Tax Reform Under Trump 2017


I would, if not for this gods-damned estate tax! Robbed me blind and left me with only a few millions!


Yes, I agree, there are many areas where the government is the only agency for a certain task; I am not suggesting that the goal is to end all government involvement in our lives. I don’t think the this tax reform bill is going to cripple society, so it’s not burning it all down, though, either.

I’m not sure I understand your comment about opportunity. You state you and I have more opportunity, but a substantial portion of Americans don’t? How did you and I gain this opportunity windfall? I’m not being sarcastic, I don’t see what you mean. I have had a lot of opportunity, some I have taken advantage of, some I have passed on through lack of interest or effort, but I think the opportunity was there for me and it was not reserved for just me (and you).

The education system, whether it is generously flush with taxpayer money or not, is nothing but a path to success. They key is desire, the motivation and recognition that education will make one better and more capable. Parents who understand and embrace that and who make the effort to build structure in a child’s life, will have (in most cases) successful children.


There’s a whole shelf - maybe a whole library - of books on this subject, but let’s go with the basics. This is a reasonable summary, and if you have some time I highly recommend going through the America’s Poverty course from Stanford Online (free, though you have to sign up for an account). Covers all sorts of topics related to opportunity, from social mobility to income inequality to racial/gender inequality to educational impact.

How does this affect the discussion about tax reform? First, the argument about the wealthy keeping more of their money loses some weight when you take into account the environmental factors that helped many of them obtain that wealth in the first place. Second, offsetting those negative environmental factors for the disadvantages takes money, which needs to come from somewhere.


Between 2007 and 2013 while everyone was losing their jobs and wages were massively depressed (then static), my salary more than doubled from ~$40k to $95k with pretty significant jumps in between. This is in Orlando where the median household income right now is $41k.

This was due to a combination of a great professional network that helped me get into positions that allowed me to succeed, plus a lot of technical ability I have gained by using computers since I was a kid (and having family that supported me coding even back when I was 9).

I’m definitely not naive to think that the majority of Americans had the same opportunity in life as me, nor were in as great a position as I was in to adapt to the ramifications of the recession that many still can’t get out from under.


Why don’t you just shoot me then?


He’s talking about this:

Looks to me as though 5 might be flippable (Denham, Valadao, Knight, Royce and Walters). Nunes and Calvert would be outside shots. We need callers within those districts most of all, but I think anyone in CA can call those offices and, in an angry voice, promise to contribute lots of money to their opponents and do everything possible to defeat them if they vote to take away our deductions and raise our taxes.


The local newspaper had a report from the State Almond industry yesterday that said the Senate version of the bill ends a program that goes back to 1971 and apparently is somehow responsible for the success in exporting Almonds. It is a massive money maker for California farmers and if the program ends (IC DISC I think) so will the sales.

This will put some pressure on California republicans to change at least part of the tax bill. It may also give them a reason to support California taxpayers regards other parts of the bill.


The problem with the GOP tax bill is largely that they say they’re “simplifying” stuff, but in reality they just have a ton of sweetheart deals in there for various random groups.

For instance, I dunno what is up with almond growers, but I kind of doubt that there really should be special shit in the tax code related to them.


The story doesn’t really explain the program but I read it as though this program makes exporting any ag product easier. But I could be wrong. I know walnuts have boomed as well in the past decade thanks to exports.


Heh. They’re either flippable now…or they most certainly will be 11 months from now.


I need to look at this more closely, but on the surface these are the kinds of stories that i love. Environmental disasters and hot millennials drinking almond milk because of a tax code change 40 years ago really is the history of modern America.


So you think maybe the GOP is sneaking one in to save the environment. :)


Argh. You know how much I hate this tax bill, and it kills me to say it, but we shouldn’t be growing damn almonds and walnuts in California anyway. Too much water!


Haha. The GOP would make the tax credits permanent but also privatize water rights and then have their business “friends” buy all the water rights and then sell it back to the almond growers for 10x the previous cost.


I would argue too many people. :)

It’s a combination of many things. Farmers grow what sells and right now California grows something like 80% of the worlds almonds and they all sell. Walnuts have also boomed in the last decade. China loves both. When others start growing them and the market changes the farmers will switch to another crop.

Modern irrigation methods have reduced water use, and while environmentalists try to force salmon up rivers that haven’t had them for 80 years the water situation in most years is an issue.

The thing with ag is without ag the valley doesn’t have the industry to support the population. So unless the goal is to make the valley a bedroom community for LA and SF something needs to be done water wise.



Just called Mimi Walters office to register my concern over the tax bill. Got through right away, which was disappointing.


There is no provision to recall a member of Congress. He doesn’t get recalled for the same reason that no member of congress has ever been recalled - it’s not a thing you can do.


You’re technically correct – the best kind of correct! I was remembering some high-profile gubernatorial recalls. There really isn’t any way of getting rid of a congressmen who just called almost every single one of his constituents an alcoholic John? Because, um, maybe there should be.


Maybe, but recall votes are something of a mess in my mind, and potentially lead to more populist politicians as they’re more subject to the whims of the electorate on a running basis instead of looking at a body of work.