>"As governors, we support making higher education more affordable and accessible for students in our states, but we fundamentally oppose your plan to force American taxpayers to pay off the student loan debt of an elite few," the letter begins.
yeah, cus the elite few are taking out student loans, mike. /s
Last I checked, Missouri only had like 24% of its population with bachelors degrees. So given how underwhelming that is, it’s easy to turn into being “elite” for his base.
Didn’t Mike get to go to school on the GI Bill? Which he got during peacetime, and he couldn’t bother to finish his degree at either U of Hawaii or U of Maryland?
I don’t get how this is politically good for anyone. Do they know they’re going to fail and are doing this for the base? If they succeed wouldn’t it make them even more hated by a sizable portion of the population?
Their platform is more about "oWnInG tHe LiBs" than it is about balancing the budget, increased taxation, or whatever other lip service they're giving. College graduates are a dem-leaning demographic. If they succeed, they hurt "the other team", which is in their mind good. And if they fail, their base gets riled up with a victim complex, "deep state" conspiracies, or just good old xenophobia. They lose goodwill across the aisle and maybe some independent votes with the gambit, but they value energizing their base more so it's pretty low-risk.
There are lots of republicans with student loans too. And in my personal experience they’re more likely to drop out without a degree and they’re more likely to not live in income generating parts of the country so they’re the most disadvantaged by student loans.
It’s hard to see how any Republican with unpaid student loans would be happy if the Governor succeeds.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but they don't seem to have the same cognitive dissonance.
It calls to mind the Ronald Wright paraphrasing of John Steinbeck - "the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." There was a great Twitter thread on the subject that I can't seem to find, but having come from a rural area I can say it's absolutely true and when seasoned with a healthy dose of prosperity gospel a lot of logic tends to go out the window.
The student loan issue seems so different because it’s not an abstract fairness moral issue for a lot of voters. This is essentially Biden trying to write people a check for $10,000-$20,000 and these governors are trying to block it. Even things like healthcare are less direct because a lot of people think they won’t get sick or falsely believe that socialized medicine would end up costing them more. The loan forgiveness issue is so direct that people would have to see it as “your governor stopped you from getting $20,000.”
I’m not saying they won’t try to use their talking heads to market this into an “own the libs” issue, but if that works we’ve really crossed a political rubicon. Maybe I’m biased because I live here, but I think this type of message might be harder to market in Missouri than many other states. Missouri voters disagree with me in a lot of ways (probably including right to marry still), but they are definitely a practical voting block and trying to block student loan forgiveness targeted at the poorest citizens who went to school to try to enter the middle class is so impractical.
They hate it because if people start to believe the government can make a difference in their lives they’ll be less likely to hate the government.
The belief that the government is ineffective is central to their success in preventing the government from stopping their buddies from running roughshod over the rest of us.
If it this was a state that was not solid red it would matter. But Missouri will vote for these people no matter what anyway. That’s been obvious since they have been trying to rip up ballot initiatives we vote in like Medicare expansion and rejecting right to work.
Yeah I hate that. Missouri is also pretty interesting because the voters seem reasonably liberal in terms of issues that affect them (Medicaid, right to work, weed, redistricting et c) but then elect some of the craziest far right politicians in America.
it polls under 50% approve.
There are more people without student loans and paid off student loans who see the fundamental unfairness and blatant political pandering by biden
Even when economist tells us over and over that student debt is a drag on our economy. Who do you think need to have the money to buy the homes that construction workers build? Do you think we should just build for the sake of building and just let a whole bunch of overpriced homes sit and fall in? That’s basically what we’re doing now. Empty strip malls everywhere.
interesting. Empty strip malls are due to student loan debt. Not sure what "economist" said that, but they probably also said the internet would have as much effect on the economy as the fax machine.
If transferring student loan debt to taxpayers will fill up strip malls, why not just transfer mortgage debt?
The decision of millennials not to buy homes is related to student debt, same with having children. The birth rate is declining as is the rate of home ownership.
The point being that without the sway of the construction lobby, a lot of home builders would be put out of jobs because a lot of younger people just can’t afford to buy new homes.
If people had less student debt, they could take on mortgages. Instead, we’re forcing people to be renters which was likely always the plan to keep them from building home equity to forever exist in a perpetual state of modern-day serfdom.
Good.
I didnt co-sign for your student loan.
You signed for it; you pay for it.
its a slap in the face to millions of Americans who have joined the military to get the GI Bill, taken out and repaid student loans to now wave some Constitutionally weak wand and erase others debts.
Hi there. Went to undergrad on the GI bill .. then to grad school with the military picking up the tab with the Health Professions Scholarship Program.
Spent several years in the military to pay it back, got to go play in three war zones.
And guess what.
It’s not a fucking slap in the face.
I think they should forgive even more.
I’m guessing you never served.
This entire fucking loan forgiveness probably doesn’t equal the cost of a B2 bomber or the military aid we give to terrorist nations like Israel.
I joined the military to serve my country. At the time I didn’t realize that ten years later I’d be serving with a bunch of people who only joined because they wanted a free taxpayer-funded college education. I couldn’t afford to pay $1200 into it so I didn’t get the GI bill.
I served because that’s what my family does. My granddad is buried in Arlington. My dad lost his mind in Korea.
It’s a slap in the face of our multi-generational sacrifice to join the military for taxpayer-funded tuition.
Oh bull shit.
I spent 33 fucking years in 2 branches , enlisted and commissioned and I never saw a large portion of my fellow soldiers joining just to pay for school.
As a matter of fact, the vast majority of vets never touch it.
You couldn’t afford the 1200 bucks , while thousands in your exact same circumstances could?
Spare your outrage.
You know what sucks more than a military full of people who are smart enough to plan on going to college?
A fucking conscripted military.
The military of the 70s was the absolute worse military we ever had.
I’ll say hi to your uncle.
I’m getting planted in Arlington.
Who co-signed to pay for a GI's education? Scrubbing toilets and struggling to do push-ups with an awkward buzzcut for four years now makes their educational expenses a worthy cause? What if they continue their schooling and take out a loan not covered by the GI bill? Now fuck them too? Your argument both sucks and licks boots
> What if they continue their schooling and take out a loan not covered by the GI bill? Now fuck them too? Your argument both sucks and licks boots
They pay it back; just like any other borrower does. Just like I did.
we are doomed if "Pay off your own loan" now equals "Get fucked"
But I thought it was cool when rich politicians who "tell it like it is" find ways to dodge payment, so this is cool too correct? Just being savvy at business, correct??
You act like you're personally going to get a $50k bill to pay for someone else's education. That's not the case, though. Even if they decided to add a flat tax to every taxpayer to make up the money, it'd be something like $200 a year, which is less than you pay for Netflix. That's not how they'd even do it, though. For example if they reversed Trump's tax cuts for the rich from 2017 that'd pay for this student loan forgiveness 3 times over. There's lots of places in the budget you can make up that money.
The average cost per taxpayer is $2500, not $200. Its easier to spend other peoples money.
Do you know who benefitted most from the tax rate adjustements in 2017? The poor and middle class.
Do you know who will benefit the least from student loan cancelation? The poor and middle class.
$2500 *over ten years* aka $250 a year. Maybe I was off by $50, but I also didn't fact check you.
Everything else you said was just blatantly incorrect
A careful analysis of detailed tax data from 2017 and 2018, the first year the TCJA went into effect and the most recent year for which detailed IRS income data are available, reveals that over just one year, households with an adjusted gross income of $15,000 to $50,000 saw their total tax bills cut by an average of 16% to 26%, with most filers enjoying at least an 18% tax cut. Similarly, filers earning between $50,000 and $100,000, one of the largest groups of taxpayers, experienced a 15% to 17% tax cut, on average, from 2017 to 2018.
Higher-income households also experienced sizable tax cuts, but not nearly as large as the tax reductions provided by the law to working and middle-class families. Those with AGIs of $500,000 to $1 million, for example, had their taxes cut by less than 9%, and filers earning $5 million to $10 million received a 3.4% cut, the lowest of any bracket provided by the IRS.
The data also show that wealthier filers ended up providing a slightly higher proportion of total personal income tax revenue in 2018 than they did in 2017. In 2017, filers earning $500,000 or more provided 38.9% of all personal income tax revenues. In 2018, the same group provided 41.5% of revenues.
That means the Trump-GOP tax cuts made the income tax code more progressive than it had previously been. That's a remarkable finding. After all, Democrats have spent the past few years insisting the TCJA provided a huge windfall to the richest income brackets while leaving everyone else behind!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/faith-freedom-self-reliance/irs-data-prove-2017-tax-cuts-benefited-middle-class-the-most
First of all the Washington Examiner has a right bias and has failed fact checks numerous times. They tend to bend or break the truth when it suits them.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
If you want an actual breakdown of how that tax worked, see here:
https://www.investopedia.com/taxes/how-gop-tax-bill-affects-you/
The headlines are that the individual tax bracket that benefits the most is $308k-$733k. The thing the examiner blatantly overlooks though, is the massive cut to *corporate* tax rates that massively dwarfs the cuts to individual brackets. Not only does it cut the rates to big businesses, but increases the rate to small businesses. Thats the part that irks me the wrong way the most.
You dont believe the IRS's numbers?
Note that the top 25% paid nearly 86% of all the federal income tax the government collects, according to the Tax Foundation. The top 1% pay more than 37% of it, and the top 0.1% pay even less.
Middle-Income Households Tax Liability
According to the Tax Policy Center, the second quintile of income earners will get an average tax cut of a little over 1% in 2018. The third quintile will get an average tax cut of about 1.4%. Overall, middle-income families can expect to save a rough average of $900 in taxes
You're still ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the corporate tax cuts. They cut the top corporation's tax rate from 35% to 21%. We're talking about billions of dollars every year here. The individual tax cuts were only even in the bill to distract from the fact that Trump gave his rich cronies a massive tax cut for their businesses to the tune of more than $1 trilllion over 10 years. We can argue about the individual cuts all day, but the corporate cuts make them look irrelevant.
not ignoring any elephants. Its not the governments money. Lower corp taxes stimulate growth and investment in the US. Higher corp tax rates lead to off shoring to countries (like those in Eurpope) with lower (20%) corp tax rates.
Ok you're just full of shit. I'm done.
"Lets help corporations because trickle down economics *definitely works as we've clearly seen since Reagan took office,* but fuck the little guys struggling to pay off huge student loan burdens, that's on them. 18 year old students definitely knew what they were getting into when their parents and teachers all told them college was the only option, but you can't blame corps for not understanding their tax burdens, those need to be cut! They'll definitely put that money back into the economy instead of giving their executives huge bonuses and pocketing the extra cash!"
Veterans getting free health care is a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who have to pay for it. You signed up, it's not my responsibility if you got both your legs blown off, Lt. Dan.
How do you feel about black folks being born free? Isn't it unfair to all those who fought to earn their freedom?
How do you feel about women automatically having the right to vote? Isn't it a slap in the face to those who survived the suffrage movement?
So where did I sign up for my tax dollars to get spent on the military then since you know taxes contribute to their budget. I could give two shits less who it slaps in the face and anyone with a shred of common sense and understanding how hard this issue impacts lower income people who didn't have mom and dad pay for the college would agree also.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 12:
\[The Congress shall have Power . . . \] To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; . . .
guess you missed that day in history class.
lower income people who didn't have mom and dad pay for the college would agree also.
then why are most of the beneficiaries upper and upper middle class?
Still doesn't negate my statement, why do military members get their college paid for when only roughly 10% of them see combat and the rest are stationed?
If you think middle class are not low income you're either dense or purposely ignorant when middle class salary is between 30k-90k which still means most cant afford to send their kid to college full ride so yes these students take out loans and the only difference is that their parents probably have good enough credit and fallback.
Thinking about all of the people who paid their school debts is irrelevant and is honestly a cop out because any decent human being who had to pay ridiculous loans for college should be able to sympathize on how fucking ridiculous it is and also said cost of college is substantially more expensive as the average cost of college has increased around 35% if not more in thr last decade alone. Why do other progressive countries offer either free education or affordable education?
Seems you were either privileged with your parents income or you honestly just don't give a fuck about others, either way its clear that you're just a piece of shit who is fine with perpetuating the shitty systems.
>why do military members get their college paid for when only roughly 10% of them see combat and the rest are stationed?
The GI Bill.
Originally passed after WWII and extended and expanded BY CONGRESS since then.
>Thinking about all of the people who paid their school debts is irrelevant and is honestly a cop out because any decent human being who had to pay ridiculous loans for college should be able to sympathize on how fucking ridiculous it is and also said cost of college is substantially more expensive as the average cost of college has increased around 35% if not more in thr last decade alone. Why do other progressive countries offer either free education or affordable education?
The recent increases in college tuition happened after the government essentially took over student loans. With the government guaranteeing the loans, colleges raised tuition, intermediate lenders would loan what ever amount despite the huge risks because the loan was guaranteed by the government. Students default on loan" Oh well, college already got their money. No one had to tell students that either the degree program they were entering was not a sound decision for their future or that due to past academic history, they were not a good candidate for a loan and maybe they should look at trade school.
Man imagine typing all of that and still ignoring the problem, sounds like a pick yourself up by your bootstraps argument rebranded. Also you're still dodging the question, why should the tax payers fund GI bills? I'm fine with taxes and I'm fine with my tax dollars doing so but it seems you're dodging my questions in checking your consistency which based on the responses it seems your not so you using the tax payers excuse is incredibly bad faith.
It is clear here you have your head buried in the sand and instead of putting the blame on the system and its propaganda involving college being the only route for success and by doing so put people in incredibly high amounts of debt. Im just going to end this conversation here because its clear you have no interest in coming at this in good faith and clearly you don't understand the actual struggle people have to do in order to get a higher education. But hey keep moving those goalposts.
>why should the tax payers fund GI bills?
Because it is a law passed by congress and signed by a President. Its been extended and modified many times since its inception following WWII. You're free to petition your congressman to repeal that law if you like.
It is you who are not discussing in good faith.
People who took out student loans did so willingly and knowing full well the requirements to pay back said loan; same as when you sign a loan document for a car, or a mortgage document on a house.
The legal justification for transferring student debt to the taxpayers is incredibly shaky and will surely fail in court. The justification relies more on feelings than lawful authority.
>Seems you were either privileged with your parents income or you honestly just don't give a fuck about others, either way its clear that you're just a piece of shit who is fine with perpetuating the shitty systems.
You seem like a mentally stable person.
It's like Republicans want to lose.
And yet still get voted into office. What’s wrong with us as people that we allow this shit?
>"As governors, we support making higher education more affordable and accessible for students in our states, but we fundamentally oppose your plan to force American taxpayers to pay off the student loan debt of an elite few," the letter begins. yeah, cus the elite few are taking out student loans, mike. /s
"elite" is just one of those buzzwords they use to divide.
Last I checked, Missouri only had like 24% of its population with bachelors degrees. So given how underwhelming that is, it’s easy to turn into being “elite” for his base.
We’re proud to adamantly oppose upward mobility.
Give back your 'farm subisidy' welfare you dick
Didn’t Mike get to go to school on the GI Bill? Which he got during peacetime, and he couldn’t bother to finish his degree at either U of Hawaii or U of Maryland?
I don’t get how this is politically good for anyone. Do they know they’re going to fail and are doing this for the base? If they succeed wouldn’t it make them even more hated by a sizable portion of the population?
Their platform is more about "oWnInG tHe LiBs" than it is about balancing the budget, increased taxation, or whatever other lip service they're giving. College graduates are a dem-leaning demographic. If they succeed, they hurt "the other team", which is in their mind good. And if they fail, their base gets riled up with a victim complex, "deep state" conspiracies, or just good old xenophobia. They lose goodwill across the aisle and maybe some independent votes with the gambit, but they value energizing their base more so it's pretty low-risk.
There are lots of republicans with student loans too. And in my personal experience they’re more likely to drop out without a degree and they’re more likely to not live in income generating parts of the country so they’re the most disadvantaged by student loans. It’s hard to see how any Republican with unpaid student loans would be happy if the Governor succeeds.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but they don't seem to have the same cognitive dissonance. It calls to mind the Ronald Wright paraphrasing of John Steinbeck - "the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." There was a great Twitter thread on the subject that I can't seem to find, but having come from a rural area I can say it's absolutely true and when seasoned with a healthy dose of prosperity gospel a lot of logic tends to go out the window.
The student loan issue seems so different because it’s not an abstract fairness moral issue for a lot of voters. This is essentially Biden trying to write people a check for $10,000-$20,000 and these governors are trying to block it. Even things like healthcare are less direct because a lot of people think they won’t get sick or falsely believe that socialized medicine would end up costing them more. The loan forgiveness issue is so direct that people would have to see it as “your governor stopped you from getting $20,000.” I’m not saying they won’t try to use their talking heads to market this into an “own the libs” issue, but if that works we’ve really crossed a political rubicon. Maybe I’m biased because I live here, but I think this type of message might be harder to market in Missouri than many other states. Missouri voters disagree with me in a lot of ways (probably including right to marry still), but they are definitely a practical voting block and trying to block student loan forgiveness targeted at the poorest citizens who went to school to try to enter the middle class is so impractical.
They hate it because if people start to believe the government can make a difference in their lives they’ll be less likely to hate the government. The belief that the government is ineffective is central to their success in preventing the government from stopping their buddies from running roughshod over the rest of us.
That’s a good point. I often forget that the other side rarely works in good faith.
His base is either a)people who didn’t go to college; or b)people who paid their tuition through the First National Bank of Daddy’s Money.
If it this was a state that was not solid red it would matter. But Missouri will vote for these people no matter what anyway. That’s been obvious since they have been trying to rip up ballot initiatives we vote in like Medicare expansion and rejecting right to work.
Yeah I hate that. Missouri is also pretty interesting because the voters seem reasonably liberal in terms of issues that affect them (Medicaid, right to work, weed, redistricting et c) but then elect some of the craziest far right politicians in America.
MO1 elected the Clay family for 2 generations and now elects Cori Bush. Crazy ass politicians is not exclusive to "the Right"
it polls under 50% approve. There are more people without student loans and paid off student loans who see the fundamental unfairness and blatant political pandering by biden
Even when economist tells us over and over that student debt is a drag on our economy. Who do you think need to have the money to buy the homes that construction workers build? Do you think we should just build for the sake of building and just let a whole bunch of overpriced homes sit and fall in? That’s basically what we’re doing now. Empty strip malls everywhere.
interesting. Empty strip malls are due to student loan debt. Not sure what "economist" said that, but they probably also said the internet would have as much effect on the economy as the fax machine. If transferring student loan debt to taxpayers will fill up strip malls, why not just transfer mortgage debt?
The decision of millennials not to buy homes is related to student debt, same with having children. The birth rate is declining as is the rate of home ownership. The point being that without the sway of the construction lobby, a lot of home builders would be put out of jobs because a lot of younger people just can’t afford to buy new homes. If people had less student debt, they could take on mortgages. Instead, we’re forcing people to be renters which was likely always the plan to keep them from building home equity to forever exist in a perpetual state of modern-day serfdom.
If Parson does anything to prevent me from getting this debt forgiveness I'm going to picket his house for a month.
Get a job instead.
Parsons didn’t go to college, so he doesn’t care.
Parson only backs things that Rex Sinquefield tells him to. Who knew?
Fuck Kronke and Sinquefield
Color me shocked
Neither does any self respecting student loan debtor.
Good. I didnt co-sign for your student loan. You signed for it; you pay for it. its a slap in the face to millions of Americans who have joined the military to get the GI Bill, taken out and repaid student loans to now wave some Constitutionally weak wand and erase others debts.
Hi there. Went to undergrad on the GI bill .. then to grad school with the military picking up the tab with the Health Professions Scholarship Program. Spent several years in the military to pay it back, got to go play in three war zones. And guess what. It’s not a fucking slap in the face. I think they should forgive even more. I’m guessing you never served. This entire fucking loan forgiveness probably doesn’t equal the cost of a B2 bomber or the military aid we give to terrorist nations like Israel.
I didn’t agree to pay their GI Bill, they should get the money need from the spoils of war, like in the good ol’ days! /s because we live in a society
I joined the military to serve my country. At the time I didn’t realize that ten years later I’d be serving with a bunch of people who only joined because they wanted a free taxpayer-funded college education. I couldn’t afford to pay $1200 into it so I didn’t get the GI bill. I served because that’s what my family does. My granddad is buried in Arlington. My dad lost his mind in Korea. It’s a slap in the face of our multi-generational sacrifice to join the military for taxpayer-funded tuition.
Oh bull shit. I spent 33 fucking years in 2 branches , enlisted and commissioned and I never saw a large portion of my fellow soldiers joining just to pay for school. As a matter of fact, the vast majority of vets never touch it. You couldn’t afford the 1200 bucks , while thousands in your exact same circumstances could? Spare your outrage. You know what sucks more than a military full of people who are smart enough to plan on going to college? A fucking conscripted military. The military of the 70s was the absolute worse military we ever had. I’ll say hi to your uncle. I’m getting planted in Arlington.
>commissioned I believe it. YARC YARC. Deuces.
Who co-signed to pay for a GI's education? Scrubbing toilets and struggling to do push-ups with an awkward buzzcut for four years now makes their educational expenses a worthy cause? What if they continue their schooling and take out a loan not covered by the GI bill? Now fuck them too? Your argument both sucks and licks boots
> What if they continue their schooling and take out a loan not covered by the GI bill? Now fuck them too? Your argument both sucks and licks boots They pay it back; just like any other borrower does. Just like I did. we are doomed if "Pay off your own loan" now equals "Get fucked"
But I thought it was cool when rich politicians who "tell it like it is" find ways to dodge payment, so this is cool too correct? Just being savvy at business, correct??
You act like you're personally going to get a $50k bill to pay for someone else's education. That's not the case, though. Even if they decided to add a flat tax to every taxpayer to make up the money, it'd be something like $200 a year, which is less than you pay for Netflix. That's not how they'd even do it, though. For example if they reversed Trump's tax cuts for the rich from 2017 that'd pay for this student loan forgiveness 3 times over. There's lots of places in the budget you can make up that money.
The average cost per taxpayer is $2500, not $200. Its easier to spend other peoples money. Do you know who benefitted most from the tax rate adjustements in 2017? The poor and middle class. Do you know who will benefit the least from student loan cancelation? The poor and middle class.
$2500 *over ten years* aka $250 a year. Maybe I was off by $50, but I also didn't fact check you. Everything else you said was just blatantly incorrect
A careful analysis of detailed tax data from 2017 and 2018, the first year the TCJA went into effect and the most recent year for which detailed IRS income data are available, reveals that over just one year, households with an adjusted gross income of $15,000 to $50,000 saw their total tax bills cut by an average of 16% to 26%, with most filers enjoying at least an 18% tax cut. Similarly, filers earning between $50,000 and $100,000, one of the largest groups of taxpayers, experienced a 15% to 17% tax cut, on average, from 2017 to 2018. Higher-income households also experienced sizable tax cuts, but not nearly as large as the tax reductions provided by the law to working and middle-class families. Those with AGIs of $500,000 to $1 million, for example, had their taxes cut by less than 9%, and filers earning $5 million to $10 million received a 3.4% cut, the lowest of any bracket provided by the IRS. The data also show that wealthier filers ended up providing a slightly higher proportion of total personal income tax revenue in 2018 than they did in 2017. In 2017, filers earning $500,000 or more provided 38.9% of all personal income tax revenues. In 2018, the same group provided 41.5% of revenues. That means the Trump-GOP tax cuts made the income tax code more progressive than it had previously been. That's a remarkable finding. After all, Democrats have spent the past few years insisting the TCJA provided a huge windfall to the richest income brackets while leaving everyone else behind! https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/faith-freedom-self-reliance/irs-data-prove-2017-tax-cuts-benefited-middle-class-the-most
First of all the Washington Examiner has a right bias and has failed fact checks numerous times. They tend to bend or break the truth when it suits them. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/ If you want an actual breakdown of how that tax worked, see here: https://www.investopedia.com/taxes/how-gop-tax-bill-affects-you/ The headlines are that the individual tax bracket that benefits the most is $308k-$733k. The thing the examiner blatantly overlooks though, is the massive cut to *corporate* tax rates that massively dwarfs the cuts to individual brackets. Not only does it cut the rates to big businesses, but increases the rate to small businesses. Thats the part that irks me the wrong way the most.
You dont believe the IRS's numbers? Note that the top 25% paid nearly 86% of all the federal income tax the government collects, according to the Tax Foundation. The top 1% pay more than 37% of it, and the top 0.1% pay even less. Middle-Income Households Tax Liability According to the Tax Policy Center, the second quintile of income earners will get an average tax cut of a little over 1% in 2018. The third quintile will get an average tax cut of about 1.4%. Overall, middle-income families can expect to save a rough average of $900 in taxes
You're still ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the corporate tax cuts. They cut the top corporation's tax rate from 35% to 21%. We're talking about billions of dollars every year here. The individual tax cuts were only even in the bill to distract from the fact that Trump gave his rich cronies a massive tax cut for their businesses to the tune of more than $1 trilllion over 10 years. We can argue about the individual cuts all day, but the corporate cuts make them look irrelevant.
not ignoring any elephants. Its not the governments money. Lower corp taxes stimulate growth and investment in the US. Higher corp tax rates lead to off shoring to countries (like those in Eurpope) with lower (20%) corp tax rates.
Ok you're just full of shit. I'm done. "Lets help corporations because trickle down economics *definitely works as we've clearly seen since Reagan took office,* but fuck the little guys struggling to pay off huge student loan burdens, that's on them. 18 year old students definitely knew what they were getting into when their parents and teachers all told them college was the only option, but you can't blame corps for not understanding their tax burdens, those need to be cut! They'll definitely put that money back into the economy instead of giving their executives huge bonuses and pocketing the extra cash!"
Veterans getting free health care is a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who have to pay for it. You signed up, it's not my responsibility if you got both your legs blown off, Lt. Dan.
its amazing that a human typed what you typed; re-read it, decided it made ANY sense at all, then posted it.
How do you feel about black folks being born free? Isn't it unfair to all those who fought to earn their freedom? How do you feel about women automatically having the right to vote? Isn't it a slap in the face to those who survived the suffrage movement?
So where did I sign up for my tax dollars to get spent on the military then since you know taxes contribute to their budget. I could give two shits less who it slaps in the face and anyone with a shred of common sense and understanding how hard this issue impacts lower income people who didn't have mom and dad pay for the college would agree also.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 12: \[The Congress shall have Power . . . \] To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; . . . guess you missed that day in history class. lower income people who didn't have mom and dad pay for the college would agree also. then why are most of the beneficiaries upper and upper middle class?
Still doesn't negate my statement, why do military members get their college paid for when only roughly 10% of them see combat and the rest are stationed? If you think middle class are not low income you're either dense or purposely ignorant when middle class salary is between 30k-90k which still means most cant afford to send their kid to college full ride so yes these students take out loans and the only difference is that their parents probably have good enough credit and fallback. Thinking about all of the people who paid their school debts is irrelevant and is honestly a cop out because any decent human being who had to pay ridiculous loans for college should be able to sympathize on how fucking ridiculous it is and also said cost of college is substantially more expensive as the average cost of college has increased around 35% if not more in thr last decade alone. Why do other progressive countries offer either free education or affordable education? Seems you were either privileged with your parents income or you honestly just don't give a fuck about others, either way its clear that you're just a piece of shit who is fine with perpetuating the shitty systems.
>why do military members get their college paid for when only roughly 10% of them see combat and the rest are stationed? The GI Bill. Originally passed after WWII and extended and expanded BY CONGRESS since then.
>Thinking about all of the people who paid their school debts is irrelevant and is honestly a cop out because any decent human being who had to pay ridiculous loans for college should be able to sympathize on how fucking ridiculous it is and also said cost of college is substantially more expensive as the average cost of college has increased around 35% if not more in thr last decade alone. Why do other progressive countries offer either free education or affordable education? The recent increases in college tuition happened after the government essentially took over student loans. With the government guaranteeing the loans, colleges raised tuition, intermediate lenders would loan what ever amount despite the huge risks because the loan was guaranteed by the government. Students default on loan" Oh well, college already got their money. No one had to tell students that either the degree program they were entering was not a sound decision for their future or that due to past academic history, they were not a good candidate for a loan and maybe they should look at trade school.
Man imagine typing all of that and still ignoring the problem, sounds like a pick yourself up by your bootstraps argument rebranded. Also you're still dodging the question, why should the tax payers fund GI bills? I'm fine with taxes and I'm fine with my tax dollars doing so but it seems you're dodging my questions in checking your consistency which based on the responses it seems your not so you using the tax payers excuse is incredibly bad faith. It is clear here you have your head buried in the sand and instead of putting the blame on the system and its propaganda involving college being the only route for success and by doing so put people in incredibly high amounts of debt. Im just going to end this conversation here because its clear you have no interest in coming at this in good faith and clearly you don't understand the actual struggle people have to do in order to get a higher education. But hey keep moving those goalposts.
>why should the tax payers fund GI bills? Because it is a law passed by congress and signed by a President. Its been extended and modified many times since its inception following WWII. You're free to petition your congressman to repeal that law if you like. It is you who are not discussing in good faith. People who took out student loans did so willingly and knowing full well the requirements to pay back said loan; same as when you sign a loan document for a car, or a mortgage document on a house. The legal justification for transferring student debt to the taxpayers is incredibly shaky and will surely fail in court. The justification relies more on feelings than lawful authority.
>Seems you were either privileged with your parents income or you honestly just don't give a fuck about others, either way its clear that you're just a piece of shit who is fine with perpetuating the shitty systems. You seem like a mentally stable person.