OMB Director Mick Mulvaney Discusses Current Tax Proposal…

OMB Director Mick Mulvaney appeared on Tucker Carlson show tonight to discuss the proposed tax reform plan.  One of the biggest hits to Blue Cities in Blue States would be the elimination of state income tax deductions.  Mulvaney discusses this aspect along with the multitude of downstream consequences within the proposal.

.

The MAGAnomic agenda for 4%+ GDP growth consisted of three basic fundamental legislative needs from congress:

  • 1.) The approval of the Trump budget reducing year-over-year spending.
  • 2.) The repeal and replacement of ObamaCare.
  • 3.) Tax reform to include lowered rates on “middle class” and ¹corporations.

All three principles for strong national economic growth are opposed by multinational corporations and multinational banking interests along with the DC UniParty.  The legislative results so far are clear evidence of this opposition.  There are trillions of dollars at stake.

¹The multinational corporations (tax/policy lobbyists) don’t care about lowered rates because they have gone through corporate financial inversion and established their company headquarters overseas.  The lowered corporate rates only benefit domestic U.S. companies.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Election 2018, Legislation, media bias, President Trump, Taxes, Uncategorized, US Treasury. Bookmark the permalink.

105 Responses to OMB Director Mick Mulvaney Discusses Current Tax Proposal…

  1. Publius2016 says:

    0 for 2 so far Congress! Please get Ryan out by the New Year. Think Price should go too…Mulvaney, you’re on the clock, next!

    Like

    • big bad mike says:

      I believe you are right. Never liked Price. But he was supposed to be the expert in repealing O Care. The President has the right to make changes in his Administration, and he will in due time. Still, he has the power of the Presidency. Executive orders are the only way to get anything done quickly. We will all be dead before Congress gets anything done.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mulvaney would never answer the question from Tucker as to why capital gain income is taxed at a lower rate than earned income. If taxes are to be more fair and balanced towards the middle class, that should have been addressed.

      Liked by 1 person

      • EG Lowrey says:

        I heard Mulvaney recognize that the different treatment was the result of our tax code currently being used to drive behavior. Want more ‘investment’ behavior, tax gains at lower rate. Gee, who benefits from encouraging investment behavior? I understood him to say the reform proposed gets away from using the tax code as a means of social engineering. Sounds good to me.

        Like

      • Dividends are already taxed before you get them. Then, you pay taxes on the same dividends. That is the argument I have always heard.

        Like

        • What about stock sales, property sales, etc? They are not double taxed. If you want to promote work and less unemployment, tax earned income at a lower rate than investment income.

          Like

          • To Marka3– Those items that you mentioned actually ARE “double taxed”. When you invest in stocks, or real property, the money that you use to purchase those items, is money that you’ve already been taxed on, at least once. The money that you are using to buy your house, or stocks, most likely is money that you’ve earned from working, and you’ve already paid federal and state (and sometimes county and city) taxes on it.

            It’s your money to do with as you please– you can give it away, spend it on a vacation, or invest in real estate and the stock market. However, it’s punitive to be taxed a SECOND time, when you SELL that investment; the money that bought those things was already taxed prior to the purchase. Just because you decide you want to sell your house and move to another state, or, you want to liquidate your stock portfolio and pay medical bills is not a reason for the Federal government to tax you a second time. The people who gave away their money or went on vacations were NOT taxed a second time by the Federal government. (This is a very simplified version; there are lots of exceptions, and that’s why few people in the US can do their own taxes without having a bevy of accountants and tax attorneys.)

            I understand your point, though. To entice Americans to go back to work, it has to be more lucrative for them, than what the government provides to them if they DON’T work!! Lowering the income tax brackets will do that. Wanna make a Lib’s head explode? Suggest to them that there should be a wealth/asset tax– The hypocrisy is mind-blowing!! (But fun 😉 )

            Like

    • Exactly. Where was Dr. Price during the Obamacare repeal fight…..hiding under his desk? He was supposed to be the go to man on this issue. He reminds me of Jeff Sessions, and that’s not good.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Stringy theory says:

    I am impresses with Mullaney. I trust President Trump will hold out for real tax reform that benefits middle America that bears the tax burden. Screw the globalists and their uniparty enablers.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. MAGA trump says:

    I will continue to pray for President Trump’s success but I am also clear eyed. I know that we may get none of it through with this Uniparty congress. We will have to primary all of them. It will take patience, hard work and perseverance. We will succeed fellow treepers with the help of God and MAGA.

    Liked by 10 people

    • carrierh says:

      MAGA, and never let any many term member buy their re-election again like McCain and so many of those way too many terms and get richer on bribes. Time to say no and cut them off to the real world. I think we must also force out all benefits/perks we did not vote for nor authorize for the ripoff 2 parties in 1. We must take back the reins and run better candidates that will not betray their oaths, promises, us and America. We can understand that from time they cannot vote for some president’s plan, but all we get now is complete blockage of all Trump and we want and we can’t allow these employees to run our government. Sorry, Congress but you are being moved out and back into the real world sooner than later.

      Liked by 2 people

    • oldtoenail says:

      I agree with MAGA trump. It takes time and clear eyed people to get this correction accomplished. I have never believed repeal of O care, tax relief, or the border wall would pass congress until after the mid-term elections. The corrupt congress has accepted the globalist money and fear for their lives if they renege on the promises they made. The hard work has just began. We must succeed there may not be a second chance. The people must continue to wake up to the truth.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. snarkybeach says:

    and the ever helpful Tillis & Lankford are sponsoring a DACA amnesty bill instead “because it’s not fair to kick out the Dreamers…” Why should they do something that helps Americans when it’s easier to collect the CoC check (er, campaign donation)?

    Liked by 9 people

    • Risa says:

      Langford is one of my Senators and to say he is a profound disappointment is an understatement.

      Liked by 3 people

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        Ditto that, Risa. In fact, I told him that directly to his face the last time I saw him.
        (full disclosure, I ran the volunteer brigade for T.W. Even Lankford, agrees that the Primary was the real election.)

        Lankford, I also suspect, probably never gets the emails brought to his attention, so therefore, when I email him, I state outright that I am looking for his replacement for the next election. In fact, last time he and I were face to face, I asked if he managed his twitter acct. When he said a “A staffer does” I said to him, “Well, so all that extra staff you were excited to get becoming a Senator….only puts more layers between you and your voters.”
        (That did, catch him for just a second)

        Liked by 1 person

        • I, too, preferred T. W. Shannon; he left me with a much more favorable impression. I’m already disappointed with Lankford; he’s not even been there two years and he oozes “swamp-ness”. He’s blended right in. Vote him OUT in 2020!!

          Like

    • G. Combs says:

      At the bottom is the mailing address (Don’t have to be in NC) and his office locations around the USA for those of us in NC to show up in person to yell at them.
      https://www.tillis.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email-me

      Liked by 1 person

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        Good. I’ll do that. (Never trusted Tillis, something in his eyes!)

        Lankford, unfortunately, is one of mine. Already working on getting face time with him. If I continue to have difficulty, I do know where he lives. (It’s personal for Jimmy and me!)

        Like

  5. Sanj says:

    Mick Mulvaney is so knowledgeable that he can make arcane policy entertaining to watch and listen. He is a master and am glad he is on Team MAGA.

    Liked by 11 people

  6. Yankee Lawyer says:

    I don’t want revenue neutral tax reform, I want reduction on revenue coupled with lower spending from immediate and continuous headcount reductions. Drawing the swamp is amount much more than changes a few faces in leadership (although that would be a nice start).

    Liked by 6 people

    • trapper says:

      Yes. Thank you. Besides, it is only ever “revenue neutral” for the middle class. Amnestied illegal alien Dreamers working at a burger joint will get a tax cut. A guy with a business grossing a couple million a year in sales will get a tax cut. Apple and Google will get a tax cut. The guy working at the Ford plant, the carpenter, the plumber, the cop, and the teacher are all going to get hosed, BIG time.

      Liked by 1 person

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      It’s called………..”STOP SPENDING” on crap you’re Constitutionally not allowed to do!!

      Like

  7. MAGADJT says:

    I’m pretty much over all this. I’ve just grown tired of living and breathing politics. It seems no matter how many emails or phone calls we send to Congress, it’s like talking to a brick wall. They are going to do whatever they want to do with no repercussion or consequence. We couldn’t get #1 or #2 done. Highly doubt tax reform, if passed, looks anything resembling what was put out today.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Maquis says:

    Damn this Senate.

    Liked by 5 people

    • JustSomeInputFromAz says:

      Bought and paid for….Repeal the 17th

      Liked by 10 people

      • G. Combs says:

        Someone else who actually understands!!! 😍

        Liked by 1 person

      • MeJane says:

        I agree 100000% , I have been saying that the 17th Amendment needs to go for years, it created the swamp and is against the original design of our government. We need to return the State’s representation in the Federal government, the central government that the States themselves originally created. Prior to the 17th Amendment Senators did not have to raise millions of dollars to run for office and were not beholden to campaign donors/multinational corporations/banks/pay for play.

        The 17th amendment was never ratified by the State Legislatures of 3/4ths of the States (36 States at the time) as the Constitution requires. One of the States counted was Ohio, and on May 13, 1913 Ohio was not a State but a territory, that means that the 17th amendment is invalid as an amendment on that date. Ohio was made a State by Congress on August 7, 1953 by Public Law # 204 “retroactively to 1862” (un-Constitutional ex post facto) because of a discovery that no application for Statehood had been made. Also several of the States submitted their ratifications for the 17th with reservations and provisos which would alone invalidate it’s ratification since a proposed constitutional amendment must be accepted or rejected as written with no alterations to the language.

        Only State Legislatures have the power to rescind amendments, Federal courts have no jurisdiction. States have the Constitutional power to rescind amendments (with the exception of the first 10 Bill of Rights) as no mention of rescinding amendments is in the Constitution, so Article 10 reserves that right to the States or the people.

        For more information the excellent reference I have used in my comment is:
        17th Amendment, Rescind!!! By Daniel H. Marchi
        It can be found on Google books

        Liked by 2 people

        • JustSomeInputFromAz says:

          “MeJane” we can agree in principal, but Ohio was admitted to the Union in 1803.

          Perhaps you refer to New Mexico or Arizona but both were admitted to the Union in January & February of 1912.

          BR

          Like

  9. Niagara Frontier says:

    If the debate centers around ideology and high level economic theories, tax reform will be doomed. That’s what happened with repeal and replace. Make things too complicated (like the replacement schemes) and the average person just throws his hands up and surrenders.

    Explain tax reform proposals so that there is no confusion and no misunderstanding. Give people a simple tool they can use to compare what they pay now to what they will pay under reform. If they like what they see, then they will put pressure on their members of Congress.

    Liked by 8 people

    • fleporeblog says:

      Love the idea! Write the WH.

      Liked by 2 people

    • carrierh says:

      We are always putting pressure on our supposed representatives in Congress and get completely ignored and insulted. No, we need to remind them we own them and we can get rid of them in spite of their saying/thinking we can’t. Balderdash!

      Like

    • chicagodeplorable says:

      I posted on another thread earlier; I looked at last year’s taxes and plugged in the numbers to what was posted by Paul Ryan on his one page tax form. I would go from a $1600 refund of taxes paid to a new tax bill of $3,000 minus what we had the bank deduct from our withdrawals. Though the standard deduction is higher, we lose the exemptions per person. Half of retirement income will be taxed at 12%. Before, $32,500 of SS was not taxed. For seniors like us, this stinks!

      Liked by 1 person

      • LBB says:

        It’s possible the hard blue states (CA, IL, NY) will not do as well , but hopefully 40+ other states will. One thing I always remember , my husband & I also received much higher wages having careers in Illinois. Save for future and retire somewhere more favorable for seniors.

        Like

        • chicagodeplorable says:

          That’s the problem, LBB. We ARE retired; yes, we saved, that’s why we have IRA. AND we have a mortgage. Since we can’t uproot my 98 year old mom and move somewhere else yet, we will just have to suffer it out. I was just trying to point out that seniors are going to get hit with this new tax reform, more so than you think.

          Like

    • G. Combs says:

      Do not forget JOBS!!!

      Why President Trump wants to lower small business** tax rates compared to big Corporations and personal tax rates?

      First Small corporation pays double for #SS, and Medicare compared to a wage earner. The combined rate for Social Security and Medicare = 15.30% Wage earners pay 1/2 that or 7.65% so President Trump does not want to penalize someone too heavily for starting a business.

      Second regulations are DESIGNED (and written) by corporate lobbyists to give the Big international corporations the ability to kill off small business link

      Third the cost of regulations is a lot greater for small businesses, may of whom can not afford full time lawyers. (We just turned down a job because the contract included abiding by a bunch of laws we could not even find and the job did not pay enough to hire a lawyer to go looking.)

      How ever the biggest reason is MORE JOBS!!! link

      “[…]The latest figures show that small businesses create 75 percent of the net new jobs in our economy. [Updated September 04, 2015]

      Small businesses employ about 50 percent of all private sector workers.

      Small businesses with employees start-up at a rate of over 500,000 per year.

      Small businesses create more than 50 percent of the non-farm private gross domestic product (GDP).

      Home-based businesses account for 53 percent of all small businesses.

      The 22.9 million small businesses in the United States are located in virtually every neighborhood.

      Small patenting firms produce 13 to 14 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms.[…]

      **Small business = sole proprietor, partnership, LLC, S corporations

      Liked by 2 people

  10. Just realized that we’re doing this wrong. Instead of having a list of countries that *can’t* come here (or are restricted), let’s turn it around and talk about the (short) list of countries that have *unrestricted access* to this country. (No, Mexico isn’t on the second list)

    Liked by 2 people

  11. fleporeblog says:

    Folks what our Lion 🦁 is going to do via EO next week is beyond brilliant! That EO is going to FINALLY liberate the Forgotten Men and Women from the nightmare known as Obamacare. 31 states took the Medicaid Expansion. That allowed able bodied Americans that earned slightly above the poverty line (138%) to benefit in massive subsidies paid by the Federal Government to have Healthcare. They are the only beneficiaries of the great scheme known as Obamacare. The 19 states that refused and everyone that earns above the BS cutoff got screwed royally. They became the Cash Cow 🐮 needed to payoff the Ponzi scheme. No one gives a 💩 about them.

    However, our gift from our Heavenly Father is about to set them free! I hate Rand Paul but he gave a great explanation of what is about to occur.

    The Law Rand referenced from 1970 was setup for large corporations and businesses that had employees and localities in multiple states. Think of UPS as an example. UPS benefits from the law because they can negotiate with insurance companies throughout the US on behalf of their employees to get the best price possible to offer their employees healthcare as part of their compensation package. Insurance companies don’t mind lowering their premiums because of the sheer number of employees. They also don’t care about preexisting conditions of certain employees because the pool of healthy employees warps those that are not healthy and would need more care. This is a win win for UPS and the Healthcare companies that do business with them.

    That law covers about 34% of Americans. What our President is going to do through that EO is to allow groups of Americans to come together and have the same rights as UPS. A perfect example is the Farmers of America. That is nearly 1 million Americans and their families. Right now they are each an individual person in the eyes of Obamacare. After next week, they are freed from Obamacare and will be seen as one entity. They will setup a representative that will negotiate with insurance companies on their behalf. You will see other Forgotten Men and Women provided the same opportunity throughout our country.

    Here is the beauty in this EO. 95% of Americans will be liberated from Obamacare. Those that will group like I described above will have premiums that will be lower than when there wasn’t Obamacare. ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!!

    All that will be left is the 5% that benefit from Obamacare! Our President will flip the script on public opinion in massive numbers for his EO. Democrats and Republicans will be left with the Carcass that is Obamacare. No one in their right mind will fight it in Congress. However, it will be challenged because the Ponzi scheme will be destroyed. Our President is expecting that! He will have 75% of Americans screaming at the courts on his behalf. Democrats and Republicans will be so overwhelmed that they will agree to keeping Obamacare for the 5% and allowing our President’s EO to become actual law so that they both can take credit. It would not shock me that our President allows all 50 states to benefit from the Expansion in return for a cap in Medicaid funding to save it from going bankrupt!

    He 100% kept his promise that EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN HAS AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE!

    Liked by 13 people

    • Brilliant Analysis. That Josh Earnest is a smug punk. LOL,

      Liked by 3 people

    • Heh Heh Heh.
      Checkmate.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Vince says:

      This + interstate competition + public advertised pricing for services would cut health care costs dramatically.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Rodney Plonker says:

      I lived in Germany for 3 years around 18 years ago. I had health insurance with a ‘super-body’ of similar common interest. It was something like the ‘Federation of Engineers’ that was a co-operative of fellow engineers in Germany that run as a not for profit and by that, they were not a shell for rewarding the adminstrators. They actually run it for their members. My monthly insurance policy was matched by my employer and from what I remember, our financial liabilities wrt further medical expenses stopped there. For those who could not get such groupings, there was the fallback option of the government run insurance which in Germany, was still very well run.

      Like

    • chicagodeplorable says:

      Fleporeblog: I saw your blog and had a 4 paragraph response; I hit send and it disappeared!
      ERISA is the law, enacted in 1974. It is not insurance, but establishes rules to protect the consumers, which is good. Rand’s idea of Association Groups is also good and should be explored; my company had mom and pop operations like bakeries and currency exchanges insured.
      I know they were hard to administer regarding eligibility and premium payments, but that was then and this is now. The potential for fraud is extremely high which is probably why my company wiped out that product line. It’s very hard to determine if an employee is really an employee, and if so, does he/she actually work X amount of hours per week?
      Erisa does not apply to governmental plans so I will be curious to see how they can tweek that to small group(s). Curious and curiouser!

      Like

      • John says:

        I think you are mistaken that ERISA actually protects consumers. That was how it was sold, but in practice in protects insurance companies.

        If one is ever in the unfortunate situation of being denied service(s) by an insurance company and try to appeal their decision or file suit against them, it will quickly become apparent that ERISA puts the insurance company in the unique position of having no risk by denying one’s claim. So they tend to deny any claim for any basis however tenuous. The worst that can happen is you fight for years against them and in the end they may have to pay what they owed in the first place.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Sean Felker says:

      Great Post Flepore

      Words matter. It is, was and always needs to be discussed in the frame of Insurance Economics. This is not about your Health. This about the mechanism through which you access emergency services, symptom suppression and disease management.

      This is the most important concept above for everyone to understand…

      “that EO is to allow groups of Americans to come together and have the same rights as UPS. A perfect example is the Farmers of America. That is nearly 1 million Americans and their families. Right now they are each an individual person in the eyes of Obamacare.”

      Liked by 1 person

    • glk26 says:

      That would be wonderful. Thanks for your hard work fleporeblog. I hate Rand Paul too.

      Liked by 1 person

    • magagirl says:

      This would be amazing. I really hurt for those people, specially for families with children that need special healthcare for permanent conditions.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cdquarles says:

      This is how it worked before FDR then the Great Society, which nationalized medical insurance. Back in the old days people saved (self insured) and/or joined local associations (BPoE, Masons, KoC, Farmer’s Federation, and more). People went to the doctor or the doctor came to them only when they felt it was needed. Unfortunately, sometimes that was too late. Anyway, the doctor got paid directly and the local medical association kept the doctor in line price wise. I wasn’t around then, but I think my grandparents said that you could find out from the doctors or the association, what these charges would be. In emergencies, the doctors worked on credit. Insurance, such as it was, was for catastrophic situations.

      NB, they still do. Medical insurance today is fully controlled by governments, mostly by the Feds. NB that Medicare and Medicaid do not, directly, control things. They control the whole thing indirectly. For Medicare and Medicaid and Tricare, only Tricare is direct government, I think, and my experience was that they never paid a claim. NB that since 1997 it has been illegal for doctors and hospitals to charge any insurance company a higher rate than any other nor can they charge cash payers more, either. Since businesses run on cash flow, just what do you think will happen to the nominal retail price, since you know that Medicaid will pay you via EDS or some other processor 33 to 50 cents on the nominal dollar at best and maybe it’ll pay you 30 or 60 or 90 days later. For Medicare, depending on the contracted processor, you’ll get at best 80 cents on the dollar they allow. When you get paid depends on the processor. Good processors pay you in two weeks. That leaves the HMOs, the Blues, Aetna and others. NB that these are the contractors that process and pay claims for Medicare. I’ve never seen the details of Medicare’s contracts with the processors, but I doubt that the processors get much wiggle room. Take it or leave it, I guess. Somebody eats the losses, some where and some when, if there are any. Those that can’t make it die and get bought out if lucky and if not, oh well; the customers now have to travel to some other place to get service.

      Thus the incentive is to push the nominal price up enough to live on the scraps the system pays. That’s why prices are ‘high’ and can’t come down. There’s no incentive for it. Governments don’t want it. They want power. They have it. They want more. Why do you think the Ds pushed NoCare? They want Communism, that is, overt government control of the people. NoCare will destroy and has destroyed the concept of medical insurance. That’s why the Socialist/Communist Bernie presented his single-payer thing. That’s been the goal all along and when government controls the food, the water, your medical care and more; well, you are now a serf/slave. Don’t blame corporations, they’re just people. Blame people who lust for power.

      I like what President Trump is doing. It exposes everything and is the only way forward, I think.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. wheatietoo says:

    I’m all for it.

    The Dems are always saying…”People should pay their fair share.”
    But the Blue States where people are deducting huge amounts from their Fed Income Taxes are not paying their ‘fair share’.

    Mulvaney is right.
    The rest of us are subsidizing the Blue States.

    The Dem-controlled Blue States feel free to hike their state income taxes & property taxes…because they know that their residents can just deduct those taxes off their Fed Income Taxes.

    How is this fair to the people in Red States?
    Answer: It’s not.

    In my state, the taxes are so low that we are better off taking the Standard Deduction.
    So we don’t itemize.
    The combined amount for our Mortgage Interest & State Taxes is a lower figure.

    The Blue State Dems are going to be squealing like stuck pigs over this.
    Let them.
    Like they always say…”People should pay their fair share.”

    I wish they were lowering the Corp Tax Rate down to 15%, though.
    The lower it is, the more it would create new jobs.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. xyzlatin says:

    Tucker brings up the issue of tax on interest earned on saved money. People love to hit these people, and want to tax that capital, but conveniently forget that that money saved had tax paid on it when it was earned. Even inherited money paid tax when it originated. The idea of the State having the “right” to take away your earned and saved money when you die is another area that needs to be aired.

    Liked by 6 people

    • trapper says:

      Hey, so how about eliminating tax on our Social Security checks. We paid tax on it when we paid it in, so why should we pay tax on it again when we get it back?

      Liked by 6 people

    • magagirl says:

      My in-laws have been giving us money every year for Christmas in a big check so we don’t pay taxes for an inheritance when they die. They have 8 children, they work hard all their lives, they were dirt poor when they got married. It’s just not fair to pay so much for the death tax after they already paid taxes, work hard and were smart with money.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I was surprised at Tucker, perhaps he took the position to allow Mick Mulvaney to repudiate it but Mulvaney missed the chance to say just what you did. That money was already taxed once whether it was part of an inheritance or whether it was money the person put into stocks in their higher earning years to live from when they retired.

      Like

      • G. Combs says:

        The law:
        link
        “[…] No one pays federal income tax on more than 85 percent of his or her Social Security benefits based on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules. If you:
        ….

        file a federal tax return as an “individual” and your combined income* is
        between $25,000 and $34,000, you may have to pay income tax on up to 50 percent of your benefits.

        more than $34,000, up to 85 percent of your benefits may be taxable.
        …..

        file a joint return, and you and your spouse have a combined income* that is
        between $32,000 and $44,000, you may have to pay income tax on up to 50 percent of your benefits

        more than $44,000, up to 85 percent of your benefits may be taxable.
        ……

        are married and file a separate tax return, you probably will pay taxes on your benefits.[…]”
        The maximum monthly Social Security benefit payment for a person retiring in 2016 at full retirement age is $2,639 or $31,668 a year so you would have to pay income tax on up to 50 percent of your benefits at the minimum.

        It is designed to confiscate wealth from those with pensions, stock dividends or jobs after retirement or who had good jobs for their entire life. In other words the middle and upper class wage earners.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. ck says:

    Ha, he knew he was going to do this all along, but he let the GOPe humiliate themselves in full view of the voters, twice. Next, their masters will have them vote against funding the wall, for all the world to see. The primaries will be grand.

    Liked by 7 people

  15. From President Trump’s lips came the words that should make Congress COWER:

    The Trump Tax Cuts will produce the MIDDLE CLASS MIRACLE.

    Go ahead, Congress, and try killing the MIDDLE CLASS MIRACLE…

    Are you feelin lucky, PUNKS?

    Liked by 8 people

  16. psadie says:

    What are the tax brackets?

    Like

  17. treehouseron says:

    Mick Mulvaney was the rep for the district I work in. Good ol’ Carolinas country boy, he really knows his stuff and it’s just my opinion, and I may be biased, but he completely 100% supports the President and is trying to do the best job he can (and the best job he can do is very formidable).

    I don’t see Mulvaney going anywhere, President Trump is a good judge of character and knows Mulvaney is a rock star and a servant.

    Liked by 8 people

    • JC says:

      Agree completely, THR. Stellar performance every time he speaks. We’re blessed to have him.

      Like

    • G. Combs says:

      ❤️‍ Mick Mulvaney ❤️‍

      Boy is he good! Not only does he know his stuff, he can COMMUNICATE!

      After dealing with scientists and engineers all my life, from Dad to Hubby and at all my jobs, I know how very rare someone with a science type brain who can communicate is.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Kaco says:

    I still would like to know in their tax plan if seniors can still deduct their out of pocket medical and long term care costs. I only saw couple of deductions on the original proposal.

    Liked by 1 person

    • chicagodeplorable says:

      We also appear to be losing the $32,500 offset from SS benefits. Under the new plan half of “investment income” will be taxed at 12%

      Like

  19. Jim in TN says:

    Reducing the tax on the poor does nothing to help the economy. Reducing taxes on the rich does help the economy, but the reduction needs to be permanent. The incompetent Bush tax cuts proved both. The rich hire and the middle class spends. Both need healthy tax reductions.

    I give this plan a mixed review.

    Leaving the top rate up high (35%) is stupid and will not help anything.

    Cutting business taxes will help. But most small businesses are on personal tax returns, and the talk of a special small business tax is already being encumbered with restrictions.

    Reducing corporate taxes is good.

    Getting rid of the incentives that drive corporations overseas, and finding a way to get their money back in the US is desperately needed.

    Like

  20. Bob Thoms says:

    Has anyone see a side-by-side comparison of the Trump Tax proposals vs the Congressional Tax plan?

    Like

  21. Love Mulvaney; gives very clear explanations of how things work. I feel like the WH still doesn’t have its communications down. What Mulvaney said about how people in poor states are subsidizing rich people in CA and NY needs to be repeated often especially when the Dems pull out their mantra about how Republican plan benefits rich people. Why Republicans never push back is beyond me.

    Like

    • G. Combs says:

      “….WH still doesn’t have its communications down…..”

      I sometimes wonder if President Trump is doing that on purpose.

      “Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
      — Sun Tzu

      “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
      — Sun Tzu

      But mostly:

      “Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment – that which they cannot anticipate.”
      — Sun Tzu

      Liked by 1 person

    • cdquarles says:

      Remember, the Ds are uniparty (progressive = communist). Some of the Rs are uniparty, and some are not. It has been this way since the days of Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt. That’s why the Rs don’t push back. They mostly don’t want to.

      Like

  22. Steven Tyler says:

    ¹The multinational corporations (tax/policy lobbyists) don’t care about lowered rates because they have gone through corporate financial inversion ….

    I would add the last Mick Mulvaney factoid at the very end of the clip.
    A 35% Corporate Tax rate is a heavy burden. Your friendly lobbyist shows up and shows how you can shave many dollars off of your tax expense in exchange for a very small processing fee and a donation to targeted Politicians.

    The deal is a no brainer for the Corporation, and enriches established Politico’s.

    Lower the rate to 20%!!!
    Reduce the need for Lobbyists, and reduce/cut off the cash flow to Politicians!!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s