Displaying 1 - 10 of 60 Forum Posts 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Jan 23, 2017 01:53 PM
    Last: 28d
    1.3k

    How Would the Trump and Clinton Tax Plans Affect Your Taxes?

    Here's a calculator that I believe answers my question. I wasn't exactly right. It will still help someone in a situation like me. But my math was off. Turns out it would change my bill by about $1500 in the positive. Run the numbers for your situation, and let me know what you think of the proposal after you see it.

  • Jan 23, 2017 01:53 PM
    Last: 28d
    1.3k
    bryce28 Wrote: A standard deduction of $15k? Seriously? I would go from paying thousands to none at all, or getting a big chunk back. I can't be understanding that correctly. Let's say this scenario exists. I'm a 1099 filer, owing roughly 11k, after deductions. My standard deduction decreases that currently to $4.7k. But under Trump's proposed plan, that would change to me being $4k in the positive? Is that right? Anyone understand the workings of this proposed change?
    Also, assume I have no kids and am a single household filer, and get no other exemptions/deductions
  • Jan 23, 2017 01:53 PM
    Last: 28d
    1.3k
    A standard deduction of $15k? Seriously? I would go from paying thousands to none at all, or getting a big chunk back. I can't be understanding that correctly. Let's say this scenario exists. I'm a 1099 filer, owing roughly 11k, after deductions. My standard deduction decreases that currently to $4.7k. But under Trump's proposed plan, that would change to me being $4k in the positive? Is that right? Anyone understand the workings of this proposed change?
  • Dec 12, 2016 06:36 PM
    Last: 2mo
    1.1k
    I look at this as more of reigning in the crazy amounts of loan interest debt, by forgiving some of it. So seems like the primary 'forgiveness' plan is to pay based on your income, by %. Somewhere in the ballpark of 10-15% of your earnings. Over 20 years. Then the remaining balance after 20 years will be forgiven... I would say that would be plenty to pay back an overpriced education.
  • Nov 08, 2016 10:19 PM
    Last: 3mo
    354

    All depends on the House and Senate majority, right? If the president has the majority in one, what they want to accomplish can actually happen. If they have both and do nothing, they are the definition of a lame duck. But if they have neither, I expect a solid standstill, if not a regression.

    So.. for the first 2 years at least, if Hillary wins, I don't expect her to accomplish much. If Trump wins, look out. He can accomplish much, including dismantling a lot of what Obama put in action, like Obamacare.

  • Oct 31, 2016 10:28 AM
    Last: 3mo
    498
    Dead heat right now. 42/42. Looking like NC will go red. I imagine New Hampshire will do the same.. any chance the majority goes blue by the end of the night?
  • Nov 08, 2016 08:23 PM
    Last: 3mo
    535

    Here I am with yet another hypothetical forum. But I think this is perhaps my single biggest complaint with elections in general. And I wonder how alone I am in this thinking. Okay, here it is..

    I think we should completely do away with electoral college voting and chose the presidency strictly on the entire country's popular vote alone.

    Want EVERY vote to truly, truly matter? Make the popular vote the decider. How can you see a map with a state with only 3% reporting, and call it one way or the other, for just one example? Gerrymandering/redistricting, and red/blue districts, among the main reasons.

    Electoral voting inherently gives way to selective campaigning and vast efforts to 'rig' or said politely 'skew' the results only where it makes sense and is advantageous. It's an antiquated system that makes me angry watching it all play out.

    Can anyone explain to me why this wouldn't be a good idea?

  • Nov 08, 2016 02:40 PM
    Last: 3mo
    1k
    I struggle to fully understand just all the powers the President does and does not have. And some of those rules seem to be changing in my lifetime, with regards to war specifically. Given that and the nuclear option, I have to agree with you that Trump is a dangerous person to give those powers to. It's dubious to think that the president has enormous powers to greatly improve the economy single handily, or to change to much with the way the world operates, without the backing and support of the other branches of govt. But with war, oh yeah. The president can definitely change the world that way. And while I don't support a lot of Hilary's decisions and resume on conflicts and what she will chose in the future as president, I would rather her with that responsibility 10 fold over Donald Trump. I imagine Clinton will run the country much like Obama did. Trump.. he is truly a wild card that I don't care to see play out, at least with that awesome power.
  • Oct 31, 2016 05:41 PM
    Last: 4mo
    378

    Found that Last Week Tonight vid btw. Good stuff:

  • Nov 01, 2016 01:02 PM
    Last: 3mo
    979

    Yeah, appears to be pretty reliable polling here. I didn't think Trump would negatively effect Republicans from holding the House, as I think voters still vote down party lines for lesser known seats regardless. And even if many Republicans have become anti-Trump, it doesn't appear to have created too many anti-Republicans. I am most interested in the Senate majority race. Looks like a straight coin flip to me right now. I have a feeling that the Democrats will take majority lead this time around. That would give them 2/3. Solid, but still not quite good enough to make tons of change, without the House backing them for legislation passing.