Trump tax cut apparently puts over 600k Canadian jobs at risk

Well, I think blame is the wrong word.
IMO it is just very short sided to make such drastic economic decision that would negatively impact your neighbours and one of your closest trading partners.
That will just get Canada and Mexico looking for closer trade relations with other countries especially the EU.
I can see already see the vultures of the EU trying to bring on closes relations with those two if the US withdrawals even more.
 
Leftists had a tax bill, did the opposite of cut taxes and had the opposite results so we enjoyed the greatest depressions since the Great Depression
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
"Canada had nothing to do with it" only because you didn't equate it back then.

Canada had a favorable trade position against the US in the trade balance which they enjoyed until now. Tables turned

We lost trade leverage and jobs to them, of course we did (oil being an obvious one), but no one, not even Americans blamed Canada. It's just trade and competition-- don't act like Canada was non-competitive with Americans on trade back then. That's what this whole thing is about and now it has finally been addressed and rectified from the US side.

If Canada wants to grow their economy, it would help to put their economy (and Canadian citizens) first.



Republicans didn't seek imput from the left, the same left who famously declared verbally, on the record that they refused to seek imput from republicans for the last 2 terms? And still continue to?

Anyone can see this is two faced baloney. Like I said, crocodile tears. Stop embarrassing yourself
Click to expand...

lol have you actually listened to Mitch McConnell talk at all between 2008-2016?
 
....

I'll believe a 4.9% hit to our GDP when I see it.

My guess was that they wanted to draw the conclusion that Canada drastically slash its corporate tax rate in order to remain ''competitive.'' Scrolling down to the bottom, that's exactly what their first policy recommendation is: reduce the total corporate tax rate by 1% per year to 20%. How to fund this? Increase the personal income tax base. Oh, and slash regulations while we're at it.

<mma3>
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
Leftists had a tax bill, did the opposite of cut taxes and had the opposite results so we enjoyed the greatest depressions since the Great Depression
Click to expand...

Source?

I'm only asking because this sounds like fiction.
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
Like everyone else, I have no idea what you are talking about. You are going to have to be clear if you want to lead some kind of vague charge like this.
Click to expand...
You keep saying that so I guess you're some kind of mind reader.
 
Rational Poster said:
Source?

I'm only asking because this sounds like fiction.
Click to expand...

Stimulus Bill. It's the one where the government taxed us extra during the depression to hand the money over to Goldman Sachs to help stimulate the economy.

It really should be fiction, because it's too sad and pathetic to be comedy
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
Stimulus Bill. It's the one where the government taxed us extra during the depression to hand the money over to Goldman Sachs to help stimulate the economy.

It really should be fiction, because it's too sad and pathetic to be comedy
Click to expand...

You mean the stimulus bill signed by Bush in 2008?

The stimulus bill that actually wasn't a tax increase at all, but a series of low to zero interest loans, many of which have been paid back?

The stimulus bill that was the REACTION to the depression, not the cause?

That stimulus bill?
 
Rational Poster said:
You mean the stimulus bill signed by Bush in 2008?

The stimulus bill that actually wasn't a tax cut at all, but a series of low to zero interest loans, many of which have been paid back?
Click to expand...


2009

It was a tax increase, not cut. Correct
 
kpt018 said:
Democrats did.
Click to expand...

Democrats told us those jobs were never coming back, unless of course you had a "magic wand".

hMyo-M0cDaG5V3MYPfkmA3PLMsqHC248bMUUit6qRdA.jpg
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
Taxes were raised. It clearly didn't work
Click to expand...

You are an idiot.

Read the text.

Tax rebates created by the law were paid to individual U.S. taxpayers during 2008. Most taxpayers below the income limit received a rebate of at least $300 per person ($600 for married couples filing jointly). Eligible taxpayers received, along with their individual payment, $300 per dependent child under the age of 17. The payment was equal to the payer's net income tax liability, but could not exceed $600 (for a single person) or $1200 (married couple filing jointly).[3] Net liability can be found in these locations:

It was literally a tax rebate. (and a series of loans)
 
Whippy McGee said:
Democrats told us those jobs were never coming back, unless of course you had a "magic wand".

hMyo-M0cDaG5V3MYPfkmA3PLMsqHC248bMUUit6qRdA.jpg
Click to expand...
LOL! I'd hold off on celebrating (the jobs haven't come back yet, and we're seeing trillions in deficits).
 
Reyesnuthugr said:
That's not what I'm referring to at all

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksc...e-was-the-2009-stimulus-program/#9d89a95cca3d

I know that's what you want it to be but that aint it chef
Click to expand...

It still doesn't help your argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

Tax changes ($275 billion)
    • House – About $145 billion for $500 per-worker, $1,000 per-couple tax credits in 2009 and 2010. For the last half of 2009, workers could expect to see about $20 a week less withheld from their paychecks starting around June. Millions of Americans who don't make enough money to pay federal income taxes could file returns next year and receive checks. Individuals making more than $75,000 and couples making more than $150,000 would receive reduced amounts.
    • Senate – The credit would phase out at incomes of $70,000 for individuals and couples making more than $140,000 and phase out more quickly, reducing the cost to $140 billion.
    • Conference – Tax Credit reduced to $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010 and phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers. Note retirees with no wages get nothing.[23]
  • Alternative minimum tax
    • House – No provision.
    • Senate – About $70 billion to prevent 24 million taxpayers from paying the alternative minimum tax in 2009. The tax was designed to make sure wealthy taxpayers can't use credits and deductions to avoid paying any taxes or paying at a far lower rate than would otherwise be possible. But it was never indexed to inflation, so critics now contend it taxes people it was not intended to. Congress addresses it each year, usually in the fall.
    • Conference – Includes a one-year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[23]
  • Expanded child credit
    • House – $18.3 billion to give greater access to the $1,000 per-child tax credit for low income workers in 2009 and 2010. Under current law, workers must make at least $12,550 to receive any portion of the credit. The change eliminates the floor, meaning more workers who pay no federal income taxes could receive checks.
    • Senate – Sets a new income threshold of $8,100 to receive any portion of the credit, reducing the cost to $7.5 billion.
    • Conference – The income floor for refunds was set at $3,000 for 2009 & 2010.[24]
  • Expanded earned income tax credit
    • House – $4.7 billion to increase the earned income tax credit – which provides money to low income workers – for families with at least three children.
    • Senate – Same.
  • Expanded college credit
    • House – $13.7 billion to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
    • Senate – Reduces the amount that can be refunded to low-income families that pay no income taxes, lowering the cost to $13 billion.
  • Homebuyer credit
    • House – $2.6 billion to repeal a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time for homes purchased from Jan 1 to July 1, unless the home is sold within three years. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $150,000.
    • Senate – Doubles the credit to $15,000 for homes purchased for a year after the bill takes effect, increasing the cost to $35.5 billion.
    • Conference – $8,000 credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years.[24]
  • Home energy credit
    • House – $4.3 billion to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
    • Senate – Same.
    • Conference – Same.
  • Unemployment
    • House – No similar provision.
    • Senate – $4.7 billion to exclude from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
    • Conference – Same as Senate
  • Bonus depreciation
    • House – $5 billion to extend a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.
    • Senate – Similar.
  • Money-losing companies
    • House – $15 billion to allow companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.
    • Senate – Allows companies to use more of their losses to offset previous profits, increasing the cost to $19.5 billion.
    • Conference – Limits the carry-back to small companies, revenue under $5 million[25]
  • Government contractors
    • House – Repeal a law that takes effect in 2011, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.
    • Senate – Delays the law from taking effect until 2012, reducing the cost to $291 million.
  • Energy production
    • House – $13 billion to extend tax credits for renewable energy production.
    • Senate – Same.
    • Conference – Extension is to 2014.
  • Repeal bank credit
    • House – Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.
    • Senate – Same.
    • House – $36 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, teacher training, economic development and infrastructure improvements.
    • Senate – $22.8 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, industrial development and infrastructure improvements.
  • Auto sales
    • House – No similar provision.
    • Senate – $11 billion to make interest payments on most auto loans and sales tax on cars deductible.
    • Conference – $2 billion for deduction of sales tax, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.[26]
THESE ARE TAX REBATES AND CREDITS, not increases
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,047
Messages
55,463,597
Members
174,786
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top