NEW: Sinema Announces Support for Democrats’ $740 Billion Tax-and-Spend Bill After Manchin Strikes Deal with Schumer

TigerGrowls

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
10,825
6,147
113
Not good!


By Cristina Laila
Published August 4, 2022 at 10:15pm
manchin-sinema-screengrab-.jpg

Democrat Senator Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) said she will support the Democrats’ $740 billion tax-and-spend bill.
Sinema was the last Democrat holdout after Manchin struck a deal with Schumer.
Last week Sinema dodged questions from reporters when asked if she would join Manchin and move the bill forward.
TRENDING: BREAKING: Election Desk HQ, AP Call the Race -- KARI LAKE WINS GOP PRIMARY IN ARIZONA! ...Update: Kari Wins EVERY COUNTY in Arizona!

Sinema’s announcement comes after Democrat Senator Joe Manchin negotiated a deal with Schumer to support the bill.
Manchin on Sunday absurdly claimed Biden’s ‘inflation reduction act’ lowers energy costs and doesn’t raise taxes.
Manchin is lying.
The new spending bill does the complete opposite.
Penn Wharton, Moody’s and the Tax Foundation all said the new bill will NOT reduce inflation.
“The Democrats’ Bidenflation Scam would INCREASE taxes on oil by $25B. And as inflation goes up, so does the tax!” the RNC said. “Natural gas isn’t spared either. Industry experts warn the methane tax in the bill would increase natural gas costs by 17%, or $100 a year for the average family.”
The tax-and-spend bill will be passed through budget reconciliation (no Republican votes needed) so it still needs approval from the Senate Parliamentarian.
“Subject to the Parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward,” Sinema said.
According to USA Today, Sinema “said she negotiated the removal of a provision to increase taxes on carried interests targeting wealthy investors, resolving a key difference that had held back her support.”
“I am pleased to report that we have reached an agreement on the Inflation Reduction Act that I believe will receive the support of the entire Senate Democratic conference,” Schumer said.
The Senate will vote on the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ on Saturday.
 

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
We are so fkd. Inflation reduction act is something straight out of idiocracy.

please spare the bazillionaires who hide behind carried interest to avoid taxes while the rest of us get a pineapple shoved up our hoop. Human trashpile warren buffet pays himself 100k a year salary he pays taxes on while when worth 100bb or so - didnt look up exactly what the absurd number sits at currently. that pos gets treated like americas folksy grandpa because he says progressive things the media likes like “my secretary pays more in taxes than i do”. Yea dkhead cause you pay her prob 500k salary versus your 100k…but nothing on your 100bb net worth. How people are so blind to his scumbag nature because the media only writes puff pieces about him that make him look like he cares is an indictment of this countries intelligence. Bunch of idiots who cheer who theyre told the good guys are.

personally im against almost any taxation and the federal govt should prob just be responsible for national security. So im not advocating for taxing carried interest or anything else per se - buffets an extreme example and at lower net worths that would bring liquidity issues for families and businesses among other things. I just fkn hate that im about to get taken for even more by these useless morons in dc while that azzhole and others in his sphere dont get hit for anything. Hes just the worst of them because of the fawning image he goes out of his way to have painted of him that everyone just goes along with. And thats just the first reason to detest that weirdo.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
This is what happens when you have people that don't know squat about economics driving our economy. This is not what was intended.
 
Last edited:

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
This is what happens when you have people that don't know squad about economics driving our economy. This is not what was intended.
Oh they know enough to know this is a crock of sht. They just dont give a fk. Why do bills like this that allegedly simply pass whats headlined need to be hundreds or thousands of pages? Do the people voting on them have the slightest idea what theyre voting on? The first answer is, beyond the stupid language of legalese, spelling out all the special favors they have kicked in for themselves, friends, and family. The second answer is no. As long as they get what they want they dont care how much damage it does to everyone else.
 

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
Not good!


By Cristina Laila
Published August 4, 2022 at 10:15pm
manchin-sinema-screengrab-.jpg

Democrat Senator Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) said she will support the Democrats’ $740 billion tax-and-spend bill.
Sinema was the last Democrat holdout after Manchin struck a deal with Schumer.
Last week Sinema dodged questions from reporters when asked if she would join Manchin and move the bill forward.

TRENDING: BREAKING: Election Desk HQ, AP Call the Race -- KARI LAKE WINS GOP PRIMARY IN ARIZONA! ...Update: Kari Wins EVERY COUNTY in Arizona!

Sinema’s announcement comes after Democrat Senator Joe Manchin negotiated a deal with Schumer to support the bill.
Manchin on Sunday absurdly claimed Biden’s ‘inflation reduction act’ lowers energy costs and doesn’t raise taxes.
Manchin is lying.
The new spending bill does the complete opposite.
Penn Wharton, Moody’s and the Tax Foundation all said the new bill will NOT reduce inflation.
“The Democrats’ Bidenflation Scam would INCREASE taxes on oil by $25B. And as inflation goes up, so does the tax!” the RNC said. “Natural gas isn’t spared either. Industry experts warn the methane tax in the bill would increase natural gas costs by 17%, or $100 a year for the average family.”
The tax-and-spend bill will be passed through budget reconciliation (no Republican votes needed) so it still needs approval from the Senate Parliamentarian.
“Subject to the Parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward,” Sinema said.
According to USA Today, Sinema “said she negotiated the removal of a provision to increase taxes on carried interests targeting wealthy investors, resolving a key difference that had held back her support.”
“I am pleased to report that we have reached an agreement on the Inflation Reduction Act that I believe will receive the support of the entire Senate Democratic conference,” Schumer said.
The Senate will vote on the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ on Saturday.

I would encourage everyone in this thread to read the bill when available, vs. forming your opinions on it via right or left wing propaganda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jonada

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
I would encourage everyone in this thread to read the bill when available, vs. forming your opinions on it via right or left wing propaganda.
Agree with this, and youd be doing more than anyone voting on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

OleFastball

Valles Marineris
Jun 8, 2021
678
871
93
We are so fkd. Inflation reduction act is something straight out of idiocracy.

please spare the bazillionaires who hide behind carried interest to avoid taxes while the rest of us get a pineapple shoved up our hoop. Human trashpile warren buffet pays himself 100k a year salary he pays taxes on while when worth 100bb or so - didnt look up exactly what the absurd number sits at currently. that pos gets treated like americas folksy grandpa because he says progressive things the media likes like “my secretary pays more in taxes than i do”. Yea dkhead cause you pay her prob 500k salary versus your 100k…but nothing on your 100bb net worth. How people are so blind to his scumbag nature because the media only writes puff pieces about him that make him look like he cares is an indictment of this countries intelligence. Bunch of idiots who cheer who theyre told the good guys are.

personally im against almost any taxation and the federal govt should prob just be responsible for national security. So im not advocating for taxing carried interest or anything else per se - buffets an extreme example and at lower net worths that would bring liquidity issues for families and businesses among other things. I just fkn hate that im about to get taken for even more by these useless morons in dc while that azzhole and others in his sphere dont get hit for anything. Hes just the worst of them because of the fawning image he goes out of his way to have painted of him that everyone just goes along with. And thats just the first reason to detest that weirdo.

Can't be mad at buffet. Be mad at the people who write the code. Don't hate the player, hate the game i think the kids say.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
I would encourage everyone in this thread to read the bill when available, vs. forming your opinions on it via right or left wing propaganda.

I agree wholeheartedly with this post. Read every bill you can (some are ridiculously long) and take in what it says for yourself. It's often worse than the media portrays!
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
Oh they know enough to know this is a crock of sht. They just dont give a fk. Why do bills like this that allegedly simply pass whats headlined need to be hundreds or thousands of pages? Do the people voting on them have the slightest idea what theyre voting on? The first answer is, beyond the stupid language of legalese, spelling out all the special favors they have kicked in for themselves, friends, and family. The second answer is no. As long as they get what they want they dont care how much damage it does to everyone else.

The thing that amazes me most is that people seem to think corporations and businesses pay taxes... It's remarkable that people are economically illiterate enough to think that ever happens. This bill has a nice little bit of that which is terrible for Americans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigdad

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
Can't be mad at buffet. Be mad at the people who write the code. Don't hate the player, hate the game i think the kids say.
I wasnt taking issue with his actions, the rules are the rules. I take issue with the image he crafts with his message of the rich dont pay enough taxes while actively avoiding paying taxes. So people who get paid high salaries but not nearly the kind of wealth he has pay the tab as “the rich”. And people slob his knob because the media paints a fawning image and they cant do any thinking for themselves. Hes a pos. You run around saying the rich should pay more but the rules just dont allow you to? Then write the gd check old man. Also some serious skeletons in that closet
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113

there's some not terrible parts of this bill that i think should get bipartisan support

That's terrible because again, it imposes taxes on businesses. Taxing a business is just another income tax. The D's have learned from Europe you can tax the hell out of businesses and no one will bat an eye because due to being educated in government run schools, most people just don't have the economic understanding to realize that businesses don't pay taxes. They just pass it on to their customers in the form of elevated prices. Even the notion of taxing businesses more so they will pay more is a double taxation in and of itself. You can't tax both ends of things and have it be anything but a gamed system to empower government. It must be one or the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
The thing that amazes me most is that people seem to think corporations and businesses pay taxes... It's remarkable that people are economically illiterate enough to think that ever happens. This bill has a nice little bit of that which is terrible for Americans.

Businesses and Corporations dont pay taxes? I need to call my CPA.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
Businesses and Corporations dont pay taxes? I need to call my CPA.

Materials cost + staffing + infrastructure + margin + taxes = cost to customers

Households
Income (lowered due to taxes) - income taxes - consumption taxes = net income - added costs due to taxes on businesses = shitty economics
 
Last edited:

WapPride

Valles Marineris
Mar 17, 2021
1,170
1,438
113
That's terrible because again, it imposes taxes on businesses. Taxing a business is just another income tax. The D's have learned from Europe you can tax the hell out of businesses and no one will bat an eye because due to being educated in government run schools, most people just don't have the economic understanding to realize that businesses don't pay taxes. They just pass it on to their customers in the form of elevated prices. Even the notion of taxing businesses more so they will pay more is a double taxation in and of itself. You can't tax both ends of things and have it be anything but a gamed system to empower government. It must be one or the other.
what kind of jibberish is this? is your implication that if you remove all taxes from businesses that prices would just randomly drop? as if they wouldn't continue along at their current prices and improve profit margins?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nytigerfan

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
what kind of jibberish is this? is your implication that if you remove all taxes from businesses that prices would just randomly drop? as if they wouldn't continue along at their current prices and improve profit margins?

Yes, prices would drop. Just as they would if we stopped having employer provided health insurance. Everything would prove if we just had vision and courage. There are ways to solve every problem. We totally lack vision in this country. We're totally frozen in place by scare tactics, small mindedness and corruption.
 

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
Materials cost + staffing + infrastructure + margin + taxes = cost to customers

Households
Income (lowered due to taxes) - income taxes - consumption taxes = net income - added costs due to taxes on businesses = shitty economics

This is about as lame as the old conservative argument that taxing people at higher incomes will disincentivize them to earn more money.

C Corps will absolutely raise prices based on all the factors you listed, minus taxes. They raise their prices whenever they can, within the parameters of price elasticity. If they based that on taxes paid, they would quickly overprice and kill demand.

If you what you say is accurate, then they would be in a loop.

Raise prices = More revenue = more taxes = raise prices = more revenue = more taxes = raise prices = more revenue = more taxes
 

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
Yes, prices would drop. Just as they would if we stopped having employer provided health insurance. Everything would prove if we just had vision and courage. There are ways to solve every problem. We totally lack vision in this country. We're totally frozen in place by scare tactics, small mindedness and corruption.

Maybe. In fantasy land.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
Maybe. In fantasy land.

This is why you tend to drift toward authoritarian control over every part of society. Unfortunately you don't know squat. Gas prices are an easy example of this we see in our country now. Where I live, gas is about $3.59 a gallon. In California, gas is significantly more expensive. I believe it's well over $5 per gallon still. The gas is different in terms of the formula and that cost is passed on to the customer. There's also the vastly higher taxes in the state of California which are also passed on to the customer. Businesses are not going to pay taxes. They are going to pass it on and so we end up taxing people twice. The margins on gasoline are pretty much the same regardless of where you go. But I get to pay a lot less per gallon than people in California do. This is a very simplistic example but it makes the point. There are myriad of the products where you could provide similar examples.
 

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
This is why you tend to drift toward authoritarian control over every part of society. Unfortunately you don't know squat. Gas prices are an easy example of this we see in our country now. Where I live, gas is about $3.59 a gallon. In California, gas is significantly more expensive. I believe it's well over $5 per gallon still. The gas is different in terms of the formula and that cost is passed on to the customer. There's also the vastly higher taxes in the state of California which are also passed on to the customer. Businesses are not going to pay taxes. They are going to pass it on and so we end up taxing people twice. The margins on gasoline are pretty much the same regardless of where you go. But I get to pay a lot less per gallon than people in California do. This is a very simplistic example but it makes the point. There are myriad of the products where you could provide similar examples.

Its a lot more than taxes. Everything is more expensive in California and NYC. It is not because of taxes that corps are paying, it is because people make a lot more money in those areas and the businesses know they can cgarge more. Again, price elasticity.

For example, I recently drove from Columbia to the Isle of Palms. These locations are all in the state of SC. Gas was much more expensive in Cola and Charleston than in the small towns in between. Same state taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374

WapPride

Valles Marineris
Mar 17, 2021
1,170
1,438
113
Yes, prices would drop. Just as they would if we stopped having employer provided health insurance. Everything would prove if we just had vision and courage. There are ways to solve every problem. We totally lack vision in this country. We're totally frozen in place by scare tactics, small mindedness and corruption.
my guy you're living in fantasy land if you think companies are just going to slash prices and lose that potential increased profit margin. in the 90s waste companies implemented something called an "environmental fee" for disposing of waste in landfills and it was meant to be a one time event to offset costs associated with landfill regulations that first year. after the year ended and the regulations reverted back the major waste haulers/LF owners in the industry instead of canceling the 10% environmental fee decided to make it a permanent charge because of the massive revenue increase they saw over that first year.

companies will not lose out on potential revenue if they see a complete tax reduction. to think otherwise is to just have a complete misunderstanding of how businesses operate.
 

yoshi121374

Lake Baikal
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2006
3,794
8,323
113
Williamston,SC
That's terrible because again, it imposes taxes on businesses. Taxing a business is just another income tax. The D's have learned from Europe you can tax the hell out of businesses and no one will bat an eye because due to being educated in government run schools, most people just don't have the economic understanding to realize that businesses don't pay taxes. They just pass it on to their customers in the form of elevated prices. Even the notion of taxing businesses more so they will pay more is a double taxation in and of itself. You can't tax both ends of things and have it be anything but a gamed system to empower government. It must be one or the other.

Bro, I generally like you, but you have an irrational and frankly distorted view of Schools. This seems to be a constant refrain with you.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
my guy you're living in fantasy land if you think companies are just going to slash prices and lose that potential increased profit margin. in the 90s waste companies implemented something called an "environmental fee" for disposing of waste in landfills and it was meant to be a one time event to offset costs associated with landfill regulations that first year. after the year ended and the regulations reverted back the major waste haulers/LF owners in the industry instead of canceling the 10% environmental fee decided to make it a permanent charge because of the massive revenue increase they saw over that first year.

companies will not lose out on potential revenue if they see a complete tax reduction. to think otherwise is to just have a complete misunderstanding of how businesses operate.

If there was a movement to dissolve all business taxation and you coupled it with other policies to ensure maximum competition, prices would absolutely fall. It's just economics 101 to see that reality. Public pressure over the understanding of this reality would drive it and competition would cement it.

We have allowed the creation of a system where small businesses can't compete with in numerous sectors. We have allowed far too much consolidation within a vast number of industries. This isn't good for costs because we thwart competition. What you're talking about is different because those fees go back and forth. In an industry that is subject to government fees like waste disposal, they are going to do all they can to keep margins growing. Plus a lot of those types of facilities were in the process of being annexed into city and county government control back then. That being said, I know what you're talking about goes on. It goes on in my industry too. But it's nearly always from industries that are tied into some form of government control or regulation beyond what would be considered normal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
Bro, I generally like you, but you have an irrational and frankly distorted view of Schools. This seems to be a constant refrain with you.

I like you too. You always get frustrated with me about this but it seems like you don't try to understand what I am saying. It's nothing against your wife or other teachers. Simply put, a government should NEVER have any role, be it funding, control or implementation, in the education of its citizens. As that has taken greater hold in our society, people have generally trended toward more and more government control while becoming more and more ignorant about fundamental aspects of how our government and society should function. Not to mention they do a horrendous job educating the people the system was subsidized to help. Our family has experienced both, been employed in both and seen the benefits and drawbacks of both. Has yours?
 
  • Like
Reactions: clemsonalex

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
Its a lot more than taxes. Everything is more expensive in California and NYC. It is not because of taxes that corps are paying, it is because people make a lot more money in those areas and the businesses know they can cgarge more. Again, price elasticity.

For example, I recently drove from Columbia to the Isle of Palms. These locations are all in the state of SC. Gas was much more expensive in Cola and Charleston than in the small towns in between. Same state taxes.

That's a great example with respect to South Carolina. In Columbia the tax rate is 1% less than in the Charleston area. That's before you even get into all the other taxes that are added in the Charleston area like hospitality taxes, etc. Government never fails to raise costs in areas with high appeal/population/demand, etc. The demand to live in/around and visit Charleston is dramatically higher than it is to visit Columbia. There is a limit on land, shoreline, facilities, etc. in both areas and demand is what raises the costs so much. I understand what you're saying there but what I am referring to is the rate of taxation. That is also higher.

California has an average gas tax of $.6698 per gallon. South Carolina is $.3600 per gallon. This trend is generally accurate all the way down the line with each state related to taxation. It just costs more in California because that state can never tax enough to satisfy its appetite. It also is a state that has done everything in its power to limit competition so it can control everything. So while California may very well be the most beautiful state in the US and because of that prices would be higher due to demand, it's also true that this is dramatically exacerbated by the fact that the state has a very muscular government that seeks to gain power over almost all aspects of life there.
 

yoshi121374

Lake Baikal
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2006
3,794
8,323
113
Williamston,SC
I like you too. You always get frustrated with me about this but it seems like you don't try to understand what I am saying. It's nothing against your wife or other teachers. Simply put, a government should NEVER have any role, be it funding, control or implementation, in the education of its citizens. As that has taken greater hold in our society, people have generally trended toward more and more government control while becoming more and more ignorant about fundamental aspects of how our government and society should function. Not to mention they do a horrendous job educating the people the system was subsidized to help. Our family has experienced both, been employed in both and seen the benefits and drawbacks of both. Has yours?

I and the vast majority of Americans disagree with your premise here. The best investment we as a nation can make is in the education and training of our citizenry. This develops our citizens to be better employees,for America to stay competitive on a global scale, and to continue to be one of the best countries in the world.

The basic difference between us is this, you had a bad experience with public education that you have now assumed is the experience everyone is having all over the country. And you believe that all state run education is failing.

I have seen the good of education, how it develops low income students and gives them a fighting chance. I know that it is a valuable resource. I know it can do better, but I know it's not as bad as you seem to feel it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kudzuking

yoshi121374

Lake Baikal
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2006
3,794
8,323
113
Williamston,SC
That's a great example with respect to South Carolina. In Columbia the tax rate is 1% less than in the Charleston area. That's before you even get into all the other taxes that are added in the Charleston area like hospitality taxes, etc. Government never fails to raise costs in areas with high appeal/population/demand, etc. The demand to live in/around and visit Charleston is dramatically higher than it is to visit Columbia. There is a limit on land, shoreline, facilities, etc. in both areas and demand is what raises the costs so much. I understand what you're saying there but what I am referring to is the rate of taxation. That is also higher.

California has an average gas tax of $.6698 per gallon. South Carolina is $.3600 per gallon. This trend is generally accurate all the way down the line with each state related to taxation. It just costs more in California because that state can never tax enough to satisfy its appetite. It also is a state that has done everything in its power to limit competition so it can control everything. So while California may very well be the most beautiful state in the US and because of that prices would be higher due to demand, it's also true that this is dramatically exacerbated by the fact that the state has a very muscular government that seeks to gain power over almost all aspects of life there.

California also has vastly better infrastructure and roads than South Carolina does. Gas tax is the quintessential consumption tax. It costs more to those who use the roads the most. Seems like it's a good thing?
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
California also has vastly better infrastructure and roads than South Carolina does. Gas tax is the quintessential consumption tax. It costs more to those who use the roads the most. Seems like it's a good thing?

I have no idea if this is correct or not. I've only been to San Diego. It was nice. Just not sure it was vastly better. What do you think is better? The cost of construction is MUCH higher there and the landscape presents a lot of challenges.
 

Willence

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 26, 2003
10,353
19,717
113
I and the vast majority of Americans disagree with your premise here. The best investment we as a nation can make is in the education and training of our citizenry. This develops our citizens to be better employees,for America to stay competitive on a global scale, and to continue to be one of the best countries in the world.

The basic difference between us is this, you had a bad experience with public education that you have now assumed is the experience everyone is having all over the country. And you believe that all state run education is failing.

I have seen the good of education, how it develops low income students and gives them a fighting chance. I know that it is a valuable resource. I know it can do better, but I know it's not as bad as you seem to feel it is.

I didn't have a bad experience in the way you're talking about. We are in the best public school district in Georgia. Don't assume we have some tainted view based on a horrible situation. In our area, we have top rated schools and the students who attend them are just not getting what they need if you look at across the board understanding of things. Our area is wealthy, whatever happens the kids here will be fine. I'm talking about the abject failure that is public education in rural and urban settings. The numbers don't lie. By any statistical measure the schools are failing. I'd love for you to show me a poor area where they are doing well? Show me one poor, socioeconomically disadvantaged area where there is a great school. I'll hang up and listen. FYI, my wife taught in four different title 1 schools over her teaching career in three states. So this isn't something that's just being hoisted out there from ignorance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chetsu

nytigerfan

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2004
7,111
8,322
113
That's a great example with respect to South Carolina. In Columbia the tax rate is 1% less than in the Charleston area. That's before you even get into all the other taxes that are added in the Charleston area like hospitality taxes, etc. Government never fails to raise costs in areas with high appeal/population/demand, etc. The demand to live in/around and visit Charleston is dramatically higher than it is to visit Columbia. There is a limit on land, shoreline, facilities, etc. in both areas and demand is what raises the costs so much. I understand what you're saying there but what I am referring to is the rate of taxation. That is also higher.

California has an average gas tax of $.6698 per gallon. South Carolina is $.3600 per gallon. This trend is generally accurate all the way down the line with each state related to taxation. It just costs more in California because that state can never tax enough to satisfy its appetite. It also is a state that has done everything in its power to limit competition so it can control everything. So while California may very well be the most beautiful state in the US and because of that prices would be higher due to demand, it's also true that this is dramatically exacerbated by the fact that the state has a very muscular government that seeks to gain power over almost all aspects of life there.

we are never going to agree on this. I will just say that I own a few businesses, and if my tax was eradicated tomorrow I would not be running to slash prices. Neither would my clients. I already compete with companies out In Utah. They pay lower taxes already and their pricing is higher than mine in lost cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374

yoshi121374

Lake Baikal
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2006
3,794
8,323
113
Williamston,SC
I didn't have a bad experience in the way you're talking about. We are in the best public school district in Georgia. Don't assume we have some tainted view based on a horrible situation. In our area, we have top rated schools and the students who attend them are just not getting what they need if you look at across the board understanding of things. Our area is wealthy, whatever happens the kids here will be fine. I'm talking about the abject failure that is public education in rural and urban settings. The numbers don't lie. By any statistical measure the schools are failing. I'd love for you to show me a poor area where they are doing well? Show me one poor, socioeconomically disadvantaged area where there is a great school. I'll hang up and listen. FYI, my wife taught in four different title 1 schools over her teaching career in three states. So this isn't something that's just being hoisted out there from ignorance.

Anderson District One in South Carolina. Very low income and one of the top districts in the State.


Cedar Grove Elementary School(my wife's school)

Over 80% free and reduced lunch.

 

CUT93

Lake Baikal
Gold Member
Jan 8, 2006
3,947
6,847
113
29370
I would encourage everyone in this thread to read the bill when available, vs. forming your opinions on it via right or left wing propaganda.
How about we listen to non partisan tax groups and economist who say this is will increase inflation over the near term if it does anything.
 

tigdad

The Mariana Trench
Gold Member
Sep 26, 2001
1,742
2,815
113
The thing that amazes me most is that people seem to think corporations and businesses pay taxes... It's remarkable that people are economically illiterate enough to think that ever happens. This bill has a nice little bit of that which is terrible for Americans.
Because of the ignorance of the American people, Dems and some Pubs are able to tax the blood out of us while telling us they are only taxing corporations. It’s impossible to tax a corporation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Willence

scotchtiger

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 15, 2005
18,595
12,788
113
Mount Pleasant, SC
For example, I recently drove from Columbia to the Isle of Palms. These locations are all in the state of SC. Gas was much more expensive in Cola and Charleston than in the small towns in between. Same state taxes.

Should have looked me up. Would have been happy to buy you a beer. I’m 1 exit from the IOP exit on 526.
 

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
There are some legitimate pockets that aren’t paying enough in taxes. You know who is though? The family making $400K+/yr - the threshold Biden publicly set as who he would target for tax increases.
This is the issue. “Taxing the rich” really means that upper middle class trying to work their way into real wealth getting cornholed. Im against pretty much all taxes in general, the federal government is useless. But fk these pricks always taking aim at me. Taking over half of what someone earns is criminal. Burn it down and start over. Not paying more to hire 100k irs stormtroopers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls

TigerGrowls

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
10,825
6,147
113

TigerGrowls

The Jack Dunlap Club
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
10,825
6,147
113
Everyone get your finances straight. Financial proctol exams on the way.


Democrats’ ‘Inflation Reduction’ Bill To Make The IRS Larger Than FBI, Border Patrol, State Department Combined​

By Alicia Powe
Published August 7, 2022 at 7:43pm
irs-building-sign.jpg

The Senate on Sunday passed the Democrats’ sweeping economic package that would allocate billions of taxpayer dollars to facilitate the expansion of the Internal Revenue Service’s workforce.
The IRS would receive $80 billion if H.R. 5376, the $750 billion “Inflation Reduction Act” passes the House and lands on Biden’s desk. The funding would mark a 600 percent increase from 2021 when the bureau received $12.6 billion.
The reconciliation package would also double the current IRS workforce by hiring an additional 87,000 employees to the bureau’s staff of 78,661 employees, a move that would make the IRS larger than the Pentagon, State Department, FBI and Border Patrol.
“The Pentagon houses roughly 27,000 employees, according to the Defense Department, while a human resources fact sheet says the State Department employs just over 77,243 staff. The FBI employs approximately 35,000 people, according to the agency’s website, and Customs and Border Protection says it employs 19,536 Border Patrol agents,” the Washington Free Beacon reports.
TRENDING: EXCLUSIVE: Unmasking the Biden-Harris Administration's International Human Trafficking Disaster - Interviews with Illegal Migrants
Democrats claim the majority of additional revue from IRS audits would come from the wealthy upper class, but a study from the Joint Committee on Taxation shows the audits would cripple the middle class, the publication notes:
The additional IRS funding is integral to the Democrats’ reconciliation package. A Congressional Budget Office analysis found the hiring of new IRS agents would result in more than $200 billion in additional revenue for the federal government over the next decade. More than half of that funding is specifically earmarked for “enforcement,” meaning tax audits and other responsibilities such as “digital asset monitoring.”

The majority of new revenue from IRS audits and scrutiny will come from those making less than $200,000 a year, according to a study from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. The committee found that just 4 to 9 percent of money raised will come from those making more than $500,000, contrary to Democrats’ claims that new IRS agents are necessary to target millionaires and billionaires who hide income.
The Senate voted to pass H.R. 5376 on a party-line vote, with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie. The bill goes to the House, where it will likely pass.
GOP lawmakers warn the Democrat’s attempt to expand the IRS is an attempt to further weaponize the federal bureau against the middle class.
“Those IRS agents are designed to come after you, they’re not designed to come after the billionaires and the big corporations. They’re designed to come after small businesses and working families across this country,” cautioned Sen. Ted Cruz, R. -Texas, on Sunday. “The Democrats are making the IRS bigger than the Pentagon, plus the Department of State, plus the FBI, plus the Border Patrol combined. This is a massive power grab.”

“I introduced an amendment to say, ‘don’t create 87,000 new IRS agents’ — every Democrat voted ‘no,’” Cruz continued. “They are bound and determined to try to ram this bill through.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R. -SC, warns the legislation under the guise of inflation is a “fraud” and a “lie.”
“The CBO says next year, inflation will go up or down 0.1 percent. That’s not much of a reduction,” Graham explained on a Friday appearance on FNC’s Fox and Friends. “This bill has tax increases on imported oil. The taxes in the bill will be passed on to consumers at the $75,000 or below level. The subsidies for Obamacare go to people who make $300,000 and $400,000 as a family of four. It is a bunch of bs that it will reduce inflation. It is about as accurate as saying the border’s secure and the Taliban didn’t know Zawahiri was in Kabul. This is a fraud. It’s a lie. It’s going to make every problem worse.”
 

Jjh7

Valles Marineris
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2016
1,130
1,508
113
I wonder if theres gonna be a theme to who gets audited…sure they wont stoop to egregious lows with their interpretations of the most obscure tax laws in order to generate violation headlines for targeted individuals.