Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[crashcourse]

this wiz/talent mcgriddle romance reminds me I need to go take a $hit

[froot loops]

Of course he wants a political opponent jailed, he admires tyrants and his boss is a tyrant who hates Hillary.

[entropy]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-big-reveal-the-story-of-how-470000-documents-from-osama-bin-ladens-compound-finally-got-into-the-open/article/2010324

[AlabamAlum]

If you have Hardee's in your area, the steak biscuit is worthwhile, and I have grown to like Chick-fila breakfast.

[Kapture1]

Of course he wants a political opponent jailed, he admires tyrants and his boss is a tyrant who hates Hillary.

LOCK HER UP!!

[hack]

Still confused about the tax plan announced yesterday vis-a-vis the international income of corporations, which, it seems to me, is a real and genuine issue. If nothing's done about that the European Commission will continue to chase after US corporations' overseas income. Some early analysis from Brookings:

Tax cut or tax reform? There are two possible ways to reform the tax code: Congress could shift to a consumption-based tax system or enact a 1986-like broaden-the-base, lower-the-rates plan. The 2016 House leadership “Better Way” plan included some elements of a consumption tax, principally its destination-based cash flow tax. But that idea was dumped months ago. The House GOP plan would cut rates for many businesses and shuffle tax liability for nearly all households. While it would eliminate many individual tax preferences, it would preserve others and even create new ones.

Biggest in history? Nope. Assuming it reduces federal taxes by $1.5 trillion, as promised, it would be about the 7th or 8th biggest tax cut in modern history. As a share of the economy, it would cut taxes by a bit less than 1 percent of Gross Domestic Product. That’s a relative pittance compared to the Reagan-era 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act that cut taxes by more than three-times as much—2.89 percent of GDP. Because some tax provisions phase out, and because the bill would use a less generous measure of inflation to index tax brackets and other provisions, the size of the tax cut for many households and firms would shrink over time.

Winners and losers. Despite the president’s claims to the contrary, this will not be a tax cut for every middle-income household. While this plan would be more generous to those households than the Unified Framework that Republicans proposed a month ago, its effects on individual households would be very idiosyncratic. Some will pay more in tax than under current law while others will pay less. It will depend very much on their specific circumstances: Where you live, the size and composition of your household, and how you earn your living will matter. That, of course, is the way it is under the current tax code. And it is why this bill is not really tax reform.

Simplification? By nearly doubling the standard deduction and repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax, it would simplify tax filing for millions of middle-income households. So far, so good. But, for other families, filing would get more complicated. Businesses would get a sweet tax cut, but the price they’d pay is far more complexity. Owners of some pass-through businesses such as partnerships would have to comply with complicated new anti-abuse rules to benefit from the new 25 percent tax rate. Multi-national corporations would have to navigate a new minimum tax unlike any corporate tax anywhere in the world. Accountants and tax lawyers will be very happy.

The effect on the deficit. In the end, the bill will have to fit in the $1.5 trillion box the Senate built for it. But that doesn’t mean it will actually reduce revenues by that much. One reason: The measure is filled with phase-outs that may never happen.

A growth explosion. Not likely. The President claimed his original plan, which was far bigger than this one, would result in 3 percent annual economic growth forever. That prediction was implausible. This proposal would not cut the top individual tax rate at all, its business rate cuts are more modest, and key investment incentives would be temporary. While the smaller size of the tax cut would limit increases in the federal debt, the positive effects of the tax cuts themselves would be more modest.

[entropy]

I'd feel better and bash the party system less if they actually had a consistent moral standard for themselves and the other party.

[entropy]

very good thread on Trump's recent comments about the DOJ..

[ame]https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/926417953750384640[/ame]


Read his replies to his own post too

[hack]

I'd feel better and bash the party system less if they actually had a consistent moral standard for themselves and the other party.

Gotta get away from the politics-as-sport stuff. Memes and trashtalking and finding the stupidest of either side and assuming everyone on that side is just like that. All that stuff. Good luck with that though. Now it's clear that you can use that dysfunction to make money.

[entropy]

echo chambers are self rewarding..

[AlabamAlum]

Politics schmolitics: meat loaf with ketchup sauce or gravy? (There is only one correct answer: ketchup sauce).

[Kapture1]

very good thread on Trump's recent comments about the DOJ..

https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/926417953750384640

Read his replies to his own post too

or perhaps he is voicing his opinion.

[Ghengis Jon]

Ketchup is the food of the Anti-Christ.

[CGVT]

Politics schmolitics: meat loaf with ketchup sauce or gravy? (There is only one correct answer: ketchup sauce).

I could go either way. How about both?

[froot loops]

If you use gravy on a pastie in the UP, you have outed yourself as a downstater.