• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

The stimulus bill includes a tax break for the 1%

ChibiMofo

Elon Musk is my dog
OP
Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
682
Trophies
0
XP
2,802
Country
Canada
You may have heard that the super rich don't get anything in this $1.2T stimulus bill. If so, you heard wrong. Trump and each of his family members will get far more than $1,200 from this. Now you know why the Republicans in Congress were so eager to get the 800 page bill passed quickly and claimed that the Democrats were dragging their feet. Vote for people who will repeal this handouts and make billionaires pay their fair share.
 

urherenow

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
4,714
Trophies
2
Age
48
Location
Japan
XP
3,588
Country
United States
You're an idiot.

Pelosi is the one that held up the bill, until the DEMOCRATS got what they wanted. Impeach Trump for delaying money to the Ukraine, but it's perfectly fine to delay money for the USA. Don't like the bill, blame the democrats.
And before you even THINK about a retort, don't forget the theme of the impeachment: The HOUSE (read: DEMOCRATS) controls the purse. Not the President.
 
Last edited by urherenow,

Chary

Never sleeps
Chief Editor
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
12,334
Trophies
4
Age
27
Website
opencritic.com
XP
128,052
Country
United States

urherenow

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
4,714
Trophies
2
Age
48
Location
Japan
XP
3,588
Country
United States
MSNBC.... always pro-Trump. NOT.

The HOUSE controls the purse. PERIOD. Stop being a sheep and learn how the government actually works.
Or are you going to stand back and say the impeachment was invalid? (it was, actually, since not a single republican in the house voted for it)

But then again... the article posted clearly proves your original assertion is false, so... :rofl2:
 
Last edited by urherenow,

TimPV3

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
57
Trophies
0
Age
34
XP
742
Country
United States
You guys clearly didn't read the article:

"Now here is what changed in the historic $2 trillion stimulus bill. Previously, if a married couple had depreciation deductions that exceeded their real estate business income, the couple could claim that "loss" to write off taxes on a maximum of $500,000 in income from other sources, like wages from a day job.
Under the change, our rich taxpayer couple -- and this applies only for individuals, not corporations -- can now deduct an unlimited amount of "excess losses" in real estate against income from other sources. So now real estate moguls with lucrative day jobs or bountiful capital gains from other investments can go back to living tax-free, the Kushner way, before limits were put in place as part of the 2017 tax reform bill."
 

Chary

Never sleeps
Chief Editor
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
12,334
Trophies
4
Age
27
Website
opencritic.com
XP
128,052
Country
United States
Fair enough. First post would definitely benefit from that quote in there, cuz that's the most relevant part. Reading the post itself just made me recall the nbc piece. If that's so, that's a pretty large loophole he's left for himself. Why does it apply retroactively as well, yikes? Hm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seliph

Xzi

Time to fly, 621
Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
17,714
Trophies
3
Location
The Lands Between
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
8,459
Country
United States
Last edited by Xzi,

Chary

Never sleeps
Chief Editor
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
12,334
Trophies
4
Age
27
Website
opencritic.com
XP
128,052
Country
United States
THE HOUSE WROTE THE FINAL BILL. Not Trump. Get that through your thick skulls. The ONLY thing you can pin on Trump is an executive order.
Calm yourself. This whole mentality of people getting so overly irate in the politics section over nothing is why people think this section is so horrendous. I didn't even say anything worth fighting over.

I merely find it interesting that there's such a loophole in the first place, and that it applies for years previous, which would have nothing to do with the virus at all. Especially when it's so focused on real estate, which Trump totally has a stake in. Take a chill pill, man. Spare me the caps shouting and snark over the fact I'm not on my knees praising the president on all topics and rooting for him constantly on every front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seliph and x65943

Flame

Me > You
Global Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
7,212
Trophies
3
XP
18,386
THE HOUSE WROTE THE FINAL BILL. Not Trump. Get that through your thick skulls. The ONLY thing you can pin on Trump is an executive order.

You need to clam down.

what good is trump? is he not president? when things are good. its trumps. when the world goes to shit like now. "it was not an executive order!"
 
Last edited by Flame,

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
I like how this entire thread is about how taking 1% less of someone's money is considered a handout. Uhh, no - that's *their* money, the government is just going to take less of it because the stock market crashed. The "super-rich" don't sleep on bags of money - this isn't Looney Tunes. They don't actually have as much liquid assets as people imagine they do, most of their money sits in various capital investments, primarily stocks, which are now worth less than the paper they're printed on. The government came along and said "y'know, we see you have it rough right now, we're going to *take less* from you this time around" - that's not a "gift", that's the "rich" being allowed to keep more of their own money in order to remain solvent. The government isn't "handing out" anything to them, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of what taxation is.
 

urherenow

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
4,714
Trophies
2
Age
48
Location
Japan
XP
3,588
Country
United States
You need to clam down.

what good is trump? is he not president? when things are good. its trumps. when the world goes to shit like now. "it was not an executive order!"
your point makes zero sense. The bill is done by congress. Not Trump. Trump didn't create the virus or this crises. He was called all the usual foul names when he wanted to close travel from China, and he was 100% right in wanting to do so. There would have been a bit less of a problem if Pelosi and her stooges would simply let him do his job. We are so close to an election, that I can't fathom why they keep obstructing him, when a failure on his part would be good for their cause. Same goes for just about every media outlet there is.
 

Taleweaver

Storywriter
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
8,685
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Belgium
XP
8,066
Country
Belgium
The HOUSE controls the purse. PERIOD. Stop being a sheep and learn how the government actually works.
Hey...didn't you say Trump intervened in that process just one post before? So...since you're so adament on hammering on that point, shouldn't he have been removed from office right now? :tpi:


But meh...I'll forego your personal insults, diversion and attempt that your opinion outweighs news channels and go along with it because on a ground level you're certainly right. It's the house who passes legislations and assign money, and since democrats hold the majority, you can correctly pin it on them.

But really: that only works if they can oversee it being handled well. If @Xzi is right and Trump overrides the oversight, then that "controls the purse PERIOD" thing is moot. My guess is that you'll disagree, which is okay (this is a forum after all), but before you make it personal about me as well...can we at least agree that IF @Xzi is correct, then the entire criticism from the OP is valid?


@Foxi4 : I know that's what it says, but is that really the plan? From my recollection, US already has quite a low overhead, and all these tax cuts Trump imposed (irrelavant of who benefitted the most) didn't help. If this all comes down to "okay, guys: because of this situation it's okay if y'all pay a total of 2 trillion dollars LESS than normal", will the government be able to afford it? Meaning: does the USA collect over 2 trillion dollars in taxes in the first place? :unsure:
(note: I always assumed the easy - but on the long run dangerous - solution: print extra money. It helps everyone in the short run, though it might undermine the position of the dollar in the long run)
 
  • Like
Reactions: lexarvn

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Hey...didn't you say Trump intervened in that process just one post before? So...since you're so adament on hammering on that point, shouldn't he have been removed from office right now? :tpi:


But meh...I'll forego your personal insults, diversion and attempt that your opinion outweighs news channels and go along with it because on a ground level you're certainly right. It's the house who passes legislations and assign money, and since democrats hold the majority, you can correctly pin it on them.

But really: that only works if they can oversee it being handled well. If @Xzi is right and Trump overrides the oversight, then that "controls the purse PERIOD" thing is moot. My guess is that you'll disagree, which is okay (this is a forum after all), but before you make it personal about me as well...can we at least agree that IF @Xzi is correct, then the entire criticism from the OP is valid?


@Foxi4 : I know that's what it says, but is that really the plan? From my recollection, US already has quite a low overhead, and all these tax cuts Trump imposed (irrelavant of who benefitted the most) didn't help. If this all comes down to "okay, guys: because of this situation it's okay if y'all pay a total of 2 trillion dollars LESS than normal", will the government be able to afford it? Meaning: does the USA collect over 2 trillion dollars in taxes in the first place? :unsure:
(note: I always assumed the easy - but on the long run dangerous - solution: print extra money. It helps everyone in the short run, though it might undermine the position of the dollar in the long run)
Fiat currency is not a zero sum game - you can print/mint more of the currency while devaluing what's already in circulation, you can manipulate debt, you can do all sorts of things. My point was that the government wasn't "giving" anything to the rich from the treasury, which seems to be how people are taking this. The "rich" are already paying the gross majority of taxes in America, the top 50% pays 97% of all income tax, out of which the top 1% pays over 36% - I think we should define what a "fair share" is, considering the "poor-er" half of the population pays 3% of the total.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fugelmir

qqq1

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
227
Trophies
1
XP
2,405
Country
United States
It's so funny when people think tax cuts equate to someone being given something. That's like saying the guy who held you up at gun point only took $80 of the $100 you had in your wallet so he gave you $20. He stole less of your money, he didn't give you anything. I don't care if you have $1 or $1,000,000,000. It's your money and the government shouldn't be stealing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxi4

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
It's so funny when people think tax cuts equate to someone being given something. That's like saying the guy who held you up at gun point only took $80 of the $100 you had in your wallet so he gave you $20. He stole less of your money, he didn't give you anything. I don't care if you have $1 or $1,000,000,000. It's your money and the government shouldn't be stealing it.
Some forms of taxation are acceptable and non-controversial since they're payment for service rendered. Income tax is not one of them, it's a penalty for productivity. Long discussion to be had, but yes, you more or less captured the spirit of what happened here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: qqq1

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,788
Country
Poland
Being a pretty hardcore libertarian I can not agree to this :P
It's "theft that we're okay with" for the purposes of defense from internal and external threats - it's what differentiates a libertarian from an anarchist. We collectively agree that:
  1. Having laws only makes sense if someone can enforce them
  2. Having borders only makes sense if someone can protect them
  3. We only have rights that we are willing to fight for
Since those three are objectively true, we agree that some form of law enforcement, military and legislature is necessary, and thus requires some form of fair taxation. Notwithstanding we reserve the right to form militias, require fair representation (no taxation without representation) et cetera, et cetera. We only really dispute on what the size of those three should be - most libertarians are somewhere between minarchism (government so small that I can barely see it) and classical liberalism (strong civil freedoms and a free economy under the rule of law). How does that sound like? :P
 

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,419
Country
Laos
Another example for why taxation is a must. You get all the money. You save for retirement. The house market collapses, or the stock market crashes.

There goes your plan for retirement.

In societies with a normal demographic progression you have the people currently working, pay for the retirement of people currently being retired. As the second sector (if normal demographic progression) is smaller - stuff suddely works out - stock market tanking or people loosing houses, doesnt matter - there is still money to attend to your elders.

Same argument with education.

Another argument for taxation are large infrastructure projects. Where investments needed are so high, that they arent recoupable within one generation of 'people' this goes for people heading companies as well - if upfront costs get too large, no one is investing.

Another argument is complexity. If you have to 'grassroots organize' from scratch on every issue that arises - your flexibility and response times tank. So if you dont want to pay people to do 'governing jobs' - you are about 200-500 years to late to even think that thats theoretically possible. ;)

How come, I havent met one libertarian yet that actually roughly knows what his tax money is mostly going to and why.... ;)


On topic - it is mostly a money infusion to stop the stock market from tanking.
Large companies, that are structurally 'necessary' boing, pretty much should always get saved, no matter what.
Why cruise line companies also are bailed out I have no freaking idea.

You need huge sums (at least announced), to keep the stock market from tanking (its more expensive to built economy back up from nothing), that both political sides agree on.

The issue as far as the left are concerned in this case is 'lack of oversight on spending'.

So to give you the example in Germany - three very big companies, with assets to get over more than six weeks of income drops, suddenly announced they would stop paying their leases/rent, as soon as government announced, that there will be a special - no termination clause for people that cant pay rent due to corona curfews. With the state picking up the difference.

So the fear is, that companies will optimize for getting most of that fund money - while still reducing workforce, and 'risk'. If there is little oversignt on looking after who gets what - the system will be abused.

On a very basic level, this money is handed out in an expectation, that companies will use it in ways so they dont have to let go of workers during mass curfews. It will never be micro managed where it goes (you simply open the hose), but some basic restrictions should be in place so it can have the intended effect.

Also if it needs to be 6 trillion in the end can be discussed as well - but basically no one knows. Still cheaper to rebuilding the economy from nothing.
 
Last edited by notimp,
  • Like
Reactions: Alato

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    LeoTCK @ LeoTCK: im going off now...I'll turn off my brain