Conservatives/Right-Wingers Only: Which Do You Prefer?

[Kingpoleon]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

[Maverick J-Mac]

Option one, it's the corporate taxes that are driving companies overseas.  I wouldn't have changed the federal income taxes the last handful of times it's been changed.  Lower corporate taxes brings back jobs which leads to more people paying taxes. 

[Indy Texas]

Option one, it's the corporate taxes that are driving companies overseas.  I wouldn't have changed the federal income taxes the last handful of times it's been changed.  Lower corporate taxes brings back jobs which leads to more people paying taxes. 

Please stop telling this lie. When companies relocate for tax purposes, they change where they are domiciled, which usually involves setting up a very nominal office in Ireland or Bermuda or some other such place, with a handful of people. Moving profits to or from the overseas entity is done via transfer pricing arrangements. "Shipping jobs overseas" is a separate issue. A lower corporate tax rate isn't going to make companies start making cheap plastic crap here instead of making it in China.

Apple has "foreign cash." That doesn't mean it's literally sitting in a bank vault in Switzerland. In many cases it is being invested here already - the profits are just getting moved to and from different balance sheets. They aren't going to start making iPhones here because of a lower corporate tax rate.

[Maverick J-Mac]

Option one, it's the corporate taxes that are driving companies overseas.  I wouldn't have changed the federal income taxes the last handful of times it's been changed.  Lower corporate taxes brings back jobs which leads to more people paying taxes. 

Please stop telling this lie. When companies relocate for tax purposes, they change where they are domiciled, which usually involves setting up a very nominal office in Ireland or Bermuda or some other such place, with a handful of people. Moving profits to or from the overseas entity is done via transfer pricing arrangements. "Shipping jobs overseas" is a separate issue. A lower corporate tax rate isn't going to make companies start making cheap plastic crap here instead of making it in China.

Apple has "foreign cash." That doesn't mean it's literally sitting in a bank vault in Switzerland. In many cases it is being invested here already - the profits are just getting moved to and from different balance sheets. They aren't going to start making iPhones here because of a lower corporate tax rate.

We're the laughing stock of the world because of our corporate tax rates.  Plus they'll have less write-offs.  My theory is that if someone tries to avoid paying taxes, then it means their taxes are too high.  The same can be said with corporations.  It's not like any young Democrats will want to work anyways because they think they're entitled to sit around and watch MTV all day while us white Republicans work and pay for them through our hard earned tax dollars.  We're slaves to the young and slaves to the thieves.

[Indy Texas]

Option one, it's the corporate taxes that are driving companies overseas.  I wouldn't have changed the federal income taxes the last handful of times it's been changed.  Lower corporate taxes brings back jobs which leads to more people paying taxes. 

Please stop telling this lie. When companies relocate for tax purposes, they change where they are domiciled, which usually involves setting up a very nominal office in Ireland or Bermuda or some other such place, with a handful of people. Moving profits to or from the overseas entity is done via transfer pricing arrangements. "Shipping jobs overseas" is a separate issue. A lower corporate tax rate isn't going to make companies start making cheap plastic crap here instead of making it in China.

Apple has "foreign cash." That doesn't mean it's literally sitting in a bank vault in Switzerland. In many cases it is being invested here already - the profits are just getting moved to and from different balance sheets. They aren't going to start making iPhones here because of a lower corporate tax rate.

We're the laughing stock of the world because of our corporate tax rates.  Plus they'll have less write-offs.  My theory is that if someone tries to avoid paying taxes, then it means their taxes are too high.  The same can be said with corporations.  It's not like any young Democrats will want to work anyways because they think they're entitled to sit around and watch MTV all day while us white Republicans work and pay for them through our hard earned tax dollars.  We're slaves to the young and slaves to the thieves.

I don't even know what that means.

Most major corporations are headquartered in the US.

We have massive net capital inflows.

If we were the "laughingstock of the world" then why aren't we experiencing capital flight?

[mileslunn]

That is a tough one, but mine would be to reduce the corporate tax rate to 20-25% and with income tax rate reduce it to three or four brackets.  The top rate should probably stay where it is, but have it kick in at a higher level.  Also I would cut military spending as US spends 6% of GDP on military while next highest in NATO is 3%.  Big tax cuts without spending cuts is not fiscally conservative as it means a bigger deficit which true fiscal conservatives oppose.

[HillGoose]

Option One. No cuts to the military, that is unacceptable.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

That 29.5% rate is not a marginal tax rate , unlike the other rates.

[Kingpoleon]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

The same way that there’s a 39% bracket right now and the top bracket is at 35%?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

The same way that there’s a 39% bracket right now and the top bracket is at 35%?

So 39% is marginal and 35% is a maximum calculated after that?  Do you have some article or reference which discusses this?  It's not something I've ever come across in researching taxes before.

[Kingpoleon]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

The same way that there’s a 39% bracket right now and the top bracket is at 35%?

So 39% is marginal and 35% is a maximum calculated after that?  Do you have some article or reference which discusses this?  It's not something I've ever come across in researching taxes before.

https://www.thebalance.com/corporate-tax-rates-and-tax-calculation-397647

The corporate tax rates in 2017 are: 15%/25%/34%/39%/35%/38%/35%, the goal of which is to encourage companies to earn more money and pay less in taxes.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Option One:
- Decrease all corporate taxes by 6%
- Decrease all income taxes by 3%
- Increase military spending by 6%
- 10% Cut to all welfare spending

Option Two:
- Simplify corporate tax code - merge the four 34%, 39%, 34%, 39% into a 37.5% bracket, reduce top rate to 29.5%
- Income taxes of 15%-20%-25%-32.5%-42.5%, with the bottom four brackets staying at the same levels of income as the current bottom four brackets and the rest being merged into the top bracket
- Freeze on military spending
- 4% Decrease in welfare spending besides SNAP
- 15% Increase in spending on SNAP, HUD, NASA, and the State Department
- Value-added tax of 11%

I'm confused, how can the top rate be 29.5% if there's also a 37.5% bracket?

I might consider this if the VAT was replacing payroll taxes. Otherwise no thanks, that's a big tax increase for people.

But as for option 1, cutting welfare to increase military spending is not something I'm particularly interested in either.

The same way that there’s a 39% bracket right now and the top bracket is at 35%?

So 39% is marginal and 35% is a maximum calculated after that?  Do you have some article or reference which discusses this?  It's not something I've ever come across in researching taxes before.

https://www.thebalance.com/corporate-tax-rates-and-tax-calculation-397647

The corporate tax rates in 2017 are: 15%/25%/34%/39%/35%/38%/35%, the goal of which is to encourage companies to earn more money and pay less in taxes.

oh right of course. I didn't recognize that you were leaving some brackets out in your description.   

I've never gotten the rationale of the zig-zag pattern of the corporate tax rate though.  Perhaps there's some empirical data describing it as optimal, but in the abstract it doesn't make much sense.

[MR DARK BRANDON]

Option one will impose a true tax cut so I chose option 1.

[Senator Spark]

Option 1.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Agree with Shua that Option 2 is flawed, but I'd still take it on the whole. The debt is the biggest national security threat, and no amount of military spending will protect us from that. We can reduce the spending on that or at least re-appropriate it to take care of our citizens in varying ways (think childcare, medicare), thus allowing more money to be put into the economy through their saved income. Of course that would probably be offset by those numbers given in regards to the income tax.

[mvd10]

Neither. Option 1 would probably increase the deficit which is the last thing America needs now. Option 2 is too extreme. I'd prefer eliminating deductions, raising a 5% broad-based (so no exceptions for groceries and stuff like that) VAT and reforming medicare, SS and some other social programs (though I definitely wouldn't go as far as the Ryan plan). That would raise more than enough revenue to further reduce corporate and income tax rates, increase the EITC, do something about America's sh**tty infrastructure and still reduce the deficit. I guess the VAT would have to be coupled with a small refundable rebate though.

[Republican Left]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The US will need to take some tough decisions down the line, but do we really need to add a Value Added Tax? Wouldn't that make us less competitive, reduce long-run growth and opportunities for the future? If I understand correctly, we'd be creating another sales tax, on top of the current income tax structure and while a 5% (or I could wager even a 10%) rate seems sensible and possibly necessary (if you want to refurbish infrastructure and pay down the national debt) but what would stop politicians from increasing the rate?

[pops]

Two I suppose but they both really suck

[CookieDamage]

Option One. No cuts to the military, that is unacceptable.

Biggest military in the world and responsible for civilian deaths constantly but you jingoists love this crap. Stay banned.

[SATW]

Option One. No cuts to the military, that is unacceptable.

Biggest military in the world and responsible for civilian deaths constantly but you jingoists love this crap. Stay banned.

Grow up.

Option One for me.

[Saint Milei]

awful choices. since choice 1 increases defense spending, that is immediately a no. option 2 it is with srs reservations

[Indy Texas]

Option one, it's the corporate taxes that are driving companies overseas.  I wouldn't have changed the federal income taxes the last handful of times it's been changed.  Lower corporate taxes brings back jobs which leads to more people paying taxes. 

Please stop telling this lie. When companies relocate for tax purposes, they change where they are domiciled, which usually involves setting up a very nominal office in Ireland or Bermuda or some other such place, with a handful of people. Moving profits to or from the overseas entity is done via transfer pricing arrangements. "Shipping jobs overseas" is a separate issue. A lower corporate tax rate isn't going to make companies start making cheap plastic crap here instead of making it in China.

Apple has "foreign cash." That doesn't mean it's literally sitting in a bank vault in Switzerland. In many cases it is being invested here already - the profits are just getting moved to and from different balance sheets. They aren't going to start making iPhones here because of a lower corporate tax rate.

We're the laughing stock of the world because of our corporate tax rates.  Plus they'll have less write-offs.  My theory is that if someone tries to avoid paying taxes, then it means their taxes are too high.  The same can be said with corporations.  It's not like any young Democrats will want to work anyways because they think they're entitled to sit around and watch MTV all day while us white Republicans work and pay for them through our hard earned tax dollars.  We're slaves to the young and slaves to the thieves.

So if someone shoplifts, does that mean the item they stole was too expensive?

Also, you're funny.

[DavidB.]

I don't give a damn.

[Lechasseur]

Agree with Shua that Option 2 is flawed, but I'd still take it on the whole. The debt is the biggest national security threat, and no amount of military spending will protect us from that. We can reduce the spending on that or at least re-appropriate it to take care of our citizens in varying ways (think childcare, medicare), thus allowing more money to be put into the economy through their saved income. Of course that would probably be offset by those numbers given in regards to the income tax.

This