Steve Bannon wants Trump to hike taxes on the rich he wants a 4 in front of it.

[bullitpdq68]

• 
  http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/03/stev...advocating-for-a-tax-hike-on-the-wealthy.html

Steve Bannon, a key player in President Donald Trump's White House, has reportedly been advocating for a policy change that would disturb many Republicans — upping taxes on the rich — according to unnamed sources who spoke with Axios.

The publication said Bannon wants to hike taxes "on the wealthiest Americans to pay for steep middle and working-class tax cuts."

Bannon, who serves as Trump's chief strategist, believes this is a "potent populist idea," sources told Axios.

Further, Bannon has told colleagues in the White House that he wants the highest income tax bracket to "have a 4 in front of it," Axios said.

Today, the top bracket is 39.6 percent for single Americans who bring home $418,401 or more annually and for married individuals filing jointly who make $470,701 or more.

A representative from the White House did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment.

The last time Congress passed major tax reform in the U.S. was 1986. It remains to be seen when and how President Trump will be able to pass this key portion of his agenda — one that the former businessman has been advocating for since the start of his campaign.

President Trump has vowed to bring tax relief for middle-class Americans, simplify the tax code, and grow the U.S. economy overall — all of this without adding to America's debt and deficit.

 

[Neutron Monster]

That would be the sort of thing a President could do to put both parties in a brutal position while making himself look good, too bad it will never happen under this President, because that would require him to engage on what goes into a piece of legislation.

 

[bullitpdq68]

That would be the sort of thing a President could do to put both parties in a brutal position while making himself look good, too bad it will never happen under this President, because that would require him to engage on what goes into a piece of legislation.

I was thinking the same thing if he wanted to really to give his base a victory this would be something to do.

 

[Neutron Monster]

He could put the Ds in an absolutely brutal position on tax reform if he pushed for making the top rate 40%.

 

[wcowherd]

One could imagine a world where trump started with infrastructure and tax reform instead of healthcare.

 

[vbsideout]

One could imagine a world where trump started with infrastructure and tax reform instead of healthcare.

I think he will tire of the Pubs inability to do anything but obstruct and move towards the Dems and then the ball will be in their court and if they obstruct the American people will have to vote all the idiots out of office..

 

[bullitpdq68]

I think he will tire of the Pubs inability to do anything but obstruct and move towards the Dems and then the ball will be in their court and if they obstruct the American people will have to vote all the idiots out of office..

I really think Trump would work with the Dems on some legislation if they would work to introduce something. I would like for them to get out in front of the taxes, this thing from Bannon is prefect they could really work with this and get something out there that would put the Pubs on their heals. I am not against reducing corporate taxes for companies who invest in their workers and continued job growth in America, and increasing personal taxes on the rich and reducing middle class and poor .

 

[vbsideout]

I really think Trump would work with the Dems on some legislation if they would work to introduce something. I would like for them to get out in front of the taxes, this thing from Bannon is prefect they could really work with this and get something out there that would put the Pubs on their heals. I am not against reducing corporate taxes for companies who invest in their workers and continued job growth in America, and increasing personal taxes on the rich and reducing middle class and poor .

Smart ideas, but somebody has to lead this country back to where compromise is not a dirty word. We are the greatest country in the world , but we keep letting greed and power get in the way of the republic.

 

[3Rfan]

Smart ideas, but somebody has to lead this country back to where compromise is not a dirty word. We are the greatest country in the world , but we keep letting greed and power get in the way of the republic.

Too bad ONE person in the House or Senate has the power to keep a bill like this from ever getting to a vote. I've never figured why our government is set up so that one person has that much power. They are much more powerful than the president when it comes to passing legislation.

 

[Neutron Monster]

I really think Trump would work with the Dems on some legislation if they would work to introduce something. I would like for them to get out in front of the taxes, this thing from Bannon is prefect they could really work with this and get something out there that would put the Pubs on their heals. I am not against reducing corporate taxes for companies who invest in their workers and continued job growth in America, and increasing personal taxes on the rich and reducing middle class and poor .

I don't think he cares enough about policy. His own party can't get him to engage on taxes. By all accounts, the bill is being written by Cohn, Mnuchin, Paul Ryan, Kevin Brady, and selected Senators. How are the Ds going to engage him when he won't even engage on the #1 and #2 priorities of his own party in Congress?

The only things he ever seems to truly care about are protectionism and immigrants, and the common ground there is pretty weak overall unless he wants an immigration grand bargain. Do you think you could get 80% of the Ds to vote for something resembling his policy on those issues? I don't.

 

[Neutron Monster]

Smart ideas, but somebody has to lead this country back to where compromise is not a dirty word. We are the greatest country in the world , but we keep letting greed and power get in the way of the republic.

Trump was decently well positioned to try to reach out when he came into office. They chose the 100% single party path on health care and taxes while tanking his approval rating. That ship has sailed, realistically, for 2017.

 

[3Rfan]

I don't think he cares enough about policy. His own party can't get him to engage on taxes. How are the Ds going to engage him?

The only things he ever seems to truly care about are protectionism and immigrants, and the common ground there is pretty weak overall unless he wants an immigration grand bargain. Do you think you could get 80% of the Ds to vote for something resembling his policy on those issues? I don't.

Anything the D's introduce ain't gonna get a vote in the house or senate.

 

[Neutron Monster]

Anything the D's introduce ain't gonna get a vote in the house or senate.

Realistically, no, although if you had an engaged President you could put a lot of pressure on for a vote.

 

[Scout 4u]

Anything the D's introduce ain't gonna get a vote in the house or senate.

Interesting that the Republicans had to deal with that very same issue for the previous ( 8 ) years and no liberal on this board cared.

Now that the Pubs are returning the favor there is a call for "Compromise"...

Nope

 

[millerbleach]

Interesting that the Republicans had to deal with that very same issue for the previous ( 8 ) years and no liberal on this board cared.

Now that the Pubs are returning the favor there is a call for "Compromise"...

Nope

This.
And the idea the dems wanted to work with Trump but he went 100% partisan is just stupid. They have been trying to lynch him since he announced for the nomination and the "Russian collusion" was shouted before he took office. Such cooperation has rarely been seen.

 

[JakeFrmStateFarm]

This.
And the idea the dems wanted to work with Trump but he went 100% partisan is just stupid. They have been trying to lynch him since he announced for the nomination and the "Russian collusion" was shouted before he took office. Such cooperation has rarely been seen.

Repubs have wh both houses of congress and supreme court.

Fail

 

[millerbleach]

Repubs have wh both houses of congress and supreme court.

Fail

This somehow means the dems wanted to work with Trump???
FAIL.

 

[JakeFrmStateFarm]

This somehow means the dems wanted to work with Trump???
FAIL.

They dont need the dems. They need to do what they say and not govern by polls. They are running scared.
Excuses are for losers
Do you guys wonder why they said they were gonna repeal and replace and haven't come up with a plan in SEVEN YEARS? !?!?
You boys are special

 

[Scout 4u]

This.
And the idea the dems wanted to work with Trump but he went 100% partisan is just stupid. They have been trying to lynch him since he announced for the nomination and the "Russian collusion" was shouted before he took office. Such cooperation has rarely been seen.

To be fair Obama was treated harshly by the media as well.
Remember how they waited (14) days after presidential inauguration before they began to praise him for winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[3Rfan]

Interesting that the Republicans had to deal with that very same issue for the previous ( 8 ) years and no liberal on this board cared.

Now that the Pubs are returning the favor there is a call for "Compromise"...

Nope

Since you count me as a liberal you are dead wrong. I have been saying for a long time that I HATE that one person in the house or senate has the power to withhold a vote on anything they want regardless of which side it is. Even if they know a bill would pass with bipartisan support they won't allow a vote unless a majority of the party in power are for it. I can't imagine this is what the framers intended.

 

[wcfanfourever]

I don't think he cares enough about policy. His own party can't get him to engage on taxes. By all accounts, the bill is being written by Cohn, Mnuchin, Paul Ryan, Kevin Brady, and selected Senators. How are the Ds going to engage him when he won't even engage on the #1 and #2 priorities of his own party in Congress?

The only things he ever seems to truly care about are protectionism and immigrants, and the common ground there is pretty weak overall unless he wants an immigration grand bargain. Do you think you could get 80% of the Ds to vote for something resembling his policy on those issues? I don't.

I could have sworn legislation was supposed to come from Congress and not originate in the White House??

 

[Scout 4u]

Since you count me as a liberal you are dead wrong. I have been saying for a long time that I HATE that one person in the house or senate has the power to withhold a vote on anything they want regardless of which side it is. Even if they know a bill would pass with bipartisan support they won't allow a vote unless a majority of the party in power are for it. I can't imagine this is what the framers intended.

You have consistently said that...
I was wrong, your not a liberal.

 

[JakeFrmStateFarm]

I could have sworn legislation was supposed to come from Congress and not originate in the White House??

So its o'congress rather than obama care

 

[coachperk]

Since you count me as a liberal you are dead wrong. I have been saying for a long time that I HATE that one person in the house or senate has the power to withhold a vote on anything they want regardless of which side it is. Even if they know a bill would pass with bipartisan support they won't allow a vote unless a majority of the party in power are for it. I can't imagine this is what the framers intended.

So, in the history of legislation, legislation has been the passed because a majority party voted for it? Oh, glad you cleared that up...lol. They're all on the take. The most prolific leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in an exclusive multi-million dollar community. How they afford this who knows? Ya think the framers saw that coming? I say yes they did.
The pathology study of all our sins corruption is well known. It started with the framers of the constitution and continues to this day.

 

[coachperk]

Plain and simple, Bannon sees taxing the rich as a populist browny point.

 

[Scout 4u]

So, in the history of legislation, legislation has been the passed because a majority party voted for it? Oh, glad you cleared that up...lol. They're all on the take. The most prolific leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in an exclusive multi-million dollar community. How they afford this who knows? Ya think the framers saw that coming? I say yes they did.
The pathology study of all our sins corruption is well known. It started with the framers of the constitution and continues to this day.

It is hard for folks like Claire McCaskill flying around in her $2 million jet to understand that farmers still use trucks.

To her defense though, DJT wouldn't get caught dead flying in that piece of crap.

 

[bullitpdq68]

It is hard for folks like Claire McCaskill flying around in her $2 million jet to understand that farmers still use trucks.

To her defense though, DJT wouldn't get caught dead flying in that piece of crap.

LOL now that's good stuff right there.

 

[Duck_walk]

Plain and simple, Bannon sees taxing the rich as a populist browny point.

Or possibly as the most just way to fund a government that rich people control.

 

[HomeyR]

Plain and simple, Bannon sees taxing the rich as a populist browny point.

So Trump is going to raise taxes on himself ?

 

[coachperk]

So Trump is going to raise taxes on himself ?

He doesn't pay taxes. None of them do. They collect tax money. The business model for all them is to #1. Lie, #2. Cheat, #3. Steal.

 

[HomeyR]

He doesn't pay taxes. None of them do. They collect tax money. The business model for all them is to #1. Lie, #2. Cheat, #3. Steal.

No disagreement there... but surely you see the implication of my previous statement. Perhaps the real answer will lie in his supposed tax reform plan. (if they ever get to it)

 

[Neutron Monster]

I could have sworn legislation was supposed to come from Congress and not originate in the White House??

Yes, Mr. Pedant, they have to write the legislation, but they can and do consider the opinion of the head of government when writing such legislation since (a) he can veto it, (b) he is the head of one of the two parties, including controlling RNC fundraising they need for campaigns, and (c) he has the bully pulpit.

Look at the last few Presidencies. Do you think NCLB didn't resemble what GWB wanted? That the stimulus didn't reflect have a lot of input from Obama? Etc. They generally get a lot of what they want

 

[Neutron Monster]

So Trump is going to raise taxes on himself ?

Real estate depreciation/deductions and the estate tax are as much or more important to him than the current marginal rate.

 

[bullitpdq68]

It would be ludicrous to assume any final tax reform bill would look exactly like the White House’s original proposal. Gary Cohn, the director of the National Economic Council, and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, go to Capitol Hill on a weekly basis to negotiate with GOP leadership and the Republican chairs of the tax committees.

And those Hill Republicans have been skeptical of the White House’s optimistic benchmarks for tax reform since the beginning. Simplifying the code (down to three brackets) and lowering rates has to get paid for somewhere if the plan is to be revenue neutral. Getting rid of nearly all deductions won’t cover it, and so the White House and Congress will have to hammer out details to make tax reform work. That could mean a top marginal rate higher than 35 percent. But higher than the current rate? Perhaps Steve Bannon is holding his own negotiations on the Hill, but it’s hard to believe there’s much more appetite in the Republican conferences for raising the rate than there is in the White House.

So why would Bannon float his “four-in-front-of-it” idea now, when the White House is already committed to negotiating from its own publicly stated baseline of 35 percent? There’s little purchase among Republicans in Congress for Bannon and Trump’s economic nationalism and populism. Most House and Senate members are traditional conservatives on taxes, often to a fault, and there’s no indication that Republicans are itching to get Trumpy on taxes quite yet.

One possibility: Bannon is looking a little farther down the road, politically, at how the Republican party will be constituted, and who will constitute it. The more downscale voters the GOP has attracted in recent years, even before Trump’s presidency, may be less keen than Republicans of years past on keeping tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. In this view, there’s more than a little Bernie-ism among Trump voters on whether the rich are and should pay their “fair share.”

 

[3Rfan]

So, in the history of legislation, legislation has been the passed because a majority party voted for it? Oh, glad you cleared that up...lol. They're all on the take. The most prolific leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in an exclusive multi-million dollar community. How they afford this who knows? Ya think the framers saw that coming? I say yes they did.
The pathology study of all our sins corruption is well known. It started with the framers of the constitution and continues to this day.

What the heck does that mean? A leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in a multi-million dollar community?

 

[Duck_walk]

What the heck does that mean? A leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in a multi-million dollar community?

Bullit has turned into a repubpologist.

 

[coachperk]

What the heck does that mean? A leftist social engineer senator and conservative lives in a multi-million dollar community?

Bullit has turned into a repubpologist.

A new study from Brunel University London found that physically weaker men are more apt to believe in socialist policies, such as redistribution of wealth. Meanwhile, stronger men are more geared to believe in the capitalist concepts, such as the idea that people should keep what you earn.

 

[Scout 4u]

A new study from Brunel University London found that physically weaker men are more apt to believe in socialist policies, such as redistribution of wealth. Meanwhile, stronger men are more geared to believe in the capitalist concepts, such as the idea that people should keep what you earn.

I'm one of the strong ones.

 

[Duck_walk]

A new study from Brunel University London found that physically weaker men are more apt to believe in socialist policies, such as redistribution of wealth. Meanwhile, stronger men are more geared to believe in the capitalist concepts, such as the idea that people should keep what you earn.

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

 

[bullitpdq68]

Bullit has turned into a repubpologist.

repubpologist LOL, so are you a Clintonocratic making sure corporations continue to rape America for profit....but hey you got a man in the ladies room good for you!!

Just because I refuse to be put in a box does not make me one or the other. I believe in tax cuts for business that treat employees fairly and continue to invest in America with job growth and decent wages, I think we need to tax the crap out of those who offshore and who put profits ahead of doing the right thing. I think the 1% should be taxed higher since they have shown no interest in making America great again. I think the middle class and poor should get bigger tax cuts. I believe in actual healthcare reform not mandatory insurance that only robs from the rich to pay the rich with tax dollars and leaves the poor and middle class with government subsidized insurance and only shows how ridiculous healthcare and prescription cost have gotten.

You talk about the rich but all we have done with the current Obamacare is create more corporate handouts. Hospital, pharmacies, and Healthcare insurance companies continue to report larger profits on the backs of the America tax payer and nothing is done to address what the real issue is and that is outrages price gouging in the healthcare and prescription industry!!