Civilized said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Is there an article related to this tweet?

---

Based on the mess Were posts in here I think you already know the answer to that.

Red meat clickbait.

---

Is the link above, from were, an article?

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Israelis don't need that kind of aid, and the Ukrainians may not deserve it. Spending priorities need to be confined to domestic needs.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

Follow the money. Oversight chairman James Comer shows you how Joe got money from China.

https://truthsocial.com/@Qanon76/posts/111335720306148487

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

You mean like the Bidens ?

Redwolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

You mean like the Bidens ?

---

I always ask simple questions and that person never answers.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

Objection, your honor. I clearly provided Matlock with a graph answering the completely beside the point question he's about to repeat 10 times.

---

Like Biden? Won't answer …figured.. your not here to debate, your here to disrupt ..well..
Got something for it's called the ignore button. Have a nice life.

Redwolf said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

Objection, your honor. I clearly provided Matlock with a graph answering the completely beside the point question he's about to repeat 10 times.

---

Like Biden? Won't answer …figured.. your not here to debate, your here to disrupt ..well..
Got something for it's called the ignore button. Have a nice life.

---

Please don't quote that idiot... some of us have had him / her on ignore for a good while now.

Smapty, your graph is meaningless to the context of my points. I posted a tweet that said the offset, was paid for, by taking out funding for the new IRS agents. The post referenced it not being an offset as they didn't take in consideration the new revenues these agents would find.

My question continues to be…. What is rich? Why do I ask that question? Well, you said I was protecting rich tax cheats. So, what is the income number the new IRS agents would be targeting?

I don't see that as a difficult question for anyone supporting the new IRS agents to answer.

caryking said:

---

Smapty, your graph is meaningless to the context of my points. I posted a tweet that said the offset, was paid for, by taking out funding for the new IRS agents. The post referenced it not being an offset as they didn't take in consideration the new revenues these agents would find.

My question continues to be…. What is rich? Why do I ask that question? Well, you said I was protecting rich tax cheats. So, what is the income number the new IRS agents would be targeting?

I don't see that as a difficult question for anyone supporting the new IRS agents to answer.

---

The vast majority of IRS audits for people making under $1 million a year (and especially for people making under $200k) rely heavily on automated processes... you get a form letter asking for a document, etc.

It's for people with income over $1milion a year (I'm assuming this qualifies as "rich") where audits tend to become very complex, and require dedicated agents to sort through things. These are the audits that are directly affected by how much funding the IRS gets, and these are the audits that have dropped dramatically in recent years thanks to a concerted effort by Republicans.

So yes, there's no question that the House GOP knew exactly what they were doing... insisting that more rich people be allowed to cheat on their taxes in exchange for Israel aid.

caryking said:

---

ok, lets take your 1M as being rich...

What the CBO said, was that the cut in funding, 12.5B for the 87K new IRS agents would lose revenues, in the amount of 27B.

Do you really think that people, that are making 1M or more, are getting away with paying 27B in income taxes?

Smapty, let be honest here... you are ok with running significant deficits and adding to the debt, because you believe in Modern Monetary Policy. I don't! I think that deficits, along with the ever increasing debt, is crippling the country.

---

I said pretty clearly I don't believe Modern Monetary Policy (and Paul Krugman doesn't either, or really anyone outside of the fringe, fwiw)... but feel free to keep believing it.

Anyway, so you're saying you don't believe that actually auditing rich people will generate revenue? Or are you saying you don't care that House Republicans are insisting on raising the deficit to protect rich people from audits, even though the deficit personally keeps you up at night?

ok, you don't believe in MMP. I don't think that Krugman is an opponent of it, but anyway. I was under the impression, at one point, you said you did agree with it; and again.. but anyway...

I never said auditing people wouldn't realize some revenue. What I am pointing out is that the CBO said they would gain 27B, in new revenues, with the proposed cut by the House leaders.

It's also my opinion that they will never find 27B in additional revenues in rich people. Rich as "potentially" defined by you as 1M per year.

caryking said:

---

ok, you don't believe in MMP. I don't think that Krugman is an opponent of it, but anyway. I was under the impression, at one point, you said you did agree with it; and again.. but anyway...

I never said auditing people wouldn't realize some revenue. What I am pointing out is that the CBO said they would gain 27B, in new revenues, with the proposed cut by the House leaders.

It's also my opinion that they will never find 27B in additional revenues in rich people. Rich as "potentially" defined by you as 1M per year.

---

No, the CBO said that GOP cuts would save 12.5 billion, but then cost us 27 billion. Hence actually adding to the deficit and not offsetting anything.

If only there was a way to see how much revenue the IRS has historically generated from auditing rich people (which of course the CBO just did), I suppose we could easily prove that your opinion is wrong.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

ok, you don't believe in MMP. I don't think that Krugman is an opponent of it, but anyway. I was under the impression, at one point, you said you did agree with it; and again.. but anyway...

I never said auditing people wouldn't realize some revenue. What I am pointing out is that the CBO said they would gain 27B, in new revenues, with the proposed cut by the House leaders.

It's also my opinion that they will never find 27B in additional revenues in rich people. Rich as "potentially" defined by you as 1M per year.

---

No, the CBO said that GOP cuts would save 12.5 billion, but then cost us 27 billion. Hence actually adding to the deficit and not offsetting anything.

If only there was a way to see how much revenue the IRS has historically generated from auditing rich people (which of course the CBO just did), I suppose we could easily prove that your opinion is wrong.

---

Wait, the House said they would fund the Israeli demands, from the Biden admin, with an offset in spending. That offset was the funding of these additional IRS agents (Some amount of the 78K that had previously been funded in a bill passed by Democrats), right!

So, we don't spend the 12.5B in IRS agents and that becomes a "NEW" deficit. Man, you guys are really screwed up... Its just maddening having conversations with some people...

We count on revenue, that hasn't occurred; therefore, it now called a loss, thus deficit...

Since our Useful Idiots have gotten their guy in place with election fraud we should also learn the levels of DEFCON……. Biden and his handlers just about have us in position for some hair-raising excitement….

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

ok, you don't believe in MMP. I don't think that Krugman is an opponent of it, but anyway. I was under the impression, at one point, you said you did agree with it; and again.. but anyway...

I never said auditing people wouldn't realize some revenue. What I am pointing out is that the CBO said they would gain 27B, in new revenues, with the proposed cut by the House leaders.

It's also my opinion that they will never find 27B in additional revenues in rich people. Rich as "potentially" defined by you as 1M per year.

---

No, the CBO said that GOP cuts would save 12.5 billion, but then cost us 27 billion. Hence actually adding to the deficit and not offsetting anything.

If only there was a way to see how much revenue the IRS has historically generated from auditing rich people (which of course the CBO just did), I suppose we could easily prove that your opinion is wrong.

---

Wait, the House said they would fund the Israeli demands, from the Biden admin, with an offset in spending. That offset was the funding of these additional IRS agents (Some amount of the 78K that had previously been funded in a bill passed by Democrats), right!

So, we don't spend the 12.5B in IRS agents and that becomes a "NEW" deficit. Man, you guys are really screwed up... Its just maddening having conversations with some people...

We count on revenue, that hasn't occurred; therefore, it now called a loss, thus deficit...

---

Did you know that revenue reduces the deficit? So if you do something that reduces revenue, you are choosing to have a higher deficit than you would have otherwise. It's pretty basic math. You sure you ran a business?

Unrealized revenue doesn't do anything. The Treasury/CBO or someone projected 5T in revenue, for 2023. That didn't happen…. Do I get to keep saying we got 5T in revenue, so the our deficit is lower? No, we didn't realize the projections.

That's exactly what the CBO said when they projecting new revenue in those IRS agents. It hasn't happened; therefore, it's not realized.

BTW, yes, I did run a business, unlike you, I'll bet…

I’m proud to endorse @realDonaldTrump.

It’s time for the Republican Party to come together, behind one candidate, and declare with one voice that we are united in our efforts to defeat Joe Biden and rescue America.https://t.co/HtaAtG6Biu

— Rick Scott (@ScottforFlorida) November 2, 2023

I'm confused about what's even being argued here.

The last time I looked at this, every $1 in spending in new initiatives and hires by the IRS generated $5 - $10 in additional revenue, depending on how certain aspects of the analysis were modeled.

So are we debating whether prudent spending by the IRS on new agents and initiatives is justifiable from a business sense? That answer seems to be unequivocally 'yes'.

Or are we just debating whether the IRS should grow or not based on some fanciful ruminations about the tyranny of taxation?

Civilized said:

---

I'm confused about what's even being argued here.

The last time I looked at this, every $1 in spending in new initiatives and hires by the IRS generated $5 - $10 in additional revenue, depending on how certain aspects of the analysis were modeled.

So are we debating whether prudent spending by the IRS on new agents and initiatives is justifiable from a business sense? That answer seems to be unequivocally 'yes'.

Or are we just debating whether the IRS should grow or not based on some fanciful ruminations about the tyranny of taxation?

---

Civ, this goes back to the CBO post about not being able realize more revenues if their new agents lose funding. For me, I'm not big on unrealized revenue. My example is the recent shortfall in revenues for 23.

Now, I'm certainly not in favor of growing the federal government. If some want a more just tax revenue plan, then let's discuss; otherwise, we need to quit growing government (yes, that's my talking point)…

Civilized said:

---

I'm confused about what's even being argued here.

The last time I looked at this, every $1 in spending in new initiatives and hires by the IRS generated $5 - $10 in additional revenue, depending on how certain aspects of the analysis were modeled.

So are we debating whether prudent spending by the IRS on new agents and initiatives is justifiable from a business sense? That answer seems to be unequivocally 'yes'.

Or are we just debating whether the IRS should grow or not based on some fanciful ruminations about the tyranny of taxation?

---

I honestly can't make heads or tales of what he's arguing... seems like just a mish mash of cognitive dissonance to avoid acknowledging what is pretty obvious. Basically how our "conversations" always go.

Yes, you are the smart one in the room…

TheStorm said:

---

Redwolf said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

Objection, your honor. I clearly provided Matlock with a graph answering the completely beside the point question he's about to repeat 10 times.

---

Like Biden? Won't answer …figured.. your not here to debate, your here to disrupt ..well..
Got something for it's called the ignore button. Have a nice life.

---

Please don't quote that idiot... some of us have had him / her on ignore for a good while now.

---

Really? Why didn't someone tell me before now, so I could join the cool crowd?

Redwolf said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

Isn't this fascinating?

🚨 BREAKING -- CBO says the House's Israel aid bill is not offset at all.

Will add $12.5B to the deficit in the next decade.

Cuts to IRS will decrease revenue by $26.7Bhttps://t.co/wLg6CUqwzR

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) November 1, 2023

So, it appears that we need to up the offset.

---

Lol, wait, that's your conclusion? And not "House Rebuplicans just conditioned Israel aid on fewer rich guys getting audited by the IRS, pretending it's an offset but knowing full well it will raise the deficit. W T F?!?!"

You guys are a special bunch.

---

What's rich?

---

Ok, just confirming that as always you don't actually care about the deficit... the whole "offset" game is just a con to get rid of things you don't like ideologically (like going after rich tax cheats, apparently), even if it hurts our economy.

---

What's rich?

---

Objection, your honor. I clearly provided Matlock with a graph answering the completely beside the point question he's about to repeat 10 times.

---

Like Biden? Won't answer …figured.. your not here to debate, your here to disrupt ..well..
Got something for it's called the ignore button. Have a nice life.

---

Lol, disrupt what? Is the IPS Water Cooler your private meeting space down by the docks? It's pretty clear that the only "debate" most of you can tolerate for more than 10 seconds is whether Tucker is a great patriot or the greatest patriot.

Anyway, -sob- Farewell! I'll always remember that time out of nowhere you barfed out "Like Biden?". Sure, it was completely nonsensical, but it made me long for the thought provoking debates we could have had.

Thought provoking? That's funny…

#TheSieve was RIdin' w BIden back in 2020 and still does. I wonder if the Jewish community that rode with him in 2020 still do too.

The US will bring Israel to destruction if it continues to raise the stakes in the Middle East, warns Colonel McGregor.

The American authorities do not understand that the situation in the Middle East has changed dramatically. The Arab states, which have become stronger and… pic.twitter.com/S8j2ybhk0e

— S p r i n t e r X (@SprinterX99880) October 29, 2023