What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

timschochet’s political thoughts and commentary- back in here until the election is done (4 Viewers)

sho nuff said:
I could see that...reverse the more permanent of Trumps tax cuts...keep those of the middle and lower.
Click to expand...
I’m sure Biden would like to do a lot more than that: 

1. Immigration bill 

2. Climate change 

3. Gun control 

4. Infrastructure 

5. improve Obamacare 

6. Police Reform 

All of this and more is in the Democratic platform. But the Republicans will try to stop all of it and even if the Dems get control of the Senate it’s unlikely that Biden can get past the filibusters. Hope I’m wrong about this. 

 
timschochet said:
You’ll never convince conservatives of this. Like @Ramblin Wreck most of them believe that any tax on the wealthy is passed down to the middle class in the form of inflation. 
Click to expand...
To be fair, over the past 50+ years, most taxes on "the wealthy" have disproportionately impacted the "upper middle class, not quite wealthy" segment of our population far more than the extreme wealthy.

 
I've only heard Biden mention he'd roll back the tax cuts Trump put in place.  If there are others I'd like to see them.  That would mean, putting things back the way they were when companies were making record profits and we weren't trending upward in our deficits rather down.  Remember....those tax breaks went back to the companies who used them to buy back their stock because they were doing so well, that was the smartest play.  If we want to argue that the debt accrued is going to fall on the middle class, that's true.  That's why it's important that deficits are trending downward and not shooting through the roof.  First step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
I've only heard Biden mention he'd roll back the tax cuts Trump put in place.  If there are others I'd like to see them.  That would mean, putting things back the way they were when companies were making record profits and we weren't trending upward in our deficits rather down.  Remember....those tax breaks went back to the companies who used them to buy back their stock because they were doing so well, that was the smartest play.  If we want to argue that the debt accrued is going to fall on the middle class, that's true.  That's why it's important that deficits are trending downward and not shooting through the roof.  First step to getting out of a hole is to stop digging.  
Click to expand...
Yes buybacks increased. But for the S&P 500 less than a third went to buybacks. 20 companies were responsible for 2/3rds of the increase in buybacks. 

There could be a whole laundry list of other things those companies did with money that can be argued are also not good for the overall economy, but that is obviously a more in depth discussion. I just dont understand how it came to be that the common talking point is that the tax savings just went to stock buybacks. Seems saying it mostly went to the wealthy would be far more accurate and accomplish same goal. 

If we expand beyond a year on year comparison and compare historically we can see that 2018 buybacks werent that much higher than the previous record so obviously other factors are at play. 2019 buybacks saw a massive decrease from 2018. Obviously 2020 is now not really usable data, but prior to covid they were predicting another big drop while they were predicting another large increase in capital expenditures, which were up 13% in 2018 and another 9% in 2019. 

There is also an argument to be made that the companies fueling the buybacks also earn the most overseas so that at least a % of that money now comes home somehow, but I dont remember those details and dont feel like looking them up. 

Perhaps @Sand or somebody else is more familiar with that. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
Yes buybacks increased
Click to expand...
I'm old enough to remember when you vehemently denied first that there would be any buy backs then that there had been an increase in buy backs.

Now, it's (paraphrasing) buy backs aren't the worst thing they used that money for. Interesting 

 
timschochet said:
I didn’t use to feel this way, @Ramblin Wreck. I used to think, like most conservatives, that in general the way to grow the economy is to shrink taxes, not grow them. But the last 3 times Presidents have raised taxes, the economy has grown. It actually seemed to help things. 
Click to expand...
Reagan alone raised taxes more than three times to fuel the "Reagan Miracle".  

I assume that you believe that growing businesses results in a growing economy?    All you need to know is that lower taxes create incentives to remove profits from a business because it cost less to do so while higher taxes creates incentives to defer paying those taxes by reinvesting into a business, to grow the business - assuming there is room for growth to begin with. 

 
timschochet said:
I don’t know: I would think though that it differs from state to state, region to region. What do you think? 
Click to expand...
I think it's mostly a buzz word with no real meaning but since you used them wanted to get your definition before I agreed or disagreed.  Obviously someone living in NY, LA, Chicago, DC isn't the same as someone living in Iowa, Nebraska or Mississippi in terms of income.

But eliminating the extremes on either end, I think the 80K - 120K income is clearly middle class but I know plenty of people that would consider that wealthy. 

 
RW one problem with that reasoning is that unfortunately we as a nation have leveraged ourselves to the tune of a $1 trillion deficit this year. I think that's more than Obama's first year, which is astounding considering how much effort both parties expended digging ourselves out of that morass from the crash and the Iraq War. Just like that we're back in it. In point of fact the lower and middle classes owe that money, we all do, it sucks. Let's not even get into the disastrousness of what Trump wants to do with SS/Medicare. We have to get our fiscal house in order and quick.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
Yes buybacks increased. But for the S&P 500 less than a third went to buybacks. 20 companies were responsible for 2/3rds of the increase in buybacks. 

There could be a whole laundry list of other things those companies did with money that can be argued are also not good for the overall economy, but that is obviously a more in depth discussion. I just dont understand how it came to be that the common talking point is that the tax savings just went to stock buybacks. Seems saying it mostly went to the wealthy would be far more accurate and accomplish same goal. 

If we expand beyond a year on year comparison and compare historically we can see that 2018 buybacks werent that much higher than the previous record so obviously other factors are at play. 2019 buybacks saw a massive decrease from 2018. Obviously 2020 is now not really usable data, but prior to covid they were predicting another big drop while they were predicting another large increase in capital expenditures, which were up 13% in 2018 and another 9% in 2019. 

There is also an argument to be made that the companies fueling the buybacks also earn the most overseas so that at least a % of that money now comes home somehow, but I dont remember those details and dont feel like looking them up. 

Perhaps @Sand or somebody else is more familiar with that. 
Click to expand...
99 times out of 100 I include them both.  This happens to be the one time I left part out in haste.  To the part of the money coming back home, I thought that was reversed in the tax bill as well and is no longer the case.  Those tax havens are safe once again if I am remembering correctly, but I might not be.  Would have to look at that again.  

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
RW one problem with that reasoning is that unfortunately we as a nation have leveraged ourselves to the tune of a $1 trillion deficit this year. I think that's more than Obama's first year, which is astounding considering how much effort both parties expended digging ourselves out of that morass from the crash and the Iraq War. Just like that we're back in it. In point of fact the lower and middle classes owe that money, we all do, it sucks. Let's not even get into the disastrousness of what Trump wants to do with SS/Medicare. We have to get our fiscal house in order and quick.
Click to expand...
Where I'm going with this is the marketing of the laws are to go after the uber wealthy but then they still get all these tax breaks to avoid paying and the middle class does eat a lot of the tax hikes.  Not even here to argue whether that's good or bad I jumped into the conversation to say I think it's bad to do that during a pandemic where a lot of the middle class are hurting. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
Perhaps @Sand or somebody else is more familiar with that. 
Click to expand...
Sorry - no good references come to mind on buybacks during that timeframe.

BTW, Tim, good to see you back.  The moderation has changed around here.  A couple years back Dedfin (thank goodness that dude was eventually deep sixed, what a cancer) called me much, much worse .  I reported it and nothing happened.  

 
The Commish said:
99 times out of 100 I include them both.  This happens to be the one time I left part out in haste.  To the part of the money coming back home, I thought that was reversed in the tax bill as well and is no longer the case.  Those tax havens are safe once again if I am remembering correctly, but I might not be.  Would have to look at that again.  
Click to expand...
Tax havens are safe still. Thats kind of my point. If companies that make lots of money overseas do lots of the buybacks(which I think is the case but dont know for sure) it is at least a roundabout way of getting money back into american coffers. I am not saying there isnt a better way, just saying there is at least an argument there. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
Tax havens are safe still. Thats kind of my point. If companies that make lots of money overseas do lots of the buybacks(which I think is the case but dont know for sure) it is at least a roundabout way of getting money back into american coffers. I am not saying there isnt a better way, just saying there is at least an argument there. 
Click to expand...
Might be talking about two different things here...not sure.  I am talking about the rules that went into affect saying monies made overseas would be subject to US tax if their HQ was here in the US.  There was a period of time that was going to be allotted that allowed them to move the money back here without penalty (I don't remember the specifics).  What I'm saying is, I THOUGHT those rules were rolled back in Trump's tax bill so that it was no longer necessary to bring them back since they wouldn't be subject to US tax anymore restoring the tax havens that were there previously.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramblin Wreck said:
Where I'm going with this is the marketing of the laws are to go after the uber wealthy but then they still get all these tax breaks to avoid paying and the middle class does eat a lot of the tax hikes.  Not even here to argue whether that's good or bad I jumped into the conversation to say I think it's bad to do that during a pandemic where a lot of the middle class are hurting. 
Click to expand...
My guess is income tax increases on citizens will be effective at >= $250,000 a year.  I can't see them raising taxes on the middle class.

 
Summer Wheat said:
What is the middle and lower cutoff now?
Click to expand...
Id say something along the lines of under 250,000 wont see increases as Juxt says below.  Id have to go back into more details on the legislation adn which parts were more permanent than others.

Juxtatarot said:
My guess is income tax increases on citizens will be effective at >= $250,000 a year.  I can't see them raising taxes on the middle class.
Click to expand...

 
Juxtatarot said:
My guess is income tax increases on citizens will be effective at >= $250,000 a year.  I can't see them raising taxes on the middle class.
Click to expand...
So Imagine you are living in California and making 250K where you are already the most heavily taxed demographic, now the Federal govt and the State govt will raise taxes even more.  

Not Cool.

What the govt doesn't take into account with these policies is that making 250K in California is not even remotely close to making 250 in Mississippi or Arizona or Michigan etc. etc. etc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TripItUp said:
So Imagine you are living in California where you are already the most heavily taxed demographic, now the Federal govt and the State govt will raise taxes even more.

Not Cool.
Click to expand...
Most Californians don't make over $250K.  I understand that many who do won't like the increase.

 
TripItUp said:
My CA property taxes cost 1/2 the national median household income...that's just my property taxes.
Click to expand...
Can’t you just enjoy the year round sunshine like the rest of us? It’s got a price. 
Seriously though, we need to make a huge investment to deal with, among other things, climate change. California is not going to be much good if we’re dealing with constant fires. We’ve got to change our way of living and it’s going to cost trillions of dollars. How are we to pay for this without raising taxes? 

 
timschochet said:
Can’t you just enjoy the year round sunshine like the rest of us? It’s got a price. 
Seriously though, we need to make a huge investment to deal with, among other things, climate change. California is not going to be much good if we’re dealing with constant fires. We’ve got to change our way of living and it’s going to cost trillions of dollars. How are we to pay for this without raising taxes? 
Click to expand...
As I’ve looked out to orange tinted sky for the last 2 days.  

 
TripItUp said:
My CA property taxes cost 1/2 the national median household income...that's just my property taxes.
Click to expand...
Right now the question is - can you insure it?

Based on dgreen's comment I think you might be paying less than I am in AL if it's really a 4M house.  :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993 said:
TripItUp said:
My CA property taxes cost 1/2 the national median household income...that's just my property taxes.
Click to expand...
Hence....

dkp993 said:
Removing the 10k SALT cap would help a ton for a lot of us.  
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Making his comments of voters voting against their interests something he's apparently guilty of himself (this is from same guy, different thread).

 
timschochet said:
Can’t you just enjoy the year round sunshine like the rest of us? It’s got a price. 
Seriously though, we need to make a huge investment to deal with, among other things, climate change. California is not going to be much good if we’re dealing with constant fires. We’ve got to change our way of living and it’s going to cost trillions of dollars. How are we to pay for this without raising taxes? 
Click to expand...
by holding PG&E fiscally accountable for their decades of malfeasance and demand they put their lines underground within a certain timeline or suffer stiff fines and penalties? 

 
Quint said:
timschochet said:
Can’t you just enjoy the year round sunshine like the rest of us? It’s got a price. 
Seriously though, we need to make a huge investment to deal with, among other things, climate change. California is not going to be much good if we’re dealing with constant fires. We’ve got to change our way of living and it’s going to cost trillions of dollars. How are we to pay for this without raising taxes? 
Click to expand...
by holding PG&E fiscally accountable for their decades of malfeasance and demand they put their lines underground within a certain timeline or suffer stiff fines and penalties? 
Click to expand...
Agreed.  But how does that address the climate driven issues, which I believe is the crux of what Tim was alluding too.  The 2 largest fires in the State right now (2 of the largest in our history btw) had absolutely nothing to do with PGE malfeasance.  

 
Good news: Biden is up by 9 in Pennsylvania. If Biden wins Pennsylvania it’s extremely likely he wins Wisconsin and Michigan and the election is decided. 

Bad news: Florida is a dead heat. This is bad news because previous polls showed a 3-4 point lead for Biden. We really need Florida to go blue because if it does it means an early night on November 3 and Biden’s victory will be so overwhelming that Trump can’t pull any crap. That’s the most desirable outcome, (and the one I still expect.) 

The reason for the latest dead heat in Florida appears to be that Latinos, who voted for Hillary in Florida by 27 points, are only favoring Biden by 13 points. Apparently the Republican message about Biden bringing socialism is resonating among many Latinos, particularly Cubans and Venezuelans in Miami. It was expected that these groups might be countered by Puerto Rican’s who moved to the state after the hurricane (for which Trump did so little) but those folks didn’t show up in 2018 and they seem disinterested again. Who knows? On the plus side Biden has made real inroads with seniors in Florida who decided the election last time around for Trump: they really don’t like his response to COVID. 

 
timschochet said:
Biden basically proposed a new tariff this morning. 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/09/biden-says-trump-failed-to-bring-back-michigan-jobs-and-tanked-economy-with-covid-response.html%3foutputType=amp

I know why he did it, he’s got to win Michigan. I get it. And even on this issue he’ll be a thousand times better than Trump. 
But damn, in my lifetime is any major politician from either party ever going to defend free trade again? 
Click to expand...
I keep trying to tell you Tim, in this day and age, "free trade" is a unicorn...it doesn't exist.

 
The revelations in the Woodward book may overshadow the fact that a whistleblower from national intelligence is telling us, as of yesterday, that he was ordered by the White House to hide news from Congress of Russian interference in the election, and further ordered to hide news of white supremacists, and overemphasize (or fabricate?) Antifa’s role in the protests. 

On the off chance that Trump gets re-elected, he may be the first President ever to be impeached twice. Quite the accomplishment. 

 
timschochet said:
Fine. I’d someone to speak on behalf of lowering tariffs rather than raising them, lowering controls rather than imposing new ones. How’s that? 
Click to expand...
Sign me up....we all know that "tariffs" are nothing but an increase in cost to consumers.  Since we are pretty much a consumer based economy that's problematic to us.  We are paying for the "tariff wars" this administration has started in hopes of reversing the trade deficits.  Oddly enough, our trade deficits are at the largest they've been in quite a long time, so I don't think that's working. We really need a TPP of sorts to achieve these goals.  We just can't give up our sovereignty in the deal.  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

glvsav37
Hulu and the Political Ads Issue
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
Desert_Power
Desert_Power
T J
Is Trump in the wrong if he actually believes the election was stolen?
2 3
Replies
110
Views
3K
Prinefan
P
Joe Bryant
Election Deniers Are Bad, Right?
20 21 22
Replies
1K
Views
29K
knowledge dropper
knowledge dropper

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top