ADVERTISEMENT

THANKS Obama for your contribution to the US drug epidemic

Also from Politico so that makes the bias news argument a bit more difficult to pass. They (Dems) might be having a difficult time seeing as their blue goggles are being removed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wvkeeper(HN) and 19MU88
“They followed cocaine shipments, some from Latin America to West Africa and on to Europe and the Middle East, and others through Venezuela and Mexico to the United States. They tracked the river of dirty cash as it was laundered by, among other tactics, buying American used cars and shipping them to Africa. And with the help of some key cooperating witnesses, the agents traced the conspiracy, they believed, to the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.”
 
Trump will out do him, hands down. You ain't seen nothing yet. With this tax bill hitting the lowest income group the hardest, with people making less than 30k per year actually paying more taxes, they will quit working and turn to drugs. Mark it down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Herd Fever
the proposed income tax brackets for singles.

Rate

Taxable Income Bracket

10% 0 to $9,525
12% $9,525 to $38,700
22% $38,700 to $82,500
24% $82,500 to $157,500
32% $157,500 to $200,000
35% $200,000 to $500,000
37% $500,000 and up
Here are the proposed rates for married couples who file jointly.

Rate

Taxable Income Bracket

10% 0 to $19,050
12% $19,050 to $77,400
22% $77,400 to $165,000
24% $165,000 to $315,000
32% $315,000 to $400,000
35% $400,000 to $600,000
37% $600,000 and up
For comparison, here would be the 2018 brackets under current tax law, adjusted for inflation.

Rate

Taxable Income Bracket-Single / Married Filing Jointly

10% 0 to $9,525 0 to $19,050
15% $9,525 to $38,700 $19,050 to $77,400
25% $38,700 to $93,700 $77,400 to $156,150
28% $93,700 to $195,450 $156,150 to $237,950
33% $195,450 to $424,950 $237,950 to $424,950
35% $424,950 to $426,700 $424,950 to $480,050
39.60% $426,700 and up $480,050 and up
 
So what is known is that the Obama administration contributed to the current drug epidemic that so many are suffering from. What’s the percent of drug addicts that qualify as indigent?
 
Herdfaninnoke said:
“They followed cocaine shipments, some from Latin America to West Africa and on to Europe and the Middle East, and others through Venezuela and Mexico to the United States. They tracked the river of dirty cash as it was laundered by, among other tactics, buying American used cars and shipping them to Africa. And with the help of some key cooperating witnesses, the agents traced the conspiracy, they believed, to the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.”
Click to expand...

"Colombia has been the world's largest producer of coca since the mid-1990s and continues to be the source of the cocaine seized in U.S. territory, with 92 percent of cocaine samples confiscated last year. Six percent were of Peruvian origin and two percent were of an unknown point of departure, the report shows."

http://www.newsweek.com/cocaine-use...n-rebounding-colombian-coca-production-692270
 
Extra I’m sorry but I am not following the point your making in regards to the Politico article.
 
Your thread title:
THANKS Obama for your contribution to the US drug epidemic

How much contribution to the drug problem came from Hezbollah when 92% of cocaine in the U S comes from Columbia?
 
countryroads89 said:
Trump will out do him, hands down. You ain't seen nothing yet. With this tax bill hitting the lowest income group the hardest, with people making less than 30k per year actually paying more taxes, they will quit working and turn to drugs. Mark it down.
Click to expand...

There's way too many things to call out Trump on than to resort to such an outlandish statement. You don't give an exact scenario as far as the makeup of your example (married, single, children), but just get the old and new brackets and run a comparison. The income bracket you reference would be paying little to nothing in either scenario. Even if there was a difference it would be negligible. Certainly not enough to suddenly turn an entire group of low income people to a life of drug use. If a low income individual resorts to drugs, the conditions leading to it will exist under both old and new tax plans.

Put together some scenarios and run the assumptions through both plans. Don't just rely on a "Trump bad" rigid thinking mentality with every single argument. Run the numbers in both tax plans and post it here. If it shows a huge increased burden on the poor, example shouldn't be hard to find.
 
GK4Herd said:
There's way too many things to call out Trump on than to resort to such an outlandish statement. You don't give an exact scenario as far as the makeup of your example (married, single, children), but just get the old and new brackets and run a comparison. The income bracket you reference would be paying little to nothing in either scenario. Even if there was a difference it would be negligible. Certainly not enough to suddenly turn an entire group of low income people to a life of drug use. If a low income individual resorts to drugs, the conditions leading to it will exist under both old and new tax plans.

Put together some scenarios and run the assumptions through both plans. Don't just rely on a "Trump bad" rigid thinking mentality with every single argument. Run the numbers in both tax plans and post it here. If it shows a huge increased burden on the poor, example shouldn't be hard to find.
Click to expand...
Using the New York Times calculator a person making less than $25000 will get an $80 tax refund

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/17/upshot/tax-calculator.html
 
When I look at the two tax brackets side by side the tax rate actually decreases for the under $30,000 income bracket. The amount taxed at 10% raises slightly on new plan then goes to 12% after that. On the old plan the tax rate jumps to 15% after the first tier. So less taxes. If a person is married with kids...and given the child tax credit...they likely aren't paying taxes in either situation.


Look...I really dislike Trump. But this tax plan isn't hurting poor people like is being presented.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SamSwimmer
GK4Herd said:
Look...I really dislike Trump. But this tax plan isn't hurting poor people like is being presented.
Click to expand...

1) you can't just look at the brackets. People are losing the standard deduction on page 2 of the IRS forms, $4050 per dependent.

B) the tax break for lower income people, all people for that matter, is temporary.

3) Medicare and Medicaid are being cut by $20 billion dollars.

Yes,it sure as hell does hurt the lower income people.
 
countryroads89 said:
1) you can't just look at the brackets. People are losing the standard deduction on page 2 of the IRS forms, $4050 per dependent.

B) the tax break for lower income people, all people for that matter, is temporary.

3) Medicare and Medicaid are being cut by $20 billion dollars.

Yes,it sure as hell does hurt the lower income people.
Click to expand...
80% of people will have lower taxes. 5% will pay more. The tax break is only temporary if it’s allowed to expire
 
Watching conservatives sell out their core principle of lower spending by the government for a tax break. priceless. sad.
 
extragreen said:
Watching conservatives sell out their core principle of lower spending by the government for a tax break. priceless. sad.
Click to expand...


Watching you give a pass to the Obama administration for allowing Hezbollah operate a drug enterprise which contributed to the enslavment of US citizens while funding terrorism isn’t funny.
 
Last edited:
Raoul Duke MU said:
Who does cocaine these days?
Click to expand...

Rich, white people still do it - politicians, celebs, and such. There is still a crack market in extremely poor urban and rural areas, but those are diminishing thanks to cheap Mexican ice. Even though they do the opposite, pills and heroin have also had a huge impact on the demand for coke.
 
ThunderCat98 said:
Rich, white people still do it - politicians, celebs, and such. There is still a crack market in extremely poor urban and rural areas, but those are diminishing thanks to cheap Mexican ice. Even though they do the opposite, pills and heroin have also had a huge impact on the demand for coke.
Click to expand...

Yeah, crack is coming back a little in the ghetto. I follow the local police blotter pretty closely, here it is 95% opioids and meth. Of course rich white people are pretty much immune from drug arrest lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThunderCat98
countryroads89 said:
1) you can't just look at the brackets. People are losing the standard deduction on page 2 of the IRS forms, $4050 per dependent.

B) the tax break for lower income people, all people for that matter, is temporary.

3) Medicare and Medicaid are being cut by $20 billion dollars.

Yes,it sure as hell does hurt the lower income people.
Click to expand...


First off, (1) people are not losing their standard deduction. Their standard deduction is nearly doubling. What they are losing is their personal exemption. For a married couple without children who take the standard deduction under the old tax plan they would get the standard deduction of $12,700 plus two personal exemptions of $4150 (found on page 1 of the 1040, not page 2 as you stated). So that's a total of $21,000 deduction. Under the new tax plan this couple would receive a deduction of $24,000. So they got a larger deduction PLUS they have the benefit of a more advantageous tax table.

Now...before you come back with...but what if they have kids? Great...the new tax plan increases the Child Tax Credit from what is now $1000 dollars and doubles it to $2000. This is a direct tax credit...not a deduction. This goes directly toward the tax and explains why some low income earners not only pay zero in federal taxes, they get money back.

So...like I said...give an example to go along with your $30,000 income scenario (whose increased tax burden will drive him to future drug use) and let's apply the numbers. If you're right then it should be obvious. But from my vantage it appears that most situations in your income example will be beneficial to the tax payer.

(B) Which is it...bad because it's driving poor people to drug addiction with the extra burden...or bad because the help is only temporary? Lol

As far as 3 (did you really go from1 to B to 3?)...point me toward the legislation that cut Medicare. It is my understanding that it won't be addressed until 2018.
 
GK4Herd said:
First off, (1) people are not losing their standard deduction. Their standard deduction is nearly doubling. What they are losing is their personal exemption. For a married couple without children who take the standard deduction under the old tax plan they would get the standard deduction of $12,700 plus two personal exemptions of $4150 (found on page 1 of the 1040, not page 2 as you stated). So that's a total of $21,000 deduction. Under the new tax plan this couple would receive a deduction of $24,000. So they got a larger deduction PLUS they have the benefit of a more advantageous tax table.

Now...before you come back with...but what if they have kids? Great...the new tax plan increases the Child Tax Credit from what is now $1000 dollars and doubles it to $2000. This is a direct tax credit...not a deduction. This goes directly toward the tax and explains why some low income earners not only pay zero in federal taxes, they get money back.

So...like I said...give an example to go along with your $30,000 income scenario (whose increased tax burden will drive him to future drug use) and let's apply the numbers. If you're right then it should be obvious. But from my vantage it appears that most situations in your income example will be beneficial to the tax payer.

(B) Which is it...bad because it's driving poor people to drug addiction with the extra burden...or bad because the help is only temporary? Lol

As far as 3 (did you really go from1 to B to 3?)...point me toward the legislation that cut Medicare. It is my understanding that it won't be addressed until 2018.
Click to expand...

I itemize so I use Form 1040. It is line 42 (page 2). I assumed it was the same for Form 1040A. And yes, that tax credit, $4050 for 2016, goes away.
 
countryroads89 said:
I itemize so I use Form 1040. It is line 42 (page 2). I assumed it was the same for Form 1040A. And yes, that tax credit, $4050 for 2016, goes away.
Click to expand...
Guess what you can still itemize if your deductions are over 24k. That doesn’t change
 
Herdfaninnoke said:
Watching you give a pass to the Obama administration for allowing Hezbollah operate a drug enterprise which contributed to the enslavment of US citizens while funding terrorism isn’t funny.
Click to expand...

Ok, then cheetos is contributing to the murder of American citizens by doing nothing to stop criminals.
 
extragreen said:
"Colombia has been the world's largest producer of coca since the mid-1990s and continues to be the source of the cocaine seized in U.S. territory, with 92 percent of cocaine samples confiscated last year. Six percent were of Peruvian origin and two percent were of an unknown point of departure, the report shows."

http://www.newsweek.com/cocaine-use...n-rebounding-colombian-coca-production-692270
Click to expand...

Newsflash coke really isnt the drugs of choice anymore it's Meth and Heroin and both come straight from China into Mexico and through the border with the protection of the DEA and CIA.
 
countryroads89 said:
I itemize so I use Form 1040. It is line 42 (page 2). I assumed it was the same for Form 1040A. And yes, that tax credit, $4050 for 2016, goes away.
Click to expand...

I itemize as well. You figure the number of exemptions you get on page one ((6 a,b,c) and you subtract the amount on line 42.

So...how about a filing example (filing status, number of kids, etc) to make a comparison.
 
GK4Herd said:
I itemize as well. You figure the number of exemptions you get on page one ((6 a,b,c) and you subtract the amount on line 42.

So...how about a filing example (filing status, number of kids, etc) to make a comparison.
Click to expand...

It's a tax cut for the rich. You know it and every other sane person knows it. But good to see you don't have an ideology.
 
If it's a tax cut for the rich why are the people that are in the highest income group that live in the richest cities the most upset?
 
Rock98Dog said:
If it's a tax cut for the rich why are the people that are in the highest income group that live in the richest cities the most upset?
Click to expand...

Him and Cuntrey are in private chat discussing. Doubt they reply, unless the word moron is mentioned somehow,
 
extragreen said:
It's a tax cut for the rich. You know it and every other sane person knows it. But good to see you don't have an ideology.
Click to expand...

I never argued it doesn't help the rich. The premise of the OP was that the burden of this on the low income tax payer would be so great that it would lead to an increase of drug use to shoulder the burden. That is a ridiculous statement. This is why I'm asking for specific examples so we can apply the tax tables, both old and new, and find out where the truth lies. I gave an example and I have on oher threads as well. And quite frankly, as much as I dislike our president I can't find much evidence that this hurts low income earners. I'm sure there might be a few scenarios where there's a slight difference but it is likely negligible. So I welcome examples. If there is a pocket of individuals this is crushing then let's state the scenario, apply the tax tables, and find out the truth. But no one wants the truth. They want to advance their ideology at the expense of it.


If both sides were as interested in finding the truth as much as they are in scoring political victory over their opponent this world would be a better place. The emotional investment in our personal ideology is a breeding ground for hatred. Everyone has their emotions involved and that creates a need for confirmation bias. I have a friend (a Trump supporter) that sat and defended the allegations of sexual misconduct against Trump and Moore as being made up for political gain while simultaneously trashing the misdeeds of Weinstein and Franken. It's like he honestly believes that sexual misconduct falls along political lines. He actually got angry when I said Moore was guilty as sin and the evidence was overwhelming. Angry. Now THAT'S what hardcore ideology leads to...dishonesty. Because political victory becomes the end game at the expense of honesty.

Now...you can quote me and do all that stuff that you do,
 
GK4Herd said:
I itemize as well. You figure the number of exemptions you get on page one ((6 a,b,c) and you subtract the amount on line 42.

So...how about a filing example (filing status, number of kids, etc) to make a comparison.
Click to expand...


Line 42 goes away. How many times do I have to say it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back