If it’s going to hurt Californians, a conservative says, postpone some of the tax plan

Sacramento Bee ^ | Nov 12 2017 | Tom McClintock

[ConservativeMind]

You don’t consider that budgets don’t have to be a “zero-sum” endeavor.

Congress, like you, uses a static method to calculate budget effects. Reality requires a more dynamic view, taking into account the velocity of money and how certain approaches bring in more taxes than expected.

You can reduce taxes and increase tax receipts. It happened under Reagan and Clinton.

[Angels27]

This state is already hurt by the Democrats in charge here.....and the liberal masses her love it

[DoughtyOne]

You can’t reduce taxes on the middle class unless you either: 1) increase taxes on the rich, 2) increase the deficit,or 3) cut spending. They aren’t going to do 3. They don’t want to do 2 since the deficit is so large already. That leaves 1. The Californians are just going to have to start paying their fair share.

This huge loophole for state and local taxes benefits the rich in just a handful of Blue states.

The rich in those states are going to have to be thrown under the bus in order to get the middle class tax cut passed.

Wow:  You've just made the Leftist argument against tax cuts.  Unfortunately, you're 100% WRONG, just like they are.

Government tax revenue actually increases in short order, when tax cuts are implemented.  It's a proven fact.  It did when Kennedy cut taxes.  It did when Reagan cut taxes.  In Reagan's two terms, government tax revenue doubled after he signed the tax cut legislation.  Businesses expanded, and job numbers expanded.

Why does this happen?  When you cut taxes, businesses expand and more people are hired.  When businesses expand and more people are hired, the new business and employees pay the full load in taxes.  Yes, it's at a reduced rate, but consider this.  If I get a 10% tax cut, and one new person is hired, that new person will be paying the same 90% of my old tax bill.  We both will be.  That's 180% of what I was paying.  While this is very simplified considering different tax rates, this is still why the government doesn't lose out.  Even if a person only pays half the taxes I am now, that's a net 40% increase in the taxes I was paying before the cuts.  The government can't lose.

At the local level state income and sales taxes expand.  Local communites taxe receipts expand.  Schools, Libaries, the police and emergency servcies have better support.  New projects can be implemented to keep our communities current, state of the art.

We need to put our people to work.  This is a great way to do it.  More people work, more expendible income, more products purchased, more need for still more employees and expanded businesses.  This keeps on going as new wager earners come on-line and start spending money.

At the same time you have less need to pay out unemployment and welfare funds, you have a net savings, and a net increase in government reveue.  People who were getting financial support, are now earning their own and paying taxes to boot.

Government does not come up on the short end of the stick.  You do not have to increase taxes on the rich.  You don't not experience massive deficit spending.  If you keep you spending levels in check, you're in great shape.  And with new employees coming on line, more SS taxes are paid and the system becomes much more healthy.  If we increas oure employee ranks by 25% (and it could go even higher), we increase both business and employee contributions to SS.

In short, cutting taxes is the best way to resolve issues across the board, and I haven't even addressed the deficit, which could begin to be paid down with incrasing revenues.

As I said, government tax receipts doubled under Reagan.  Had they kept spending in check, they would have had a great chance to pay down debt.  That same principle remains today.  Double our government's tax revenue, while lowing the slice of the tax pie for everyone, and we can painlessly reduce the national debt.  We could wind up paying off $1 trillion per year or more, if this is handled properly.

If your mistaken grasp on this is implemented, it will to a less or more degree, defeat the ability to create jobs and expand businesses.

The talk about "the rich", is pure Grade A Leftist propaganda.  Remember this.  When you talk about the rich, you think of people earning $200k or more.  When the government thinks of the rich, they are thinking about people making $60k or more.

Nobody needs to be thrown under the bus.  Well I take that back.  If folks like you aren't, we will all lose out.  Very few jobs will be created, businesses will not expand, and our debt will grow.

[Mariner]

If ALL, and I mean ALL deductions are eliminated, I’ll support the GOP plan.

A straight, progressive scale, or a flat tax.

No deductions. None.

Then the rest of the country can bitch right along with me.

[Mariner]

“Doing this would not be consistent with the desperately needed simplification of the current personal income tax structure.”

Just who is it that “desperately needs” simplification? If your need is that strong you can forgo all exemptions and deductions and file the 1040 EZ today. Why don’t you give it a try?

[Bookshelf]

Tom McClintock is the posterboy for the Republican Party in California. Why? He’s gutless.

[Brilliant]

No. I am in favor of tax cuts. I oppose deductions that benefit the rich in just a handful of high tax states. The liberals take the opposite position.

[willk]

Tom McClintock is one of the good guys from California. I feel so ashamed I voted for Arnold instead of Tom McClintock for Governor.

[Brilliant]

Yes I do consider that. First, the tax cut might not cause a dollar for dollar reduction in taxes due to the tax cut but the supply side effect is not enough to make up for the lost revenue from the tax cut. There is going to be some increase in the deficit. History shows that. But second we have a $665 billion deficit already so there is already a high deficit to close. Congress is going to be reluctant to do anything that would balloon the deficit even higher which is precisely why they are talking about eliminating the deductions.

[DoughtyOne]

In case you missed it, the Liberals want everyone to pay more taxes.

You have made it clear you agree in part.

My comments addressed your mistaken outlook.

[Vlad The Inhaler]

“If you don’t change the tax plan to favor California we won’t give President Trump our electoral votes in 2020!”

Pretty strong stuff!

[Brilliant]

No I don’t want everyone to pay more. I want the middle class to pay less. The deductions do not help do that. They shift the burden to the middle class. I also wager that if the Blue States did not have that loophole to reduce the amount the Blue State millionaires pay, they would stop clamoring for higher taxes on the rest of us.

[Bernard Marx]

The American Congressional system is totally screwed up. It can never deliver true conservative legislation because we've allowed politics to become a cushy career instead of a civic duty as the Founders envisioned.

Re-election is the total focus of every Congressman and Senator of both parties. Vote-buying to assure re-election has become the norm; standing up for principle and the good of the country are now as old-fashioned as spats and buggy-whips.

Worse, the Democrats (Socialists) are laser focused on destroying our Constitutional Republic by dividing us in every way: black against white, female against male, poor against rich, gay against straight, illegal immigrant against natural born citizen etc.

Selfishly, if their re-election chances are threatened by unpopular legislation, politicians who campaign as conservatives will always give away their souls to the hard Left when it's time to vote on those bills.

[Mariner]

“I oppose deductions that benefit the rich in just a handful of high tax states.”

However you define rich, and it’s apparent you define it as anyone who has more than you, the “rich” in every state in the union take the SALT deduction.

Therefore it appears your animus is directed toward the rich and has nothing to do with blue states.

[Mariner]

” I want the middle class to pay less.”

Even the Democrats define the middle class as $75k-$250k.

Is that how you define it?

[DoughtyOne]

You will have to own up to what your own 1, 2, & 3 examples contributed to your overall argument.

As stated, you were dead wrong.

Cutting taxes does not have to mean higher deficits or higher taxes for the middle class.

That’s just brain dead Leftist pap.

EVERYONE, should get tax cuts. Tax cuts should go across the board.

Don’t slice and dice based on how fair or unfair things are. If everyone gets a tax cut, it is fair to everyone.

It is also the quickest way to our nation being healed, and more people getting jobs.

Here you are talking about the rich paying their fare share. That is a Leftist talking point that is dead wrong.

[Nifster]

Sorry Tom. You and the Tribes will just have to make do

[unixfox]

California created their own mess. They can clean it up.

[Nifster]

The “hurt” comes from the idea that other tax payers shouldn’t have to support your state’s profligate spending

[Nifster]

McClintock was very quiet during the Boehner years. Remains quiet now