• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gcubed

Member
Aaron Strife said:
Is that 42-39 number among independents, or overall? If it's the former that doesn't mean shit, the number of Independents has grown on the back of former Republicans who are predictably voting Republican. Romney won independents by a decent margin but Democrats dwarf Republicans to such a point that it doesn't really matter. Of course, that strength isn't as prominent in midterms.

Also frustrating when you see voters with moderate to liberal stances on immigration or the budget but they support the Republicans anyway. I know there are some voters who prefer split congresses because they think it'll force the parties to compromise yet all you need to do is look at the last four years to see how well that's worked out.
Click to expand...

it reads like its the independent number. Isn't that... bad new for republicans? I mean thats a worse showing then Romney.
 
R

R10Neymarfan

Member
Oblivion said:
So the governor of Georgia proposed a great idea to lower health care costs: allow hospitals to turn away people who show up to the emergency room.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/georgias-deal-tighten-er-access
Click to expand...

How about just send the people that aren't in grave danger to an urgent care clinic. Seriously those clinics should be encouraged to be used more. Most people that visit the ER don't really need to.
If a state doesn't have an urgent care clinics anywhere they better start encouraging some to pop up. It can seriously help solve one or some of our problems towards healthcare.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
A man in a suit and dark tie rose from near the back of the marbled courtroom, and began loudly talking.

Witnesses said he spoke about the need to keep campaign finance reform laws in place to regulate election spending and contributions.

"Money is not speech," he reportedly said. "Overturn 'Citizens United!'" referring to a 2010 high court decision loosening a century of federal restrictions on corporate spending by "independent" groups like businesses and unions.

He was only able say a few words before police escorted him from the courtroom, and did not resist.

Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg identified the man as Noah Newkirk of Los Angeles.

Newkirk has been charged with violating federal law that makes it a crime to "harangue" or utter "loud threatening or abusive language in the Supreme Court Building."

The justices ignored the incident.
Click to expand...
Hero.
 
G

Giant Panda

Member
RustyNails said:
Hero.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how one could argue that money isn't speech in this case, so I think that is logically false. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be limits on it however, as freedom of speech has already been held to not be unlimited, and that's more where the Citizens United decision went wrong.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
A new New York Times/CBS News poll finds Republicans "are in a stronger position than Democrats for this year's midterm elections, benefiting from the support of self-described independents, even though the party itself is deeply divided and most Americans agree more with Democratic policy positions."

The generic ballot shows Republicans with a 42% to 39% lead.

Key finding: "There is a sense of foreboding in the public as well, with 63 percent of Americans saying the country is on the wrong track, and 57 percent indicating that they disapprove of Mr. Obama's handling of the economy. In addition, eight in 10 Americans are dissatisfied or angry with the way things are going in Washington."
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/u...ction-edge-poll-finds.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

Gonna be an ugly year.
 
A

Audiospawn

Banned
APKmetsfan said:
This is what happens when you have a political party literally sabotaging everything.
Click to expand...

Fuck everything there is in the world.

God damnit.

teabag.jpg
 
P

Piecake

Member
I was actually pretty surprised by the Republican tax reform proposal, in that it was actually a specific, doable plan and it wasn't god awful. Sure, there are some things I didnt like in it, specifically the capital gains bit, but it is at least coming from a place where negotiation and compromise can take place.

Realistically, I would accept capital gains neutral and changing percentage into amount. Meaning that the first X amount of dollars is tax free. That should help out the middle class more.

there might be more things in there that I dislike, but I havent looked at it thoroughly. Still, I like the idea of simplifying the tax code and keeping it revenue neutral and not changing the amount owed by anyone. Obviously, I would prefer changes, but a simplification is something that we should (at least in theory) be able to get done.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
Giant Panda said:
I'm not sure how one could argue that money isn't speech in this case, so I think that is logically false. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be limits on it however, as freedom of speech has already been held to not be unlimited, and that's more where the Citizens United decision went wrong.
Click to expand...

Money is never speech. It's money.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Anyone find it strange that the state that proudly passed and defended SB 1070 walked back this anti-gay bill with such breakneck speed?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Oblivion said:
Anyone find it strange that the state that proudly passed and defended SB 1070 walked back this anti-gay bill with such breakneck speed?
Click to expand...
Blame the NFL

Piecake said:
I was actually pretty surprised by the Republican tax reform proposal, in that it was actually a specific, doable plan and it wasn't god awful. Sure, there are some things I didnt like in it, specifically the capital gains bit, but it is at least coming from a place where negotiation and compromise can take place.

Realistically, I would accept capital gains neutral and changing percentage into amount. Meaning that the first X amount of dollars is tax free. That should help out the middle class more.

there might be more things in there that I dislike, but I havent looked at it thoroughly. Still, I like the idea of simplifying the tax code and keeping it revenue neutral and not changing the amount owed by anyone. Obviously, I would prefer changes, but a simplification is something that we should (at least in theory) be able to get done.
Click to expand...
I haven't dug deep into it but I'm reluctant to concede to their tax rate numbers. It might not shift the burden now but I fear it will in the future its trying to move us away at least rhetorically from progressive taxation IMO. I'd rather have deductions than a lower nominal rate for the rich.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
thepotatoman said:
I guess you're right about the Capital gains. I didn't think I would have had to check the source on an LA times article. You're right that someone is going to pay more and someone is going to pay less, but if for instance the too big to fail tax is making big banks paying more to make individual investors are pay less, that's a fine trade as far as I'm concerned.

You start sounding exactly like the tea party when you say that you're against something simply because a republican proposed it. I would at least like to have a good reason to hate something before hating on it.

If the JTC says revenue is going to go up 3 billion over the next 10 years, and that the tax rate for every $10,000 bracket from 0 to 100,000 is going to go down what specifically is wrong with it?
Click to expand...

This is an unfair criticism of my post. I didn't dismiss the proposal out of hand, I argued that I'm am skeptical of any proposal from them as we all should be. I even conceded that I'm okay with simplifying the tax code solely for the sake of doing so if it doesn't change the tax incedence at all. Furthermore, I mentioned how the proposal is an outline and not an actual meat and potatoes proposal so it's hard to me to directly assess its actual effects. I added that it has no shot in this form (or near it) of being an actual GOP proposal, anyway, so it is a moot point.

As for the JTC findings, I don't really care. The JTC is simply congressional members discussing an outline; I'd wait for the CBO (of which they may not be able to without knowing the deductions) and other groups like the CBPP and the like to weigh in.

I'm all for real reform, I just don't believe the GOP will provide it. Even Boehner mentioned this is nothing but a start to a conversation, not the actual conversation. I do think it's nice that on its face the proposal doesn't seem to be the massive income redistribution to the wealthy it generally is, but I need more details and real analysis before giving it the time of day.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Metaphoreus said:
Erm...

979 pages of the statutory language

A 194-page section-by-section summary

676 pages comprising JCT Technical Explanations, and other materials.

So... pretty meaty.
Click to expand...

The articles I read earlier mentioned there weren't any real deductions being discussed and those articles have since been amended. Apparently, this is a meat & potatoes plan and I'm surprised.

I've spent some time reading up and down and there's some pretty decent things in the plan. In fact, it doesn't seem that much like a republican plan at all, which is sadly why it's probably a non-starter in the house.

It's progressiveness ends at the super wealthy, which is always unfortunate. It's a big boon to oil and farming industry. But it also increases the child tax credit and the standard deduction.

It seems that the short term capital gains would stay at 39%, in fact, so I'm okay with the change to the long term rate calculation. Honestly, it seems if you would just cap the 40% off of long term gains at $1 million and then everything is 39% thereafter (or even a 29% rate), it is potentially a really good plan.

I'm still skeptical of any GOP plan, but I admit my initial misgivings seem to have been wrong (thanks faulty reporting, looks like I was also a victim of that) and if this plan was a real starting point of negotiation, good tax reform might be possible. Unfortunately, this plan is far too progressive for the GOP to actually embrace.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Black Mamba said:
The articles I read earlier mentioned there weren't any real deductions being discussed and those articles have since been amended. Apparently, this is a meat & potatoes plan and I'm surprised.

I've spent some time reading up and down and there's some pretty decent things in the plan. In fact, it doesn't seem that much like a republican plan at all, which is sadly why it's probably a non-starter in the house.

It's progressiveness ends at the super wealthy, which is always unfortunate. It's a big boon to oil and farming industry. But it also increases the child tax credit and the standard deduction.

It seems that the short term capital gains would stay at 39%, in fact, so I'm okay with the change to the long term rate calculation. Honestly, it seems if you would just cap the 40% off of long term gains at $1 million and then everything is 39% thereafter (or even a 29% rate), it is potentially a really good plan.

I'm still skeptical of any GOP plan, but I admit my initial misgivings seem to have been wrong (thanks faulty reporting, looks like I was also a victim of that) and if this plan was a real starting point of negotiation, good tax reform might be possible. Unfortunately, this plan is far too progressive for the GOP to actually embrace.
Click to expand...

If you had told me Camp's plan was a compromise proposal from the White House I'd believe it. It's not nearly as bad as I expected, although obviously it rewards the super rich and picks favorites amongst manufacturers (ie oil companies). Seems too liberal for the House, at least to me. Increases the child tax credit, standard deduction...not bad. I want to see manufacturing get the 25% rate across the board, not just oil and farming companies.

The glaring thing is the elimination of the deduction for state and local taxes, which would hit big states like NY, Cali, and NJ. I wouldn't mind seeing some type of compromise that keeps the deduction but lowers it, effectively raising taxes for residents of those states.

BTW anyone else tiring of TPM's recent lurch to liberal click bait territory? When I saw the tax proposal I thought "welp, Cali and NY are fucked." TPM's headline? GOP's New Plan Hikes Taxes On Americans In Blue States. Two blue states.
 
Hari Seldon

Hari Seldon

Member
Black Mamba said:
The articles I read earlier mentioned there weren't any real deductions being discussed and those articles have since been amended. Apparently, this is a meat & potatoes plan and I'm surprised.

I've spent some time reading up and down and there's some pretty decent things in the plan. In fact, it doesn't seem that much like a republican plan at all, which is sadly why it's probably a non-starter in the house.

It's progressiveness ends at the super wealthy, which is always unfortunate. It's a big boon to oil and farming industry. But it also increases the child tax credit and the standard deduction.

It seems that the short term capital gains would stay at 39%, in fact, so I'm okay with the change to the long term rate calculation. Honestly, it seems if you would just cap the 40% off of long term gains at $1 million and then everything is 39% thereafter (or even a 29% rate), it is potentially a really good plan.

I'm still skeptical of any GOP plan, but I admit my initial misgivings seem to have been wrong (thanks faulty reporting, looks like I was also a victim of that) and if this plan was a real starting point of negotiation, good tax reform might be possible. Unfortunately, this plan is far too progressive for the GOP to actually embrace.
Click to expand...

I don't visit this thread but I read a CNN article about the tax plan and was hoping for some OT discussion on it. It seems like a very interesting plan.
 
X

xnipx

Member
R10Neymarfan said:
How about just send the people that aren't in grave danger to an urgent care clinic. Seriously those clinics should be encouraged to be used more. Most people that visit the ER don't really need to.
If a state doesn't have an urgent care clinics anywhere they better start encouraging some to pop up. It can seriously help solve one or some of our problems towards healthcare.
Click to expand...

I've always had to pay before I'm seen at urgent care whenever I went. Not sure how they would handle someone with no money.
 
A

Armoured Priest

Member
xnipx said:
I've always had to pay before I'm seen at urgent care whenever I went. Not sure how they would handle someone with no money.
Click to expand...

If you have insurance on file, UC will bill you later (at least that has been my experience)...I realize I haven't answered the question of no money. i honestly don't know how Urgent Care would handle that.
 
X

xnipx

Member
Armoured Priest said:
If you have insurance on file, UC will bill you later (at least that has been my experience)...I realize I haven't answered the question of no money. i honestly don't know how Urgent Care would handle that.
Click to expand...

They bill insurance later but I always have to pay my co pay before I can get seen. Just like at a drs office. I've never been seen at a dr or urgent care without paying up front. Only hospitals let me pay later.
 
A

Armoured Priest

Member
xnipx said:
They bill insurance later but I always have to pay my co pay before I can get seen. Just like at a drs office. I've never been seen at a dr or urgent care without paying up front. Only hospitals let me pay later.
Click to expand...

Must be different per state, or per hospital network, then. I've been able to have my co-pay billed later for UC visits at times I don't have the money (2 or 3 days before payday for example)
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Camp's tax plan is so serious as a starting point for a bipartisan tax reform bill it's not really clear why he released it. With number tweaking, it could easily be a Democratic tax plan. Closes carried interest loophole, rolls capital gains into standard income, cuts mortgage interest deduction, limits the charitable contribution deduction. There's useful stuff here. Corporate tax reform section is probably another story.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
GOP's New Plan Hikes Taxes On Americans In Blue States

A central feature of the House Republicans' ambitious new tax reform bill would raise taxes disproportionately on residents of blue states -- especially middle-to-upper income people who live in New York and California.

The sweeping proposal released Wednesday by Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), the House's top tax writer, eliminates the deduction for state and local taxes, which lets taxpayers who itemize deductions subtract general state and local taxes when calculating their federal taxable income. It's currently the seventh most expensive tax break in code, costing the federal government about $1.1 trillion in revenue over a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Camp's plan wipes out this break for individuals in tax years beginning after December 31, 2014. "The provision would eliminate a tax benefit that effectively subsidizes higher State and local taxes and increased spending at the State and local level," reads a summary of the House Ways & Means Committee chairman's proposal. It pairs the elimination of the tax break with an increase in the standard deduction, which somewhat cushions the financial blow.

The two states that benefit most from the tax break are high-income, high-tax California (whose residents use up 17.2 percent of the cost of the deduction) and New York (13.3 percent). The contrast with low-tax, red states is stark: New Jersey, despite having a third of the population of Texas, eats up more of the deduction than the Lone Star State.
Click to expand...

More at the link of course. I just want to punch the shit-eating grins off of Boner's and Turtleman's face in that picture, though.
 
G

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Wilsongt said:
GOP's New Plan Hikes Taxes On Americans In Blue States



More at the link of course. I just want to punch the shit-eating grins off of Boner's and Turtleman's face in that picture, though.
Click to expand...

The crazy thing is that saying people can't deduct local/state taxes from their federal taxes greatly reduces the power of state governments. It's a highly federalist policy which encourages centralization, something that conservatives are supposed to be against on purely ideological grounds.

So stupid.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
GaimeGuy said:
The crazy thing is that saying people can't deduct local/state taxes from their federal taxes greatly reduces the power of state governments. It's a highly federalist policy which encourages centralization, something that conservatives are supposed to be against on purely ideological grounds.

So stupid.
Click to expand...

I would support eliminating that deduction if paired with an increase in federal spending because I agree that the effect this will have is to reduce the budgets of blue states that currently do more for their citizens than other states. That said, it is in general a good thing to reduce what states are obligated to do and supplant that with federal activity, because states are revenue-constrained entities that place drags on their economies that the same actions by the federal government would not create (at least to the same extent).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom