December 9, 2017

I am almost finished with my non-professional review of the Senate “Tax Reform” plan.  I did not review the incredible amount of attention paid to the nature of partnerships and every detail imaginable regarding life insurance.  I have to wonder about the identity and motivations of the lobbyists that were writing the plan for the Senators.

One thing is clear, if a piece of tax legislation could represent an ideology, this is it.

If you are rich, you will be doing quite well.  You’ll get special deductions for your airplanes and luxury cars. There is a special nod given to people pregnant or desiring to create families in child credits and a paid leave program (so long as you are employed at a mid to large size company).  Another inexplicably strange, special nod is given to large spirit importers or large local brewers and distillers.

There was an attempt at giving a handout to religious education; struck out by hand.  There was an attempt at giving Education Secretary Devos’ own little pet religious school (the one her brother went to) special treatment; caught at last minute.

Oil, gas, and mining companies do well; scientific research- not so much (unless it involves digging for oil, gas, or ore).

Education is absolutely hammered from all sides.

Coastal states- the administration hates you.  Live in a disaster prone area?  You’re in trouble.  For some strange reason, this tax bill doesn’t want you to move either, at least not until 2026.

Overall, it’s nice to be rich.  If you are pregnant, drink booze, uneducated, don’t live in high tax states like New York or California, have no plans on moving there any old ways, and are religious (hello you Southern Evangelicals!)- the administration doesn’t hate you as much as everyone else that isn’t rich.

***************************

Fox News is in overdrive with attempting to create a national narrative that the Mueller investigation must be ended.  Some Reps and a few Senators are starting to run with it as well.  Now, Mueller has never been political, but I’m starting to think this might affect his timeline a bit, which is regrettable.   I can’t believe Congress would allow this insanity to reach a critical mass, but some of them have already made a half-hearted endorsement of Roy Moore as a purely, ENTIRELY calculated move based solely on keeping their tenuous majority if only for another year.  So, I suppose anything is possible.

One thought on “December 9, 2017

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s