lots of cool informative graphs BTW) 

That is going to be painful at a time when the economy is likely to slow due to end of business cycle.  However, the Trump, Ryan, attempts at extending the growth cycle to  allow that yuge Fed action to get more normalized might be better for all concerned.  If, and it is a big if, less regulated business along with yuge capital expenditure tax breaks can continue to stimulate the economy to more >3% growth for an extended time(maybe also, might be, more free trade after the world gives in to fairer trade(don't laugh)).  

Then maybe the Fed will have some tools to coax the economy back when the inevitable recession occurs.  Whether that is more QE, lowering rates back after they have raised them in the coming year, whatever.  

 

WRT trillion dollar deficits:  any attempt to cut whether people or programs has been met with ridicule or whining.   Interest rates are rising which is not helping the debt servicing costs.   There has been little if any even holding the line on Government spending growth to any department.   Nothing is ever cut any more. 

So there has to be a way to out grow the spending growth or there is no way to contain the debt which, without massive QE that only marginally helps the more you do it to keep rates artificially low(and adds even more to the debt), will cause the higher costs of interest expense on our debt to spiral(credit rating cuts, and cuts due to lack of expected ability to service debt) making it even more untenable. 

There isn't enough taxable income to make that side work and it would really kill growth.  

We have to grow.

while we are at it, i would like the monica bellucci of 15 years ago to titty fuck me while blake lively gives me a rimjob and ana de armas sits on my face.

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

It’s like history began in January 2008

 

[sidis 9990]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It’s like history began in January 2008

 

fewer than 15 years..."this time it'll be different!"

[Brisketexan 106610]

10 minutes ago, sidis said:

while we are at it, i would like the monica bellucci of 15 years ago to titty fuck me while blake lively gives me a rimjob and ana de armas sits on my face.

Wait....is this an option?  Because my ballot just had Trump, Hillary, and Gary Johnson on it.  I'd like to go back and change my vote, please.

[Aqua Buddha 14782]

9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It’s like history began in January 2008

 

You're thinking Nov. 4, 2008.  Deficits didn't matter until then.

[zork 629]

40 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It’s like history began in January 2008

 

How much QE happened before 2008?  None AFAIK but I don't know the whole Fed history. 

41 minutes ago, sidis said:

fewer than 15 years..."this time it'll be different!"

What are your solutions to pay off the Debt?  Stay the course?  Cut spending? Raise taxes?

 

 

[Brisketexan 106610]

6 minutes ago, zork said:

How much QE happened before 2008?  None AFAIK but I don't know the whole Fed history. 

What are your solutions to pay off the Debt?  Stay the course?  Cut spending? Raise taxes?

 

 

When tax cuts have been proven -- time after time -- to NOT lead to the promised growth, I'd say "slashing revenue" would be something that's NOT on my list of what to do.

If you want to reduce the debt of any enterprise, you have three pressure points:

- cut expenditures

- increase the volume of revenue you bring in (that is, make more sales, work more hours, etc.)

- increase the value of the revenue that you bring in (that is, raise your prices, rates, etc.)

Spend less.  Work/sell more.  Charge more for what you do sell/perform.

This admin has chosen a path of INCREASE expenditures (see making our military bigly great) and REDUCE the value of the revenue we bring in.  Thus, they are betting it ALL on "increase the volume of revenue" -- in this context, that is "grow the economy."  Nevermind that the techniques being employed have NEVER grown the economy at a rate sufficient to even make up for the reduced revenue value, much less exceed it.  But keep on driving, pedal to the metal, who knows how it will end...

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

What are your solutions to pay off the Debt?  Stay the course?  Cut spending? Raise taxes?  

 

 

My solution as of today?  

Restructure revenue: Put the personal tax structure back to where it was in 2000, set the corporate rate to about 26-27%. Eliminate the cap on FICA/SECA “contributions” and cut the rates.

 

Cut costs:

Entitlements: turn social security into a means tested welfare program. Enact Wyden-Bennet or similar to achieve universal coverage more or less immediately in a cost neutral way.

 

Cut military headcount through attrition and use savings to restart WPA or equivalent.

 

Phased in, the combination of the above would likely achieve a budget surplus in about a decade without a historic deflationary event.

 

[zork 629]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

My solution as of today?

Restructure revenue: Put the personal tax structure back to where it was in 2000, set the corporate rate to about 26-27%. Eliminate the cap on FICA/SECA “contributions” and cut the rates.

Cut costs:
Entitlements: turn social security into a means tested welfare program. Enact Wyden-Bennet or similar to achieve universal coverage more or less immediately in a cost neutral way.

Cut military headcount through attrition and use savings to restart WPA or equivalent.

Phased in, the combination of the above would likely achieve a budget surplus in about a decade.

Nice list.  Which of the items do you see being successfully voted into law, much less all of it. 

Do you see the Democrats touching Social Security in the way you describe if they had all 3 :  PotUS, majority Senate(60 votes), majority House?

[zork 629]

1 hour ago, sidis said:

while we are at it, i would like the monica bellucci of 15 years ago to titty fuck me while blake lively gives me a rimjob and ana de armas sits on my face.

How big are your tits BTW?(does Monica have that big of a clit?)