So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?

Find out here:

<https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>

John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:

>So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>
>Find out here:
>
><https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>

Right-wing PAC propaganda, the Trump tax cuts were a disaster, a rerun
of going further into deficit spending, utterly a dumb move, McD's had
a commercial in early 2017 where two young dudes get 10 McDoubles and
10 McChickens, yeah great, meanwhile their kids' kids will be paying
back the debt that was incurred by the tax cut that enabled this,
we're done with your Republican economics of stupidity, talking out of
both sides of your mouth, "fiscal responsibility' when you're the side
that always does this shit. Fuck off.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>
> Find out here:
>
><https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>
>
I lose $9674 under Harris.
Yikes!

--
pothead
Kamala Harris = Four More Years Of Obama.
Send Her To The Curb.
Vote snit "Kook Of the Decade".

pothead wrote:
> On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>
>> Find out here:
>>
>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>
>>
> I lose $9674 under Harris.
> Yikes!
>
>
you've never even seen that much

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
> On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>
>> Find out here:
>>
>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>
>>
> I lose $9674 under Harris.
> Yikes!

It’s actually the sunsetting of the 2017 TCJA: one can’t whine about the
deficit at the same time as cheering about the tax cut which added to it.

In any event, the numbers are waaaaaaaay off. I found it’s claimed “if
TCJA continues” tax level to be low by roughly 50% vs what I’ve actually
been paying.

-hh

-hh wrote:
> In any event, the numbers are waaaaaaaay off.

You're a demotarded LIAR Huntzy, FOAD.

Chips Loral <loralandclinton@invalid.co> wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> In any event, the numbers are waaaaaaaay off.
>
> You're a demotarded LIAR Huntzy, FOAD.
>

Nah, it is well known that the Republicans’ 2017 TCJA deliberately screwed
over Blue State taxpayers by putting a $10K cap on the SALT deduction.

Below cite documents it’s *per year* financial impact as being over $90B.

<https://www.taxnotes.com/special-reports/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/repealing-salt-cap-state-state-impacts/2021/10/21/7bbv3>

Now I know math having symmetry is conceptually hard for you, but if
repealing the SALT cap would decrease Fed revenues by $90B/yr, this means
that it currently has increased current tax payments by $90B/yr:

[quote]
Over 50 percent of this reduction would accrue to taxpayers in just four
states: California (25.1 percent), New York (16.8 percent), New Jersey (6.4
percent), and Illinois (4.2 percent).
[/quote]

Now if you’re not in one of these States that’s paying higher taxes today,
then you had better thank those who are paying higher taxes for your
current financial windfall of the TCJA, by recognizing that you’re a leech
who’s not pulling your own fair share weight as a taxpayer.

-hh

On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 14:02:33 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>
>> Find out here:
>>
>><https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>
>>
>I lose $9674 under Harris.
>Yikes!

A few tens of millions of those will surely make a dent in the deficit.

#nevertrump

On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 20:09:37 +0100, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>>
>>> Find out here:
>>>
>>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>>
>>>
>> I lose $9674 under Harris.
>> Yikes!
>
>It’s actually the sunsetting of the 2017 TCJA: one can’t whine about the
>deficit at the same time as cheering about the tax cut which added to it.
>
>In any event, the numbers are waaaaaaaay off. I found it’s claimed “if
>TCJA continues” tax level to be low by roughly 50% vs what I’ve actually
>been paying.

TJIA sunset the middle class tax cuts but made the corporate and high income tax cuts
permanent.

Pothead, be sure to thank your Führer!

#nevertrump

On 8/12/24 6:17 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 14:02:33 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-11, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>>
>>> Find out here:
>>>
>>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>>
>>>
>> I lose $9674 under Harris.
>> Yikes!
>
> A few tens of millions of those will surely make a dent in the deficit.
>
> #nevertrump

For some entertainment, try to replicate pothead's "$9674" claim.

-hh

On 8/10/2024 8:56 PM, Joel wrote:
> John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>
>> Find out here:
>>
>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>
>
> Right-wing PAC propaganda, the Trump tax cuts were a disaster, a rerun
> of going further into deficit spending, utterly a dumb move, McD's had
> a commercial in early 2017 where two young dudes get 10 McDoubles and
> 10 McChickens, yeah great, meanwhile their kids' kids will be paying
> back the debt that was incurred by the tax cut that enabled this,
> we're done with your Republican economics of stupidity, talking out of
> both sides of your mouth, "fiscal responsibility' when you're the side
> that always does this shit. Fuck off.
>

Right, tax cuts are responsible for your expensive big mac. You people
are retards.

Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:

>> the Trump tax cuts were a disaster, a rerun
>> of going further into deficit spending, utterly a dumb move, McD's had
>> a commercial in early 2017 where two young dudes get 10 McDoubles and
>> 10 McChickens, yeah great, meanwhile their kids' kids will be paying
>> back the debt that was incurred by the tax cut that enabled this,
>> we're done with your Republican economics of stupidity, talking out of
>> both sides of your mouth, "fiscal responsibility' when you're the side
>> that always does this shit. Fuck off.
>
>Right, tax cuts are responsible for your expensive big mac. You people
>are retards.

The Big Mac was not expensive, but nor was it the whole of life to eat
something, we are wanting policies that don't merely enable short term
gain but borrow from the future.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 8/13/2024 3:17 PM, Joel wrote:
> Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>
>>> the Trump tax cuts were a disaster, a rerun
>>> of going further into deficit spending, utterly a dumb move, McD's had
>>> a commercial in early 2017 where two young dudes get 10 McDoubles and
>>> 10 McChickens, yeah great, meanwhile their kids' kids will be paying
>>> back the debt that was incurred by the tax cut that enabled this,
>>> we're done with your Republican economics of stupidity, talking out of
>>> both sides of your mouth, "fiscal responsibility' when you're the side
>>> that always does this shit. Fuck off.
>>
>> Right, tax cuts are responsible for your expensive big mac. You people
>> are retards.
>
>
> The Big Mac was not expensive, but nor was it the whole of life to eat
> something, we are wanting policies that don't merely enable short term
> gain but borrow from the future.

Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
for the bulk of the overall debt.

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:09:57 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:

>On 8/10/2024 8:56 PM, Joel wrote:
>> John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So how badly will a Kamala Harris presidency fuck with your wallet?
>>>
>>> Find out here:
>>>
>>> <https://www.kamalataxcalculator.com/>
>>
>>
>> Right-wing PAC propaganda, the Trump tax cuts were a disaster, a rerun
>> of going further into deficit spending, utterly a dumb move, McD's had
>> a commercial in early 2017 where two young dudes get 10 McDoubles and
>> 10 McChickens, yeah great, meanwhile their kids' kids will be paying
>> back the debt that was incurred by the tax cut that enabled this,
>> we're done with your Republican economics of stupidity, talking out of
>> both sides of your mouth, "fiscal responsibility' when you're the side
>> that always does this shit. Fuck off.
>>
>
>Right, tax cuts are responsible for your expensive big mac. You people
>are retards.

I understand your bitterness. Walz and Harris are squeaky clean. Their poll numbers are
going up and they're attracting big crowds.

Meanwhile, on your side of the aisle, you're falling in the polls, both of your candidates
are deeply flawed, one, a convicted felon with 70+ indictments and more lawsuits than most
people have socks, the other, a two faced turncoat. And your own party is campaigning
against you!

#nevertrump

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:

>Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>for the bulk of the overall debt.

If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts, why do you keep supporting the
very party that is making those tax cuts?

#nevertrump

On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>
>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>
> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,

I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
shit way beyond tax cuts).

Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.

> why do you keep supporting the
> very party that is making those tax cuts?

Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
money more than the govt needs my money.

> #nevertrump

Governor Swill wrote:

>Walz and Harris are squeaky clean.

Squeaky clean radical leftists.

>Their poll numbers are
>going up and they're attracting big crowds.

But Harris refuses to do interviews. Because she's an idiot, and it
shows.

Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>>
>> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,
>
>I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
>shit way beyond tax cuts).
>
>Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
>your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.
>
>> why do you keep supporting the
>> very party that is making those tax cuts?
>
>Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
>money more than the govt needs my money.

The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
just a lone voice.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 8/15/2024 2:56 PM, Joel wrote:
> Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>> On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>>>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>>>
>>> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,
>>
>> I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
>> shit way beyond tax cuts).
>>
>> Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
>> your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.
>>
>>> why do you keep supporting the
>>> very party that is making those tax cuts?
>>
>> Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
>> money more than the govt needs my money.
>
>
> The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.

Let's look at 2023, for example. The govt took in $4.5 trillion in
revenue, yet spent $6.2 trillion. That nets a $1.7 trillion deficit for
that year alone (dear Lord!).

Trump's tax cuts were projected to cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years
($160 billion per year).

$1.7 trillion - $160 billion = $1.54 trillion deficit.

How do you reach the conclusion you do?

> Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
> raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
> believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
> just a lone voice.
>

On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 14:56:30 -0400, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>>>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>>>
>>> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,
>>
>>I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
>>shit way beyond tax cuts).
>>
>>Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
>>your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.
>>
>>> why do you keep supporting the
>>> very party that is making those tax cuts?
>>
>>Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
>>money more than the govt needs my money.
>
>
>The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
>raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
>believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
>just a lone voice.

You're half right. The other half was jacking up spending.

Supply side economics has two sides: Cut taxes and cut spending. Republicans only cut
taxes. They NEVER cut spending. That's why supply side never works.

#nevertrump

Blast from the past: Tucker's firing announced (video 2 min)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BrcZy0yNjfc

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:

>> The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>> Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
>> raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
>> believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
>> just a lone voice.
>
>Inflation is directly related to government overspending and flooding the financial markets by
>printing money.
>And when the budgetary items, like infrastructure bill, build back better, inflation reduction act
>and other Biden policies turn out to be mostly boondoggles of wasted money, it is even worse
>because the confidence of investors decreases.
>
>The Biden administration has destroyed the US economy.
>They, along with cackling Kamala own this not matter how hard she tries to distance herself from
>Joe Biden.

Biden's policy has been fairly liberal. But Harris is another
Clinton-esque mind in the game, I bet on success with her
administration. Make DJT defeated again.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 19:22:24 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:

>On 2024-08-15, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>>>>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>>>>
>>>> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,
>>>
>>>I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
>>>shit way beyond tax cuts).
>>>
>>>Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
>>>your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.
>>>
>>>> why do you keep supporting the
>>>> very party that is making those tax cuts?
>>>
>>>Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
>>>money more than the govt needs my money.
>>
>>
>> The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>> Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
>> raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
>> believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
>> just a lone voice.
>>
>
>Inflation is directly related to government overspending and flooding the financial markets by
>printing money.

Trump dumped four trillion dollars into the economy in just over six months.

>And when the budgetary items, like infrastructure bill, build back better, inflation reduction act
>and other Biden policies turn out to be mostly boondoggles of wasted money, it is even worse
>because the confidence of investors decreases.

And when they turn out to be successes?

>The Biden administration has destroyed the US economy.

With 4% unemployment and 2.9% inflation, it doesn't look very destroyed to me.

>They, along with cackling Kamala own this not matter how hard she tries to distance herself from
>Joe Biden.

And four years from now the public will decide that Republicans aren't everything they
claim to be.

#nevertrump

Outside the RNC:
I'm a Republican because of Jesus. I put Jesus first.
If the Democrats had the some priorities as Jesus, you'd vote Democrat? Clothing and
feeding people and healing the sick?
No, the bible says if you don't work you don't eat.

Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>>The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>>Not that I'm giving Obama a pass, because he famously didn't want to
>>raise taxes in a recession, and we were in deficit before Trump. I
>>believe Biden could've done more to rectify the situation, but I'm
>>just a lone voice.
>
>You're half right. The other half was jacking up spending.
>
>Supply side economics has two sides: Cut taxes and cut spending. Republicans only cut
>taxes. They NEVER cut spending. That's why supply side never works.

We have certain levels of spending that are hard to stop, so the tax
cut is always a scheme to use bond sales that has gotten so out of
control that I am just dumbfounded that we can't get a consensus to
eliminate it. It's a numbers game but it's one that will cost our
future selves dearly.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:

>> The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>
>Let's look at 2023, for example. The govt took in $4.5 trillion in
>revenue, yet spent $6.2 trillion. That nets a $1.7 trillion deficit for
>that year alone (dear Lord!).
>
>Trump's tax cuts were projected to cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years
>($160 billion per year).
>
>$1.7 trillion - $160 billion = $1.54 trillion deficit.
>
>How do you reach the conclusion you do?

It's just math, if they don't collect tax they have to sell bonds.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 15:57:41 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:

>On 8/15/2024 2:56 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/13/2024 11:28 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:29:04 -0400, Yak <yak@inbox.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Then you need to discuss shit way beyond tax cuts. Because those account
>>>>> for the bulk of the overall debt.
>>>>
>>>> If you have a problem with debt and blame it on tax cuts,
>>>
>>> I'm not blaming tax cuts for the debt. I'm blaming spending (i.e. the
>>> shit way beyond tax cuts).
>>>
>>> Blaming tax cuts for the debt is like blaming your credit card debt on
>>> your employer because he doesn't pay you enough.
>>>
>>>> why do you keep supporting the
>>>> very party that is making those tax cuts?
>>>
>>> Because I kindd of like the idea of keeping the money I earn. I need my
>>> money more than the govt needs my money.
>>
>>
>> The tax cuts under Bush and Trump were the causes of deficit spending.
>
>
>Let's look at 2023, for example. The govt took in $4.5 trillion in
>revenue, yet spent $6.2 trillion. That nets a $1.7 trillion deficit for
>that year alone (dear Lord!).
>
>Trump's tax cuts were projected to cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years
>($160 billion per year).
>
>$1.7 trillion - $160 billion = $1.54 trillion deficit.

Which I have said many times and you have ignored. I'll try again.

Supply side has two components, tax cuts and spending cuts.

However, the Republicans don't cut spending (fact is they increase it), they only cut
taxes. As you pointed out above, Trump's spending was as costly as his tax cuts.

>How do you reach the conclusion you do?

Why do you still support Republicans if you care about the debt?

#nevertrump

Excerpt from Walz' stump speech:
I know very clearly that I am preaching to the choir, but here's my words for you: the
choir needs to sing, the choir needs to sing.