EPTOn September 27 2016 05:31 Plansix wrote:
“Common sense” = pure speculation on the terms.
“Common sense” = pure speculation on the terms.
What are you even suggesting could be the reason other than Trump not agreeing?
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5160
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23199 Posts
What are you even suggesting could be the reason other than Trump not agreeing? | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:31 Plansix wrote: NYT had a good article showing there is a large amount of undecided, more than in the last two elections. Which is why the polls are so volatile, since they are tracking “likely voters” rather than registered voters. As undecided voters enter that system, they tip the balance and they don’t enter at the same rate. We will have to see how tonight goes, but Trump has such low expectations that the press will likely praise him if he doesn’t talk about sex life during the debate. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right. So even though I disagree with these people, and how they arrive at their arguments, I'll let them go at it, since for now, we're allies. And I'm counting on these people. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:33 GreenHorizons wrote: What are you even suggesting could be the reason other than Trump not agreeing? Evidence that she asked for it in the first place. Literally any at all. Otherwise you are speculating on what was asked for and what the commission was willing to fight over. They may have known that a stool was never going to be an option or that it would fuel further health speculation and not asked for it. Or they didn’t want one at all. Everything I did there is speculation too. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:29 KwarK wrote: Just so you know, there already is a 0% tax bracket in the US, it just operates differently. Instead of having various brackets at different levels the US operates a "tax excluded" bracket of variable size that operates under all the existing brackets. If this is, say, $9,600 for you then although your first dollar earned is taxed at 10% in reality it'll be your 9601st dollar that gets taxed at 10% with all the bracket thresholds moved up by $9,600 to make room for a 0% effective bracket from $1 to $9,600. This is of variable size because it is calculated based upon taxpayer variables. Don't quote me on this because I'm doing it off the top of my head but each member of the household is worth $4,000 (2015, might be $4,050 this year) with the same for dependents who had >50% of their costs paid by the household and lived there, I wanna say.... 9 months of the year? So for a married family with two kids we're looking at the 10% bracket actually starting at $16,001. Then we have deductibles. Those work in a similar way but vary in size. You get to claim the sum of (student loan interest + mortgage interest + healthcare costs + charitable donations + some other categories) or $12,600 for a couple or $6,300 for an individual, whichever is higher. That gets our 0% bracket up to closer to $28,600 for that family with the $28,601st dollar taxed at 10%. There are phaseouts for higher income families for some of that and I've oversimplified but that's basically how it works. What this means is that there is a pretty big 0% bracket for working families already. Once you build in tax credits for kids, EITC, Saver's Credit, AOTC and a few others it's even bigger. That's why Trump's plan to create a new 0% tax rate for working families is so laughable, especially given he also plans to slash taxes on the top 1% which pay for the essential services those working families depend upon. He's introducing a new 0% rate for people who already pay near 0%, sometimes below 0%, and they're voting for it. The system needs more transparency certainly but introducing a 0% tax bracket won't help anyone because there already is one, of variable size depending on need. Yeah sorry, I meant expand the bracket, but yes, what you say is right. The process you described is exactly what I don't like. I see the desire of instead of giving people money, give them a tax credit, and that's what the US does, and has a million deduction for so many things. Like you explained, it's at a point where, who the fuck cares what the tax rate is, because people pay completely different amounts for varying different reasons. Having a discussion about the system is difficult, because me saying the income tax rate should be lowered is almost meaningless do to the aforementioned reasons. And when it's this way, less people understand what's going on, and the more difficult it's for people to be happy with the way it is. Remove the deductions for most situations, have 4-7 concrete tax brackets (or make a income vs tax function lol), and be done with it. There's so much money that just disappears, and the average person doesn't know where it goes. It's the same thing how the US federal budget, and the actual spending don't ever match up, because stuff like wars isn't included. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
hey look a giant tax dodge | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23199 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:41 Plansix wrote: Evidence that she asked for it in the first place. Literally any at all. Otherwise you are speculating on what was asked for and what the commission was willing to fight over. They may have known that a stool was never going to be an option or that it would fuel further health speculation and not asked for it. Or they didn’t want one at all. Everything I did there is speculation too. Well the step-stool request seems undeniable as she does have a custom podium. I don't think her camp is suggesting she didn't make the requests (I very well might have missed it), but if you want to put the caveat of "provided the requests were made" that's fine with me. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9118 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:31 Plansix wrote: NYT had a good article showing there is a large amount of undecided, more than in the last two elections. Which is why the polls are so volatile, since they are tracking “likely voters” rather than registered voters. As undecided voters enter that system, they tip the balance and they don’t enter at the same rate. We will have to see how tonight goes, but Trump has such low expectations that the press will likely praise him if he doesn’t talk about sex life during the debate. Intention to vote is lower than it's been in the last 4 elections, turnout for this election might even beat the negative modern record of 1996. I translate a lot of 'undecided' as 'I won't vote, but the person on the phone will judge me if I say that'. Whether or not you plan to vote / have voted in the past is up there with penis size in terms of subjects that people lie to pollsters about the most. So when a 7% lower percentage of the population says I'm definitely gonna vote, that's doubly worrying. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gkdDoJq.png) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ouMXmSJ.png) http://www.gallup.com/poll/195806/americans-less-sure-vote-president.aspx | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:45 ticklishmusic wrote: https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold/status/780508222184689664 hey look a giant tax dodge Why are we theorycrafting? He's being audited by the IRS, what more do you want? Surely they will look at this, and deal with it how it should be dealt with lol. No need to backseat attorney, when I imagine most of here don't have a comprehensive understanding of how exactly how the law applies here. @DanHH The Hillary effect. Kind of interesting, though... When to me this one seems fairly big in terms of policy, I would think people would have some more interest, even though they might not like their candidates. The general internet has never been as excited for a POTUS as Trump, but obviously that's an awful representation of the demographics. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: Why are we theorycrafting? He's being audited by the IRS, what more do you want? Surely they will look at this, and deal with it how it should be dealt with lol. No need to backseat attorney, when I imagine most of here don't have a comprehensive understanding of how exactly how the law applies here. The Trump foundation is not part of that audit and it is a clear sign that he is doing illegal things with that foundation to avoid taxes and spending other people’s money to enrich himself. Everything is on the table in a presidential election. This stuff too. If he wants to harp on the Clinton Foundation, he better be able show that the Trump foundation isn’t worst than what he claims about the Clinton foundation. And it right now, it is looking like the Trump foundation is filthy with almost on redeeming values. Just a slush fund for Trump to use other people’s money to deal with his problems in direct violation of the law. | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6635 Posts
This is gonna be great | ||
KwarK
United States42573 Posts
| ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On September 27 2016 05:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: Why are we theorycrafting? He's being audited by the IRS, what more do you want? Surely they will look at this, and deal with it how it should be dealt with lol. No need to backseat attorney, when I imagine most of here don't have a comprehensive understanding of how exactly how the law applies here. This election is full of backseat attorneying, prosecuting, judging, and execution-ing from literally everybody everywhere. I mean, when he has the best lawyers in the planet and has admitted to buying political favors I don't know why we would trust the IRS to deal with Trump properly. And honestly the Trump Foundation stuff-which, by the way, has been absolutely 100% flubbed by the Trump campaign by repeated vapid non-responses that are just absolutely shitshow-is actually one of the few things where people judging "hey, the Foundation paid Trump's legal fees and made donations to people appointed to prosecute Trump, that seems like a scam" are doing things accurately. Of course, it won't change his supporter's minds-they don't really mind he's a shitty human being with a history of being a scam artist as long as he's the messiah who believes everything they believe and is lying about everything he says that they don't believe. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 06:05 CorsairHero wrote: is he back on twitter now?? Nope and won't be while twitter is trying to sell itself. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
| ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On September 27 2016 06:20 biology]major wrote: Plansix bro, luckily most americans don't see clinton as "not perfect" but rather completely untrustworthy. Which means when she delivers her "better answer" a majority of americans will be skeptical. All donald trump has to do is keep composure, be presidential and he's gonna walk all over crooked I heard those are his biggest strengths. Well, this will be an easy evening then. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 27 2016 06:24 Doodsmack wrote: I believe Americans will be skeptical of what Trump says too. See: his long trail of verbal diarrhea thus far. All polling suggest that they are and have zero faith in the man. We will have to see if that translates into something during tonight’s debate. The one thing that I could see going really wrong for Trump is if he gets in a tiff with the moderator over some question that he doesn’t like. The birther issue will come up in the 90 minutes and so will the Trump foundation. If Trump acts to glib or refuses to answer what voters consider to be valid questions, it could set the tone for the rest of the debates. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12161 Posts
| ||
| ||
