Why cut taxes?

[Jeff Lebowski]

SO you don't disagree with him, just want to poke at Trump? That makes sense to me.

Not really.

Trump defies satire and hyperbole so I can understand the confusion.

[Crockett]

FIFY

You need to apply your caricatures evenly.

Go to Bernie Sanders campaign page and you will see those promised entitlements are not hyperbole.

Keeping out Muslims and Mexicans is ridiculous hyperbole untethered to the facts, as you know.

[creekster]

FIFY

You need to apply your caricatures evenly.

SO you don't disagree with him, just want to poke at Trump? That makes sense to me.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Oh c'mon, there is a huge difference between saying vote for me and you will get free health care, free college, and free day care and someone saying vote for me because I don't support open borders or I will appoint originalist judges will keep out the muslims and mexicans. The former is creating more entitlements and is absolutely vote buying (you will provide a good that costs something to produce for "free").

FIFY

You need to apply your caricatures evenly.

[Crockett]

For the sole purpose of buying votes!

Oh c'mon, there is a huge difference between saying vote for me and you will get free health care, free college, and free day care and someone saying vote for me because I don't support open borders or I will appoint originalist judges. The former is creating more entitlements and is absolutely vote buying (you will provide a good that costs something to produce for "free").

[creekster]

Sure, the current tax code with its incredible complexity and all sorts of credits, deductions, rules, etc. pretty much behaves that way. A very simple flat tax would not. Also, I don't consider tax changes that reduce what is taken from you as redistribution.

Nancy Pelosi has taught otherwise. Reducing taxes can be seen like Robin Hood in Reverse!! You're giving money back to rich people by stealing it from poor people.

[Crockett]

aren't all tax law changes basically an attempt to distribute the wealth a different way?

Sure, the current tax code with its incredible complexity and all sorts of credits, deductions, rules, etc. pretty much behaves that way. A very simple flat tax would not. Also, I don't consider tax changes that reduce what is taken from you as redistribution.

[Jeff Lebowski]

aren't all tax law changes basically an attempt to distribute the wealth a different way?

For the sole purpose of buying votes!

[BlueK]

Lucky you! Looks like the hyperbole police let that one go.

aren't all tax law changes basically an attempt to distribute the wealth a different way?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Lucky you! Looks like the hyperbole police let that one go.

I have lost hope for goatnapper.

[Crockett]

I am in favor of some types of SSI means test as a pragmatic necessity but it grates on me to some extent as it encourages irresponsibility wrt to saving and planning for one's future, IMO. You call it insurance, I call it a tax designed to redistribute wealth especially if you uncap its assessment levels. But nobody is likely to want me to cry on their shoulder about it.

Really like #10 if it went to funding the only socialistic fund that I like - Federal Universal Service Fund!

Lucky you! Looks like the hyperbole police let that one go.

[BlueK]

caps/floors make them not worth a lot anyway

Right. For medical it had to basically be a catastrophically high level to allow someone to use the deduction. Student loan interest I thought did apply to most people in that situation.

[old_gregg]

So, thoughts on getting rid of student loan interest and medical expense deductions?

Personal exemptions are now gone.

I am fine with the business side of it, not pretending I understand it all but whatever.

caps/floors make them not worth a lot anyway

[Maximus]

So, thoughts on getting rid of student loan interest and medical expense deductions?

Personal exemptions are now gone.

I am fine with the business side of it, not pretending I understand it all but whatever.

[cowboy]

Also lifting the tax cap is counter-intuitive. It is already at $127,000. Imagine that you have a means test where people who pay unlimited into the system have a promise they can never receive anything from it? Doesn't that strike resident socialists or redistributionists as somewhat unfair?

This is why I oppose means testing for SS. If we raise the eligibility age and the tax cap, SS should survive without means testing. Most importantly is the incentives that the policy creates. I believe legislators' biggest shortfall is in considering and managing incentives. Without doing so, legislation ends up creating counterproductive, unintended consequences. Obviously, taxes need to raise revenue, but in reaching that goal, fairness and incentives cannot be ignored without doing more harm than good.