Tax bill

unfortunately the way my brain work and what I do, im always asking why....and yes Ive followed opioid epidemic, ive been commenting on it here for sometime. But the increase in use and spike in deaths are facts.

I think its natural to look at a major policy change as a reason for the spike, I don't that's crazy from someone who is not in the industry.

Or we can shrug our shoulders & bury our head in the sand...or as I would call it, the Obama Administration's plan on dealing with the Opioid epidemic

LOL, No , I call BS on your assertions.You have no proof ,none, that the Affordable Care Act is responsible for the Opiod crisis. In your world you think that once Obama was elected all these people said lets go take drug's and die becuase Obama's in office?

LOL, No , I call BS on your assertions.You have no proof ,none, that the Affordable Care Act is responsible for the Opiod crisis. In your world you think that once Obama was elected all these people said lets go take drug's and die becuase Obama's in office?

yes I think I understand you calling bs...which is fine.

I don't have proof, I NEVER SAID I DID. I simply said why hasn't anyone taking a fuckin look at a possible correlation?

Dude, I wanted Obamacare to work...

Not as effective as opoids? I'll concede that. Not as addictive? I'll definitely take that argument. And my knowledge as to what marijuana helps is limited to the aforementioned articles, so I'm not gonna argue it solves back pain either. If it did, I'd have been blazin' daily when I pulled a ligament a couple years ago. I treated that with good ol' fashioned chiropractics instead.

Just please don't act like there aren't doctors out there throwing out fraudulent prescriptions left and right for no other reason than to make some extra money. Pill farms are fairly common in Florida, and I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't elsewhere too. Where else are the street dealers gonna get their supply?

Also idk where this argument is going. I didn't even take the percocets when I got my wisdoms pulled, because idw fuck with that shit. My sole point is that America's heroin epidemic starts with the opoid epidemic. I'm not gonna debate the effectiveness of marijuana vs. opoids for pain relief, it's something I know very little about. But sitting there acting like marijuana really has very few beneficial aids makes you look biased Schneed, especially in light of the fact you work in the health industry.

I don't believe I did dismiss it. I explained that for very specific types of pain, like eye pressure caused by glaucoma, doctors agree that marijuana's efficacy is high.

But I also explained that just because opioids are addictive and a major problem, that doesn't mean that marijuana is the next best choice for most types of pain. It's not. Every doctor in America would say it's ibuprofen (Advil), naproxen (Aleve), or acetomenaphen (Tyelenol).

And I also explained that opioids don't make much money for big pharma. That's not a bias - I see what we get paid for administering vicodin and perc in the hospital, it's pennies. The notion that big pharma is getting rich on opioids is just not founded in fact.

Big pharma gets rich on biologics more than any other drug family. Pain management is a drop in their bucket.

So I wasn't dismissing it. I was just systematically destroying your poorly thought out position on marijuana's efficacy for pain relief.

And mooby, to address your other point re: the black market for the opioid drugs, yes that's a real problem. I don't view marijuana as a solution to that in any way, though. I view the solution to that being finding the doctors participating in that process, prosecute them, and strip them of their license.

If marijuana were as effective at relieving pain as opioids, it wouldn't even be a question. Doctors would prescribe it. And hell they'd probably grow it themselves.

But it's not.

Getting Back to the Tax Bill........................



https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/4-big-problems-treasury-report-205716261.html

CNN link with a tax guessculator

Use this calculator to see how the tax bill affects your paycheck - CNNPolitics (http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/13/politics/calculate-americans-taxes-senate-reform-bill/index.html)

Seems like the lower brackets, including mine, do okay the first 5 to 6 years. I don't put much stock in the effects after 7 years, because the house will have gone through 3 iterations by then and the Senate 1.

About 3 out of 4 Americans will see their taxes go down.

I like it. Wish it helped the middle class more than it helps the wealthy, but help is help. I'd like it even more if they would now look at spending and cut that down so that our deficit doesn't get bigger.

About 3 out of 4 Americans will see their taxes go down.

I like it. Wish it helped the middle class more than it helps the wealthy, but help is help. I'd like it even more if they would now look at spending and cut that down so that our deficit doesn't get bigger.

Just playing with the calculator, it seemed like it was fairly across the board that people will see their taxes go down and after tax income go up. I think it's common sense that people making under 20K aren't paying into the system, but they still see some increase with the refundable credits, and the very top sees little percentage gain according to the linked calculator, but of course 1/2 % of 500K ($2500) is still more than 4% of 50K($2000), but the $2000 will mean more to the guy earning 50K than 2500 does to a guy making 500K

Important to note though that the calculator is intentionally simplifying things to make it digestible. Here's where there's some nuance:

- if you live in a state where there are high local taxes (at the state or local level), you're going to get hurt because it caps the deductions you can take for these if you're itemizing. Strategically smart for the GOP to hit these people because they weren't likely to vote GOP anyway.

- If you are single with no kids, you're much more likely to get hurt than you are if you're married with kids. The family and child tax credits are what causes most in the lower to middle income brackets to get any benefit. If you don't have walking tax deductions then you are more likely to get stung.

- If you own stock, have parents that may soon pass an inheritance down to you, or have real estate investments you stand to benefit significantly. Lower corporate taxes, lower estate taxes, and the elimination on certain real estate taxes.

- If you're in the 95th - 99th percentile in terms of household income, you make out better on a % basis than any other income group.

Important to note though that the calculator is intentionally simplifying things to make it digestible. Here's where there's some nuance:

- if you live in a state where there are high local taxes (at the state or local level), you're going to get hurt because it caps the deductions you can take for these if you're itemizing. Strategically smart for the GOP to hit these people because they weren't likely to vote GOP anyway.

- If you are single with no kids, you're much more likely to get hurt than you are if you're married with kids. The family and child tax credits are what causes most in the lower to middle income brackets to get any benefit. If you don't have walking tax deductions then you are more likely to get stung.

- If you own stock, have parents that may soon pass an inheritance down to you, or have real estate investments you stand to benefit significantly. Lower corporate taxes, lower estate taxes, and the elimination on certain real estate taxes.

- If you're in the 95th - 99th percentile in terms of household income, you make out better on a % basis than any other income group.

the calculator supposedly takes the state into effect, and checking it, states like NY and NJ do show a hit

Likewise it takes into account status and kids.

I'm actually not sure right now where my kids fall due to ages and divorce stuff, so I looked at both, and by the calculator as a single middle income guy with no kids in MD, I should still see some benefit, granted not as much as if I claim Head of Household with kids.

But that's always been the case...

I will say this, I know that where I fall, I am the least likely to see a positive note from this tax bill, I'm neither rich nor poor, nor overly invested, or needing/qualifying for government help. Yet I am still for any reduction overall in taxes, and I would like to see a similar reduction in overall spending. Unfortunately, while I would love to see the sequestration continued, and other programs take similar cuts, Trump is not going to cut military spending, and the democrats are not going to cut social spending so up goes the debt :(