Andrew Cuomo upset about losing SALT deductions

[fskimospy]

We're not Congressmen negotiating a comprehensive tax reform, we're discussing the independent question of whether SALT deductions should be capped or not. You seem to be perfectly capable of discussing your opinion of a border wall as a standalone proposition (opposed) without needing to link it to a complete overhaul of immigration policy.

That might be what you wish I was discussing but it’s not. I am discussing the actual implemented legislation. You know, reality.

Considering my taxes were raised for the express purpose of lowering taxes on people wealthier than me I do not support that implementation, no.

Your responses in this thread basically boil down to "Capping SALT impacts me personally, so I won't agree to it even if it goes against my principles unless you give me another concession."

No, my responses in this thread are forcing you to live in the real world and you don’t like that.

Holy cow the mental contortions you and those on your political side are going through to rationalize something that benefits you is mind boggling. To prove my point let's make the SALT deduction inversely related to how much state income tax you pay (e.g. the less state tax you pay, the less federal income tax you pay). If that passed would you then accept that without question and allow the resulting federal tax subsidies to red states to go on in perpetuity unless/until you got some unrelated tax reform? Of course you wouldn't, you'd be out in the streets protesting and burning cars about how unfair it was and how "those evil rich folks in red states" were taking advantage of the system to reduce their tax payments beyond what you thought was proper.

You seem to be desperately hoping that I will argue the position you wish I have instead of the one I actually have.

My position is very simple. I am willing to pay higher taxes if those taxes are used to do something I support. Making the tax code more progressive is one of those things! In the real world though the additional tax revenues from eliminating SALT were used to reduce the ten year cost of a tax bill whose net result was to make the tax code much LESS progressive. It should be common sense why I would oppose that.

To put just how silly your reasoning is in short:

Glenn: you should support removing the SALT deduction because it makes the tax code more progressive!

Me: the money raised from removing it was used to make the tax code less progressive, so no.

Glenn: you should pretend none of those other things happened.

Me: no.

Glenn: LIBRUL HYPOCRITE.

 

[fskimospy]

Long before this bill was ever conceived of I’ve talked about how SALT deductions are bad and should be removed. You can search yourself and find it if you care. That doesn’t change the fact that I adamantly oppose this bill as it made things even worse.

Glenn, if you want to support the idea of raising taxes on the rich by at least $700 billion (estimated SALT revenues) then I’m totally down with SALT elimination. Deal?

 

[dyna]

Yes he seems to be missing the point that state and local tax deductions do not actually lower your overall taxes as compared to simply not paying those taxes to begin with.

NY was gaming the system. They were finding ways for their residents to avoid paying federal tax and divert into their own coffers. They have a projected 35-40% less tax revenue because of this change! This money definitely circulates back to the ultra-rich. If you don't think two correlate to benefits for the ultra-rich, just look at the numbers.

 

[fskimospy]

NY was gaming the system. They were finding ways for their residents to avoid paying federal tax and divert into their own coffers. They have a projected 35-40% less tax revenue because of this change! This money definitely circulates back to the ultra-rich. If you don't think two correlate to benefits for the ultra-rich, just look at the numbers.

I have looked at the numbers. How were they gaming the system, specifically? What policies?

 

[Jhhnn]

No they are taxed consistently on LTCG no matter what state they live in, that's kinda the point and why SALT should follow the same model. That would hold true no matter what the LTCG rate was.

Another alternative could be for the federal government to tax (as income) the revenue from state government taxes. Then it wouldn't matter if SALT deductions existed or not as the value of the subsidy to rich residents of high tax states would be recouped by the federal government.

So what? The GOP tax package, as delivered, is an instrument of top down class warfare. In particular, changes to the SALT formula target blue state residents who already pay higher total taxes.

It's also the ownership class looting the Treasury while increasing inequality.

 

[Jhhnn]

That might be what you wish I was discussing but it’s not. I am discussing the actual implemented legislation. You know, reality.

Considering my taxes were raised for the express purpose of lowering taxes on people wealthier than me I do not support that implementation, no.



No, my responses in this thread are forcing you to live in the real world and you don’t like that.



You seem to be desperately hoping that I will argue the position you wish I have instead of the one I actually have.

My position is very simple. I am willing to pay higher taxes if those taxes are used to do something I support. Making the tax code more progressive is one of those things! In the real world though the additional tax revenues from eliminating SALT were used to reduce the ten year cost of a tax bill whose net result was to make the tax code much LESS progressive. It should be common sense why I would oppose that.

To put just how silly your reasoning is in short:

Glenn: you should support removing the SALT deduction because it makes the tax code more progressive!

Me: the money raised from removing it was used to make the tax code less progressive, so no.

Glenn: you should pretend none of those other things happened.

Me: no.

Glenn: LIBRUL HYPOCRITE.

Well said. Thank you.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have looked at the numbers. How were they gaming the system, specifically? What policies?

He's working on a conspiracy theory & pulling numbers out of his ass.

 

[glenn1]

That might be what you wish I was discussing but it’s not. I am discussing the actual implemented legislation. You know, reality.

Actually, you know, you're thread crapping and bringing up things unrelated to the OP in an attempt to distract. You're perfectly capable of unbundling unrelated concerns and expressing an opinion on a single subject including ones about taxation. Such as "marginal tax rates should be X." If someone like @Texashiker responded to such a thread you created with "well what about SALT deductions you can't discuss marginal rates without resolving that at the same time" then you would rightfully accuse him of thread crapping and ignoring the point of your thread.

You seem to be desperately hoping that I will argue the position you wish I have instead of the one I actually have. My position is very simple. I am willing to pay higher taxes if those taxes are used to do something I support.

That's not how taxes work and if you say that in court you'd go to jail for tax evasion. No one in the IRS gives a shit what your opinion is and thankfully for everyone you'll pay the higher federal taxes due to SALT deductions being capped and no amount of your complaining under your breath about it will stop that check you write to the U.S. Treasury from cashing. Good thing also since you'd probably not agree if some rich red state person said "I'll only pay the tax increase which @fskimospy supports if it's not used to pay welfare benefits!"

Sorry that "in the real world" if you want to screw over red state taxpayers to save a buck, you'll have to do it some other way than the SALT subsidy for your state taxes. Sorry that your pledge of "I'll gladly pay higher taxes" was shown to be such a transparently blatant lie. Death to the SALT subsidy and all other subsidies that benefit specific individuals or easily identifiable groups of individuals.

So what? The GOP tax package, as delivered, is an instrument of top down class warfare. In particular, changes to the SALT formula target blue state residents who already pay higher total taxes.

It's also the ownership class looting the Treasury while increasing inequality.

The blue state residents who called for higher taxes and said on this forum over and again "I'll gladly pay higher taxes" until they actually happened and then said "um not really."

 

[fskimospy]

Actually, you know, you're thread crapping and bringing up things unrelated to the OP in an attempt to distract. You're perfectly capable of unbundling unrelated concerns and expressing an opinion on a single subject including ones about taxation. Such as "marginal tax rates should be X." If someone like @Texashiker responded to such a thread you created with "well what about SALT deductions you can't discuss marginal rates without resolving that at the same time" then you would rightfully accuse him of thread crapping and ignoring the point of your thread.

Nope, I directly addressed the OP already. I am simply asking you to live in reality. You want us to pretend we don't know what that deduction was eliminated to pay for and you're mad that nobody else is willing to play make-believe with you.

So that you have this bookmarked for future reference I think almost all deductions in the tax code should be eliminated. If they are eliminated in the future in order to give rich people even more money you can count me opposed then too!

That's not how taxes work and if you say that in court you'd go to jail for tax evasion. No one in the IRS gives a shit what your opinion is and thankfully for everyone you'll pay the higher federal taxes due to SALT deductions being capped and no amount of your complaining under your breath about it will stop that check you write to the U.S. Treasury from cashing. Good thing also since you'd probably not agree if some rich red state person said "I'll only pay the tax increase which @fskimospy supports if it's not used to pay welfare benefits!"

Sorry that "in the real world" if you want to screw over red state taxpayers to save a buck, you'll have to do it some other way than the SALT subsidy for your state taxes. Sorry that your pledge of "I'll gladly pay higher taxes" was shown to be such a transparently blatant lie. Death to the SALT subsidy and all other subsidies that benefit specific individuals or easily identifiable groups of individuals.

The blue state residents who called for higher taxes and said on this forum over and again "I'll gladly pay higher taxes" until they actually happened and then said "um not really."

Now you're just ranting and coming up with bizarre prison fantasies because you're enraged by me showing you how silly your argument was.

If you thought people saying they would gladly pay higher taxes were saying that they would gladly pay higher taxes so rich people could pay less you're stupid. I don't think you're stupid, you're just blinded by rage right now because you got called out for saying something dumb.

 

[glenn1]

Nope, I directly addressed the OP already. I am simply asking you to live in reality. You want us to pretend we don't know what that deduction was eliminated to pay for and you're mad that nobody else is willing to play make-believe with you.

So that you have this bookmarked for future reference I think almost all deductions in the tax code should be eliminated. If they are eliminated in the future in order to give rich people even more money you can count me opposed then too!



Now you're just ranting and coming up with bizarre prison fantasies because you're enraged by me showing you how silly your argument was.

If you thought people saying they would gladly pay higher taxes were saying that they would gladly pay higher taxes so rich people could pay less you're stupid. I don't think you're stupid, you're just blinded by rage right now because you got called out for saying something dumb.

So to be clear, you're opposed to closing any tax subsidy to the rich unless their marginal rates go up? I'm sure the GOP would pretty happily agree to that deal.

 

[fskimospy]

So to be clear, you're opposed to closing any tax subsidy to the rich unless their marginal rates go up? I'm sure the GOP would pretty happily agree to that deal.

I suggest you go read my post again.

 

[glenn1]

I suggest you go read my post again.

I did and it's pretty clear. If a bill came up in Congress where the provisions were strictly limited to further lowering (or eliminating) SALT deductions for federal taxes, you'd vote against it. You won't support changes to the tax code unless (and I'm quoting here) you can "know what that deduction was eliminated to pay for" so you'd oppose.

Which is fine I guess, since I can take the same position to oppose any tax increase on the same premise. "I won't support eliminating (insert deduction here) unless I know it wasn't eliminated to pay for Obamacare." Or whatever other policy I opposed.

 

[fskimospy]

I did and it's pretty clear. If a bill came up in Congress where the provisions were strictly limited to further lowering (or eliminating) SALT deductions for federal taxes, you'd vote against it. You won't support changes to the tax code unless (and I'm quoting here) you can "know what that deduction was eliminated to pay for" so you'd oppose.

Which is fine I guess, since I can take the same position to oppose any tax increase on the same premise. "I won't support eliminating (insert deduction here) unless I know it wasn't eliminated to pay for Obamacare." Or whatever other policy I opposed.

Yes, exactly! Or at a minimum I would want to know it wasn't specifically being used for things like giving rich people money like in this case.

I wish more people took positions like that to be honest as that's how legislative compromise happens. It's way too frequent that people dogmatically cling to proposals based purely on ideology. The wall is a great example - it's stupid and a waste of money but I'm perfectly willing to let conservatives have their monument to their own stupidity if they want to give enough concessions for things I want.

 

[glenn1]

Yes, exactly! Or at a minimum I would want to know it wasn't specifically being used for things like giving rich people money like in this case.

@fskimospy "logic" in action - 'I would vote to keep a tax subsidy for rich people rather than risk the revenue raised from being used to give a tax subsidy for rich people.'

 

[JSt0rm]

@fskimospy "logic" in action - 'I would vote to keep a tax subsidy for rich people rather than risk the revenue raised from being used to give a tax subsidy for rich people.'

we are gonna raise your taxes glenn. No more deductions for stay at home retard.

 

[fskimospy]

@fskimospy "logic" in action - 'I would vote to keep a tax subsidy for rich people rather than risk the revenue raised from being used to give a tax subsidy for rich people.'

fskimospy logic in action - 'I would not support removing a tax subsidy for right people and the upper middle class when I know with absolute certainty that the revenue raised will be used to give a tax subsidy to the rich as it's literally in the legislation that was passed'

glenn1 logic in action - 'please pretend that's not true so I can be right'.

 

[TheVrolok]

Absurd. No state that puts more into the federal kitty than they get back is being subsidized by another state regardless of how that comes to be.

LOL.. These guys could be taking MORE, but since they're taking less than they could be.. They're subsidizing the big blues. That's fucking hilarious.

 

[glenn1]

fskimospy logic in action - 'I would not support removing a tax subsidy for right people and the upper middle class when I know with absolute certainty that the revenue raised will be used to give a tax subsidy to the rich as it's literally in the legislation that was passed'

glenn1 logic in action - 'please pretend that's not true so I can be right'.

The truth comes out, you think the SALT tax subsidy goes to the "right" rich people.

 

[fskimospy]

The truth comes out, you think the SALT tax subsidy goes to the "right" rich people.

That was actually a typo and I meant 'rich people and the upper middle class'.

 

[glenn1]

That was actually a typo and I meant 'rich people and the upper middle class'.

IOW people like you. As opposed to different tax subsidies for different rich folks who aren't you.

 

[fskimospy]

IOW people like you.

Huh? Look, I know you're desperately trying to dig yourself out of a hole but there's simply no way you're going to be able to misrepresent my position sufficiently to get what you want.

support: removing SALT to make the tax code more progressive or to enact other useful programs. (didn't happen)

oppose: removing SALT to make the tax code less progressive. (did happen)

glenn: 'please pretend reality didn't happen so I can be right'.

 

[glenn1]

Huh? Look, I know you're desperately trying to dig yourself out of a hole but there's simply no way you're going to be able to misrepresent my position sufficiently to get what you want.

support: removing SALT to make the tax code more progressive or to enact other useful programs. (didn't happen)

oppose: removing SALT to make the tax code less progressive. (did happen)

glenn: 'please pretend reality didn't happen so I can be right'.

I thought progressives didn't live in the past? We get it, you would have opposed that bill but now it's passed and in the past. We can now survey the current reality for what it is and determine whether we should *in the future* keep the SALT limits in place or remove them. Or are you saying that your side is so incompetent they couldn't offer changes to SALT deduction limits as a standalone bill?

 

[fskimospy]

I thought progressives didn't live in the past? We get it, you would have opposed that bill but now it's passed and in the past. We can now survey the current reality for what it is and determine whether we should *in the future* keep the SALT limits in place or remove them. Or are you saying that your side is so incompetent they couldn't offer changes to SALT deduction limits as a standalone bill?

Oh for fuck's sake.

 

[glenn1]

Oh for fuck's sake.

Go ahead and invent a time machine, get elected to Congress and vote against the bill so it never passed.

Otherwise, deal with reality as it is now in the non-alternative future version of the universe. Again it's real simple, you're smart and can opine on single subjects of the tax code.

 

[echo4747]

So... where is Cuomo/NYS going to get this 2.3 Billion? Borrow? Raise taxes? Create a new fee? Cut spending (if so, where)?