The tax 'reform' truly is a horrendous Frankenstein of a bill. It does very little it set out to do. It certainly won't simplify the tax code and will hurt huge swathes of the middle class, as well as much of the working class. What puzzles me is that so many of the working and rural class blindly support the bill, (apparently) simply on the basis that it's being pushed by their hero. Never mind that it will balloon the deficit by an additional $1.5-1.8tn. What happened to the GOP fiscal conservatives? It seems the GOP is so desperate for any kind of legislative win that they are willing to serve up this abortion of a tax bill just to be able to say "we passed huge tax cuts!" even though it's not true and the long term health of the economy may be put in jeopardy.
-

Sadly, being a fiscal conservative is no way to keep your job in either party. Both parties figured that out decades ago. So no more "Blue Dog Dems" and only a handful of fiscal conservative GOP types. If the voters were serious about the country living within our means, that's what we would get. But there's been no grassroots campaign for it, certainly the media pushes the opposite take. So the issue our increasing debt, imo the greatest issue of our time, just keeps getting worse.

It takes a strong person to accept the idea that "my family can't keep spending like a drunken sailor. We have to live within our means". And we are not strong. I have some really smart lefties that are old friends from HS. Highly successful, advanced degrees, several in econ, and they will happily battle me on the issue of a balanced budget. It's bewildering.

GOP hasn't been serious about restraining spending since Newt Gingrich. At least the Dems are honest about no desire to restrain spending. On this issue the GOP lies like a rug. They say they want the nation to live within it's means, but that doesn't match their actions at all.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

This is likely to create more wealth disparity. Questionable impact on average joe taxpayer and doesn't pay for itself. Where's the backup supporting trickle down in this day and time?
Article says little input by treasury staff.

How about the money that would go to top 2% go to debt retirement - lock box instead of writing ious.

Yeah, it’s like it was written by democrats.

But it wasn’t.

We’re fucked.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I laugh at the notion that a tax bill has to pay for itself...especially when tax revenues are at record levels. Its funny when we are approving what we are going to spend, the idea that we need the money to pay for the spending isn't really a thought.

unfortunately, much of what we spend is almost fixed costs. so when you reduce revenues relative to population growth driving much of your fixed costs (commitments) it seems kinda dumb. there was a mini test project recently in kansas and reportedly that did not work out well. maybe some kansans can chime in. let's sell alabama, ms, couple other states to reduce debt>

And cutting taxes historically has raised revenue (due to econmic growth) anyway.

Awhile back I was discussing this here with a resident leftist and I linked to revenues after the Regan tax cut and his reply was something along the lines of, “revenue went up when taxes are raised and they went up when they were cut which means revenue isn’t really tied to tax rates...”

So I then asked how do you justify the higher rates?

Never got an answer.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

maybe BK can do some commenting but i found this to add to the discussion:

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/sep/25/stephen-colbert/stephen-colbert-brings-ronald-reagans-tax-raising-/

I very much doubt that we are to the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve (where lower taxes will tend to increase revenues, all other things being equal). But regardless, all other things are not equal: the tax changes being proposed are not simple tax cuts and, for millions (including me), will mean paying more in taxes. But what most (independents at least) can agree on is that our deficits will increase and our debt to GDP ratio will worsen.

My opinion of this tax bill is that it mostly sucks ass.

And, yes, the national debt will continue to grow, but that is because of a revenue problem. It’s a spending problem.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I keep hearing how the tax reform will help productivity, which will supposedly lead to higher wages, but productivity has always improved. Wages have been flat since the 1970's.

Cutting taxes has never raised revenue sufficiently to make up for the loss in tax revenue (although it has usually goosed economic growth).

The bigger issue is that this time period doesn't resemble the Reagan era at all, which makes comparisons pretty useless. This bill mimics the Bush tax cuts, but is likely to be economically far worse. We have never pushed a high deficit stimulus package at a time of full employment. The "reform" aspects are very poorly thought out. No wonder it polls at ~26% favorable right now....

While this so-called resident leftist's comment is a joke, your claim that revenues increased after the Reagan tax cuts is not so simple. The may have increased eventually, but that says nothing about a causal relationship between the two.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...m_term=.1b548dfc3563

BTW, can you link back to that discussion? Not that I don't trust your paraphrase.... ;).

And again, if there’s no causal relationship between taxation and revenue (to a point) then what is the justification for higher rates?

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

See post above for an example of that very discussion in this thread.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I laugh at the people who repeat the meme over and over hoping it magically becomes a truth. Why do these people always fall for bullshit?

I laugh at bs trump & co. Pass out and dumarses that believe it

Reading comprehension Duffy. I didn't say there was no causal relationship. I said that increased revenue, in itself, said nothing about that causal relationship.

See post above for an example of someone who has difficulty comprehending simple sentences.