Andrew Cuomo upset about losing SALT deductions

[fskimospy]

No you’re right, a republican moving from New York to Florida because of SALT taxes would obviously changed their vote to Democrats. Most of whom are advocating for 70% tax rates which would dwarf the SALT tax increase by orders of magnitude.

I know I’m right, all we need to do is look at what actually happened after republicans jacked up the tax rates of the affluent people in the suburbs we are talking about.

 

[purbeast0]

I forgot I never finished my taxes and did them again last night and fuck you Trump for this dumb fucking SALT shit. It's over a $3k swing for our household due to the $10k deduction limit.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I know I’m right, all we need to do is look at what actually happened after republicans jacked up the tax rates of the affluent people in the suburbs we are talking about.

And what do you think is going to happen when the Democrats jack up the tax rates of the suburban affluent? The midterm suburban shift to blue was not an embrace of liberal policies, it was educated people rejecting Trump. Affluent suburbia is also ground zero of NIMBYism and resistance to anything that jeopardizes its school systems, vacation lifestyles and luxury SUVs.

 

[fskimospy]

And what do you think is going to happen when the Democrats jack up the tax rates of the suburban affluent? The midterm suburban shift to blue was not an embrace of liberal policies, it was educated people rejecting Trump. Affluent suburbia is also ground zero of NIMBYism and resistance to anything that jeopardizes its school systems, vacation lifestyles and luxury SUVs.

The Democrats probably won’t jack up their taxes so nothing will happen. The Democrats are looking to jack up taxes on the super rich, not these people who are merely kind of rich.

The Republicans made a catastrophic mistake by raising taxes on the middle and upper middle class to fund a tax cut for ultra rich people. People in the suburbs have been kind of embarrassed by the Republican Party’s lurch towards racism and away from science for a long time now, they just cared about money more. Now the party of racism is also the party that raises their taxes. That’s why they abandoned the Republicans in droves.

They are probably lost to republicans for good now, as they were already trending away.

 

[Paratus]

And what do you think is going to happen when the Democrats jack up the tax rates of the suburban affluent? The midterm suburban shift to blue was not an embrace of liberal policies, it was educated people rejecting Trump. Affluent suburbia is also ground zero of NIMBYism and resistance to anything that jeopardizes its school systems, vacation lifestyles and luxury SUVs.

99% of suburban affluents don’t make $10M. So what’s going to happen to their taxes again?

 

[fskimospy]

99% of suburban affluents don’t make $10M. So what’s going to happen to their taxes again?

It’s amazing how ingrained the idea is that Democrats will raise middle class people’s taxes despite that not having happened in more than a quarter century. (And that was followed by an years of peace and prosperity)

At least in the past Republicans were smart enough to finance their tax cuts entirely through debt so they weren’t increasing taxes on regular people, at least not directly. This time they got greedy though - the scale of money they wanted to give rich people was so huge they couldn’t finance it by debt alone so they had to tax the middle class to get it. Seems to have been a big mistake.

 

[glenn1]

It’s amazing how ingrained the idea is that Democrats will raise middle class people’s taxes despite that not having happened in more than a quarter century. (And that was followed by an years of peace and prosperity)

At least in the past Republicans were smart enough to finance their tax cuts entirely through debt so they weren’t increasing taxes on regular people, at least not directly. This time they got greedy though - the scale of money they wanted to give rich people was so huge they couldn’t finance it by debt alone so they had to tax the middle class to get it. Seems to have been a big mistake.

Again, let's go back to the main point here. People with incomes over $100,000 receive more than 88% of SALT deduction benefits. It's cute that you want to consider yourself "middle class" but you're not. "Middle class" people don't make the kind of money where basically 20% of their pre-tax income goes to paying state and local taxes. You are upper class folks whose tax preferences were being subsidized by actual middle class taxpayers in other states and now your subsidy has ended and you're pissed about it. That's what's happening here. Everything else is a distraction. If you want to imagine this will drive some mass exodus to Democrats then feel free to believe whatever you want but hopefully Democrats are principled enough not to restore unlimited SALT deductions as it's morally and fiscally indefensible in every aspect.

 

[fskimospy]

Again, let's go back to the main point here. People with incomes over $100,000 receive more than 88% of SALT deduction benefits. It's cute that you want to consider yourself "middle class" but you're not. "Middle class" people don't make the kind of money where basically 20% of their pre-tax income goes to paying state and local taxes. You are upper class folks whose tax preferences were being subsidized by actual middle class taxpayers in other states and now your subsidy has ended and you're pissed about it. That's what's happening here. Everything else is a distraction. If you want to imagine this will drive some mass exodus to Democrats then feel free to believe whatever you want but hopefully Democrats are principled enough not to restore unlimited SALT deductions as it's morally and fiscally indefensible in every aspect.

We have already been over this.

First, I have no desire to play the ‘who is the middle class’ game.

Second, I subsidize those taxpayers, not the other way around. Remember when we went over this? In order to make this logic work you were reduced to using a definition of subsidy so insane that literally everyone in the US subsidized every other person, making the term meaningless.

Third, I’m not imagining anything, I’m looking at the demonstrated shift in voting behavior by the people affected by this. You’re the one imagining that the effect of Republicans raising taxes on people to the extent that they must leave their homes will make them reward Republicans by voting for more of it.

Funny how according to conservatives Democrats increasing people’s taxes will make them vote for Republicans and Republicans raising people’s taxes will make them vote for... Republicans. Nice motivated reasoning there.

 

[glenn1]

We have already been over this.

First, I have no desire to play the ‘who is the middle class’ game.

Second, I subsidize those taxpayers, not the other way around. Remember when we went over this? In order to make this logic work you were reduced to using a definition of subsidy so insane that literally everyone in the US subsidized every other person, making the term meaningless.

Third, I’m not imagining anything, I’m looking at the demonstrated shift in voting behavior by the people affected by this. You’re the one imagining that the effect of Republicans raising taxes on people to the extent that they must leave their homes will make them reward Republicans by voting for more of it.

Funny how according to conservatives Democrats increasing people’s taxes will make them vote for Republicans and Republicans raising people’s taxes will make them vote for... Republicans. Nice motivated reasoning there.

Here's to hoping urban professionals like you continue to "subsidize every other person" to an even greater extent than capping SALT does since that's where the money is in the U.S. to pay for things. As you typically remind us, if you can afford to live somewhere where a teardown house costs over $1MM, you pay $40k for childcare, and you buy a $100 cronut then you can afford higher federal taxes and should pay them.

 

[fskimospy]

Here's to hoping urban professionals like you continue to "subsidize every other person" to an even greater extent than capping SALT does since that's where the money is in the U.S. to pay for things. As you typically remind us, if you can afford to live somewhere where a teardown house costs over $1MM, you pay $40k for childcare, and you buy a $100 cronut then you can afford higher federal taxes and should pay them.

Haha, now here’s that spite based policy we all know and love!

I’m fine with paying higher taxes, but you’re going to pay them too. As I said before, I’m just not fine with paying more in taxes so the super rich can get a tax break.

I’m glad you’re on board with the idea that affluent people can afford to pay proportionately more though, that means we can REALLY go to town on the rich!

 

[Starbuck1975]

99% of suburban affluents don’t make $10M. So what’s going to happen to their taxes again?

So now $10M is the upper bound for middle class? LOL. The affluent suburbs are filled with the $200k+ crowd. They are not middle class.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It’s amazing how ingrained the idea is that Democrats will raise middle class people’s taxes despite that not having happened in more than a quarter century. (And that was followed by an years of peace and prosperity)

At least in the past Republicans were smart enough to finance their tax cuts entirely through debt so they weren’t increasing taxes on regular people, at least not directly. This time they got greedy though - the scale of money they wanted to give rich people was so huge they couldn’t finance it by debt alone so they had to tax the middle class to get it. Seems to have been a big mistake.

I am fine with eliminating the SALT deduction AND eliminating tax cuts for the rich AND easing the tax burden on the working and middle class. I would also make military pay tax free.

 

[glenn1]

Haha, now here’s that spite based policy we all know and love!

I’m fine with paying higher taxes, but you’re going to pay them too. As I said before, I’m just not fine with paying more in taxes so the super rich can get a tax break.

I’m glad you’re on board with the idea that affluent people can afford to pay proportionately more though, that means we can REALLY go to town on the rich!

I don't really care that "affluent people can afford to pay proportionately more though" since that is a given and flat taxes are not a realistic proposal at this point. I do disagree with "REALLY going to town on the rich" as an ends to itself merely to attempt to hurt the rich or "bring them down to @fskimospy level". Taxes collected should reflect the spending the electorate demands which should broadly benefit the American people as a whole. If you need to tax a rich guy heavily to build infrastructure then so be it, that rich person will benefit as well. If you want to tax a rich guy heavily just to feel better about yourself only making $200k instead of $200m then you suck and should reexamine your morals.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't really care that "affluent people can afford to pay proportionately more though" since that is a given and flat taxes are not a realistic proposal at this point. I do disagree with "REALLY going to town on the rich" as an ends to itself merely to attempt to hurt the rich or "bring them down to @fskimospy level". Taxes collected should reflect the spending the electorate demands which should broadly benefit the American people as a whole. If you need to tax a rich guy heavily to build infrastructure then so be it, that rich person will benefit as well. If you want to tax a rich guy heavily just to feel better about yourself only making $200k instead of $200m then you suck and should reexamine your morals.

Great, since I only want to tax the rich to pay for what the country needs we're in total agreement!

 

[glenn1]

Great, since I only want to tax the rich to pay for what the country needs we're in total agreement!

It seems there is significant disagreement on "what the country needs."

 

[fskimospy]

It seems there is significant disagreement on "what the country needs."

I'm sure there is, but what the country needs should be decided on by a majority of the citizens instead of the system we currently have which is designed to promote the interests of rich people.

 

[glenn1]

I'm sure there is, but what the country needs should be decided on by a majority of the citizens instead of the system we currently have which is designed to promote the interests of rich people.

Maybe your state should STFU for a while and fix your own corruption before opining about how the rest of the country doesn't know what it needs and "votes against its own self-interest." Maybe then you wouldn't need such high state and local taxes and capping SALT wouldn't impact you so much.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...k-became-most-corrupt-state-in-america-117652

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/nyregion/new-york-subway-system-failure-delays.html

 

[fskimospy]

I am fine with eliminating the SALT deduction AND eliminating tax cuts for the rich AND easing the tax burden on the working and middle class. I would also make military pay tax free.

Military pay is already pretty tax free. Back in the early-mid 2000's I was making the equivalent of about $70,000 a year and was paying federal taxes on maybe half of it. Once your 'income' gets down into the $35,000 a year range you aren't paying much in federal taxes anymore and thanks to Pennsylvania's laws I was paying zero state tax.

 

[fskimospy]

Maybe your state should STFU for a while and fix your own corruption before opining about how the rest of the country doesn't know what it needs and "votes against its own self-interest." Maybe then you wouldn't need such high state and local taxes and capping SALT wouldn't impact you so much.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...k-became-most-corrupt-state-in-america-117652

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/nyregion/new-york-subway-system-failure-delays.html

I guess this means the argument is over as you've switched to unrelated ranting.

 

[glenn1]

I guess this means the argument is over as you've switched to unrelated ranting.

What argument? You're acting like our discussions here have any impact whatsoever on tax rates. If GOP gets in and "gives the rich a big tax break" then that will happen. If Dems win and institute their 70% tax rate then so be it. I no more care what you think the "proper" tax rate is for the rich then you care what I think it is, threads like this are simply to argue for the sake of arguing. If you want to imagine somehow it will be a better world when "the rich" are taxed at 70% and you can smile and say "serves you right jerk" then feel free.

 

[fskimospy]

What argument? You're acting like our discussions here have any impact whatsoever on tax rates. If GOP gets in and "gives the rich a big tax break" then that will happen. If Dems win and institute their 70% tax rate then so be it. I no more care what you think the "proper" tax rate is for the rich then you care what I think it is, threads like this are simply to argue for the sake of arguing. If you want to imagine somehow it will be a better world when "the rich" are taxed at 70% and you can smile and say "serves you right jerk" then feel free.

I meant that the discussion is no longer interesting to me because you've started ranting about unrelated topics.

 

[Indus]

And what do you think is going to happen when the Democrats jack up the tax rates of the suburban affluent? The midterm suburban shift to blue was not an embrace of liberal policies, it was educated people rejecting Trump. Affluent suburbia is also ground zero of NIMBYism and resistance to anything that jeopardizes its school systems, vacation lifestyles and luxury SUVs.

That's incorrect info buddy.

The Dems aren't raising taxes on anyone except the 1%. Do some more research.. wealth tax and higher taxes on incomes above 10 million per year.

How many people would it effect? Lottery Winners? Billionaires? Braindead GOP Voters who thinks Trickle Down Economics effects them?

 

[glenn1]

I meant that the discussion is no longer interesting to me because you've started ranting about unrelated topics.

Yeah I realize that your interest lies in taxing the rich at exorbitant rates and pretending that you'll gladly pay higher rates yourself and that mentioning your state and city wastes billions in corruption would kill your mood. However what and we use tax proceeds and that they aren't being squandered is just as important if not more important than the "why" of unrelated goals like "bring the rich down a peg" which you also enjoy thinking about.

 

[Indus]

What argument? You're acting like our discussions here have any impact whatsoever on tax rates. If GOP gets in and "gives the rich a big tax break" then that will happen. If Dems win and institute their 70% tax rate then so be it. I no more care what you think the "proper" tax rate is for the rich then you care what I think it is, threads like this are simply to argue for the sake of arguing. If you want to imagine somehow it will be a better world when "the rich" are taxed at 70% and you can smile and say "serves you right jerk" then feel free.

That 70% is reserved for those making incomes over 10 million.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah I realize that your interest lies in taxing the rich at exorbitant rates and pretending that you'll gladly pay higher rates yourself and that mentioning your state and city wastes billions in corruption would kill your mood. However what and we use tax proceeds and that they aren't being squandered is just as important if not more important than the "why" of unrelated goals like "bring the rich down a peg" which you also enjoy thinking about.

I've talked about New York's corruption and the MTA on numerous occasions.

I don't care if you think I'm secretly trying to trick you into believing that I would pay higher taxes or that my real reason for higher taxes is to punish people for being rich as opposed to funding the government as I know what I believe. It appears these are comforting lies you tell yourself so that you can believe everyone is as selfish and spite driven as you are.