117th Congress: DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!111!!

[Slap Shot]

Speaking from professional experience, the Fed mandated tracking their customer’s account number, the receiving institution, the country of origin of the receiving party, and a few other things. It all stems from the PATRIOT Act, and tied into anti-money laundering functions of the bank. Each and every transaction that contains a dollar value is vetted, not just savings and checking account transactions.

Sic is wrong - they are not looking at individual transactions but an aggregate. Secondly they don't have the manpower to give a **** about anyone that should have aggregates even as low as $600. The freaking slippery slope whining from people like Sic is astounding.

[rufus]

You hate outside money. Are you ok with it now that it’s for your dusty master?

Of course he is. Cause Suzie is the answer. To everything.

More senators should be like Suzie.

[Slap Shot]

I copy this verbatim from another site although no link was provided. Is this as accurate as proclaimed?

A former economic adviser to President Obama ripped House Democrats' plan to give a tax cut to millionaires, especially those in high-tax blue states, calling the proposal "obscene."

Jason Furman, president of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) under former President Obama, lambasted the Democrats’ plan to repeal a cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions, pointing out that multimillionaires would benefit the most from lifting the SALT cap.

The Trump-era Tax Cuts and Jobs Act capped the SALT deduction at $10,000, but House Democrats are pushing to lift the cap for five years, which would overwhelmingly benefit wealthy individuals in states with high income tax rates.

Rep. Josh Gottenheimer, D-N.J., in a Tuesday tweet vowed that the SALT "deduction will be in the final legislative package" for Democrats' social spending bill.

"We are going to get this done," he wrote.

"My guess is the majority of Americans have a net worth of $50 to $300 million would get a tax cut under the Build Back Better plan with a full repeal of SALT," Furman wrote on #Twitter@$ Tuesday.

BIDEN: ‘THINGS ARE A HELL OF A LOT BETTER’ THIS YEAR, DESPITE INFLATION SURGE

"The bill would do more for the super-rich than it does for climate change, childcare or preschool," Furman continued. "That’s obscene."

Furman also indicated that some "billionaires would get a net tax cut from Build Back Better [and] SALT repeal" and that he hasn’t "run the numbers on net worth but the SALT deduction is worth much more than any of the tax increases for people making up to $10 million."

"If your wealth is $200m then your income is likely to be below about $10m," the former CEA president. "Under the SALT provision [and] the rest of the bill households making up to about $40m annually will get a net tax cut."

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), a nonpartisan nonprofit "committed to educating the public on issues with significant fiscal policy impact," wrote about the conundrum facing Democrats on a policy that would lower taxes on the rich instead of raising them.

The CRFB's analysis noted that "a two-year SALT cap repeal — if included — would reduce taxes on the top 5 percent of earners by over $70 billion in FY 2023."

"The result would be a $30 billion net direct tax cut for those in the top 5 percent when SALT cap repeal is in effect. Those in the top 1 percent would also face a net tax cut, though we have not estimated the magnitude," the analysis noted.

[psych]

I copy this verbatim from another site although no link was provided. Is this as accurate as proclaimed?

Accurate as hell. I’ve been railing about it for a while. Called out Gottheimer a few weeks ago about it. Schumer is in on it. And Pelosi I believe. It’s an embarrassment as a party. I understand protecting your constituents, but man, how hypocritical do we look as a party adding that sh-t into the reconciliation bill?

Edit: I think the current deal is for 6 years of SALT repeal, and then starting it again in 2026 or something like that.

[Handyman]

Yeah it is everything you expect from a party that has no clue what it is doing.

[mookie1995]

Yeah it is everything you expect from a party that has no clue what it is doing.

They have a clue

absolutely do

they think they are smarter than everyone else and reply in shock when voters …. er stupid voters that is, repudiate them at the poles.

[ScoobyDoo]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

[rufus]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

Except Manchin would never tell them what he wanted. Only what he wouldn't support. Which was pretty much everything.

[Swansong]

It is likely tossed in to try to get some of the "lean blue but not always" voters in blue states that got ****ed by the elimination as part of Trump's tax cut. Too little, too late. Even though for almost 20 years I've happily taken advantage of the mortgage interest deduction, I would support its tapered and phased elimination.

[unofan]

I copy this verbatim from another site although no link was provided. Is this as accurate as proclaimed?

Yes, but...

The SALT deduction cap was put in by Trump specifically and blatantly to harm people in blue states with high state and local taxes. That it also caught 1%ers in red states was collateral damage.

Yes, its outright repeal would monetarily benefit the richest people the most.

But it will also benefit plenty of upper middle class families, and probably even some true middle class households, just not to the same extent.

This is one where yeah, it's probably not the greatest fiscal policy in the world, but it's one that they can easily sell to voters, because they were the ones directly targeted in the first place.

Progressives should understand that. Sometimes you take the easy political win even if you have to hold your nose to do it.

[Handyman]

Progressives never understand that...it is always "All or Nothing" and damn the consequences. You know like trying to pass a "Defund the Police" amendment in the middle of a period very high crime that isn't even supported by the people it is supposedly helping.

Progressives have all the right ideas but don't have the Game Theory acumen to actually implement them.

[aparch]

Should have just given Manchin what he wanted and passed everything you could. This legislation is on life support at this point.

https://www.theonion.com/biden-socia...ion-1847989883

[psych]

Yes, but...

The SALT deduction cap was put in by Trump specifically and blatantly to harm people in blue states with high state and local taxes. That it also caught 1%ers in red states was collateral damage.

Yes, its outright repeal would monetarily benefit the richest people the most.

But it will also benefit plenty of upper middle class families, and probably even some true middle class households, just not to the same extent.

This is one where yeah, it's probably not the greatest fiscal policy in the world, but it's one that they can easily sell to voters, because they were the ones directly targeted in the first place.

Progressives should understand that. Sometimes you take the easy political win even if you have to hold your nose to do it.

How is that an easy political win? It barely helps anyone other than extremely rich people. The rest of Trump/GOP’s 2017 tax cuts significantly helped middle-class families more than the SALT repeal ever will, and the SALT repeal significantly benefits high-income earners more than Trump’s tax cuts, not in absolute dollars, but % wise. The SALT repeal is a loser across the board, except for rich people, especially those in New York, New Jersey. No actual middle-class families will see more than maybe $10/year extra from SALT repeal.
Outside of not passing the bills at all, it’s the dumbest thing the party can do. So, yeah, as a progressive, if it means we need to add it in order for ****tards like Josh Gottheimer to vote yes so he can lose by 10 points next year in northern New Jersey instead of 20 points, I’m pragmatic and I understand the need. That’s the only justification.

[unofan]

How is that an easy political win?

Because if you're a senator from New York, or California, or Taxachussettes, or any other liberal state with above average taxes to support their above average services, you can easily sell it as "Repealing Trump's attack on you." Because it was an attack aimed at them, and they are undoing it.

The average person getting that extra $100 back on their federal taxes isn't going to complain simply because Buffett saves $100,000. They're going to see the $100 they save.

The fact that you can't see the political messaging because you're right and everyone else is wrong is why you lose. It's "defund the police" all over again only backwards, this time you have the easy slogan to sell but refuse to take it.

[psych]

Because if you're a senator from New York, or California, or Taxachussettes, or any other liberal state with above average taxes to support their above average services, you can easily sell it as "Repealing Trump's attack on you." Because it was an attack aimed at them, and they are undoing it.

The average person getting that extra $100 back on their federal taxes isn't going to complain simply because Buffett saves $100,000. They're going to see the $100 they save.

The fact that you can't see the political messaging because you're right and everyone else is wrong is why you lose. It's "defund the police" all over again only backwards, this time you have the easy slogan to sell but refuse to take it.

Get your facts straight before being a condescending as-hole, because that doesn’t fly with me. 98% of middle-class families won’t see a dime from the SALT repeal- I repeat- not a dime, much less the “extra $100” you magically made up. This constituency you speak of that would actually benefit from SALT repeal is so minuscule, they won’t make a difference in any election.
Besides, if those wealthy taxpayers are saving hundreds of thousands of extra dollars in taxes every year, where are those tax dollars that are saved going? Helping the government provide actual services to middle-class and lower-class constituents? I’m thinking that’s a no. It’s a lose-lose for all middle-class and working class families, and an actual loser for the 2% of middle-class families who might get that magical $100 you speak of. But, you’re right, they’ll see the $100, get pumped, and not notice that a large chunk of money from rich people’s taxes used for social services and infrastructure and public schools and other important things will no longer be there until it’s too late.
I’m sure all of the middle-class families living in those areas won’t also be convinced by Republicans that Democrats are benefiting rich people and not hardworking families like themselves by repealing the SALT cap. You don’t have to be condescending, I understand how hypocritical that sounds, coming from Republicans. But they’ll try it, and it’ll work.
For the last time, if it means the bipartisan bill and BBB bill pass Congress, thanks to votes from Gottheimer, etc., as a progressive, I’m on board with that. Whatever it takes. I’m pragmatic.