Trump Tax Reform &Alt-Right

Amerifats often mistakenly believe that single people making $100k/year after taxes are "middle class." Also if they succeed in removing the mortgage deduction then they will most definitely be hurting the middle class

Man this whole tax "reform" thing really makes me appreciate Marx. You could have predicted this 10 years ago easily using the theoretical basis that he created. That man was a fucking genius.

Also it helps that this sort of thing is what the US has forced onto the third world for decades via the World Bank and the IMF. You reap what you sew I guess.

The alt-right is an alliance of two major forces: Right-Wing Populists (Or NatPops because National populist is less of an obtuse term) and the post-fascist movement. Now the later is quite explicitly anti-capitalist, however the former is the exact opposite: it is "hyper capitalist" as I heard one German describe the wing of the AfD. The reason the right is doing so well in certain areas is that these two forces are united under the banner of anti-immigration and thus can cooperate on that platform. However the cracks show and always do in the political scene and leads to such alliances falling apart.

Good examples are the AfD: who have both hyper-cappie anti-migrant leaders in the west, and in the east anti-immigrant Workerists.
Front National has it's "leftist" north and its "neoliberal" south.
In the US the neofascist element is very small but immensely vocal for their actual size, in electoral politics it is mostly natpop.
In Austria we see the reverse dynamic, the FPO was founded by post-fascist elements and has gently coopted NatPop elements from the OVP. It's policy of Heimatland is a relic of their former post-Nazi past.

However, the reason the UK does not follow the trend of the rest of Europe is quite simple: the post-fascist movement in the UK peaked in 2009. This was because this was a period during the height of anti-immigrant sentiment in recent years after a decade of Neoliberal Blairite rule. The BNP did decently for a non-entity in 2005, gained councillor after councillor, had a member on the London Assembly at one point, and then to finish it won a few MEPs in 2009. They went full steam into the general election in 2010 and fell flat on their face. They disintegrated into various non-entity parties (Like the reborn National Front) or a few radical pressure groups like Britain First.
Now when do NatPops come into it? Simple: UKIP. UKIP are the prime example of National Populism: anti-EU, pro Free Trade, "The Heirs of Thatcher" and anti-regulation. I mean Farage was a Porky himself. Now why did these movements not meet up? UKIP came to prominence after the 2010 election as an anti-tory protest vote, after the lib dems entered government. The so called "Essex Man" wanted no more new labour, no more tory government and not the lib dem pussy wankers. So they voted UKIP. UKIP grew into an actual entity and got gains in Wales, and even won a few by-elections. However the movement was shot in the head after the EU referendum, since is reason d'etre collapsed. From this we even saw an attempt by post-fascists to infiltrate UKIP and form the united front seen across Europe: however this failed immensely since a lot of UKIP members were warey of their kind of politics.

And this, ladies and gentle, is why Corbyn is a major thing in the UK: the right burnt itself out first by peaking too soon with no properly national electoral strategy, and secondly by tying its fate to opposing the EU in its entirety, thus making leaving the organisation its deathblow. One of the key praxes of the modern left should be to play up these splits, to sever Post-Fascism from National Populism and thus cause the collapsed of the united, anti-immigrant, blind eurosceptic (note I am a brexiteer myself, but leaving Brussel's orbit to enter Washington's makes me sick) nationalist front and allow for the genuine proletarian message to come through. It's not impossible, I mean the AfD has already split between NatPop and Post-Fash elements, perhaps just facilitating such a split would be the boon of the left.

The middle class gets a minuscule tax cut…until 2027. However, to pay for that (and the rest of the tax cuts), the Republicans are going to gut medicare and social security. Also, that's not a permanent tax cut (unlike the corporate ones), so expect them to raise taxes on the middle class well before '27 when the "tickle down" doesn't come. And the tax cuts are likely to be negated anyway by state taxes, as Trump said he wanted states to foot the bill for future infrastructure programs.

It's a fucking horrible piece of legislation and deserves all the negative press it gets.

Still I really hope that they are able to get rid of the Mortgage Interest Deduction. Home "ownership" is bourgeois as fuck. The only reason they even created that (and other policies aimed at getting Americans into taking out home loans) was to discourage strikes and other political actions which might disrupt wages.

I agree with doing away with it for real estate speculators but wouldn't that hurt workers who own homes?

Yeah, it sure would be better if I rented for the rest of my life instead of owning a home, retard.

Rent is for bitches, user.

...

Yeah, homelessness is better. It's so great that we've gone from home ownership, to rent, to complete homelessness in the matter of three posts.

Owning an asset like a home immediately puts you into the petty bourg category. There's a reason why suburbs in the US and elsewhere tend to be hotbeds of reaction. If you own something as an asset (rather than simply for use) you are not going to want actual socialism.

Homes are personal property, retard. You cannot make profit in absentia if you own the home you actually live in. If you're talking about owning real estate, that's different.

People who own one house usually live in it. That's owning for use.

Owning a home doesnt make you a petty bourg.
If people dont own homes where should they sleep in a communal barn?

I guess this means we can't own anything, because pretty much everything can be bought and sold under capitalism.

He's not even talking about socialism. He's saying that it's good that home ownership is going away now, when being housed is not guaranteed like it would be under socialism.

In the US (and elsewhere in the developed world) homes are primarily an asset, even if you live in it. That's why the housing markets everywhere are insane. There is an interest at all levels of the bourgeoisie political machine to keep those prices from coming down. The reason for ownership is irrelevant. Economically speaking, they function as an asset and their owners treat them as such.

That's only because a market for them exists. In China, your internal organs could be an asset, that doesn't mean we should get rid of people's kidneys.

No, it's not. The alternative is a life of rent, which you obviously must think is preferable.

Funny, I don't see most families buying and selling their houses to make a profit every few years. I mostly see them living in them. Are you stupid?

Stupid christfag.

You don't know your shit. Unless you are using your home a a stream of income, you are not bourgeois. That something you own has latent value, even if it appreciates, is not what it means to be bourgeois.

You can make a profit without selling your home as long as its value is constantly increasing. Thus why no one in bourgeois democracies cares about home prices unless they are declining. Think systemically. We should be pushing for lower rents but the thing that gets in the way every fucking time is the asshole homeowners who don't want their mcmansion piggy bank getting busted by increased housing. Housing (not necessarily homes) are a right. It's time the suburban shitheads got a taste of what it's like out in the cold.

No. No, no, no. Stop that right now. Home ownership is bad and bourgeoisie, but paying rent to a landlord is fine?

I can tell you from experience the ones who are more serious about calling themselves "natsoc" are fairly anticapitalist, they just dont have any other actual economic theory to offer as an alternative.
Were it not for the "communism is jewidh" meme theyd probably be sympathetic

Nope. Did you ever read a fucking book?

Rents are exploitative. Home ownership allows people to at the very least die inside a fucking structure if they go broke. You might as well say that savings accounts or retirement accounts are bourgeois because they might go up in value, you stupid fucking retard. Many people sell their houses when they retire so that they have something to keep them in the nursing home, and most people don't fucking own a big house.

Those people are workers too, and you're just mad because they live in a different place than you do. This is another form of idpol.

Actualy I am mad because they are part of a system that oppressing people and forces entire families to live on the street just so their shitty decadent homes will maintain their value. Everything about this needs to be changed (preferably destroyed.)

You're an assmad retard who's too angry and short-sighted to think for a second about the shit you post. Just stop embarrassing yourself.

No, retard. Scarcity and prices do that. If every "suburban shithead" decided to rent (and they could because they have stable jobs), rents would go up, and the people you say you care about would be out in the street still.

The ability to own your own home ensures you have some place to live when your years of productivity run out. This is a good thing for people. Instead of trying to drive people out of their homes with no replacement other than rents (which are bound to go up if everyone rents, retard), we should by attempting to house everyone in a permanent fashion, just like houses. The thing is that you're so inebriated with your special brand of idpol that you can't see it. Read a book and fuck off.

But all of that goes double for rentals, you imbecile! People have to live somewhere, and for all of them individually it is better to own your own home than to have to pay a landlord to live in his house.

Why should anyone care what this literal nobody has to say I had to look him up only to find he does disney parodies centred around Autism Level tests. Christ alive.

You are against people owning a home which guarentees they have a strucuture over their head no matter what but push renting which give the actual bourgeousie their massive riches.

You should be pushing for mass home ownership instead pegging the prices to their actual current worth in the economy not the over priced prices that they current are worth, and subsidizing home ownership for the economically disadvantaged..

Yeah I'm sure that's it. You'll see. Keep on chasing the home ownership meme. I'm sure home prices will fall enough so that you can one day afford to take out a 30 year loan for it. It's not like wages are stagnant and rents are always increasing or anything so it should be easy for you to afford that down payment. In the meantime keep on supporting home ownership friendly policies and politicians. After all you will have one of your own on day.

Rents are already going up. That's what happens when values are constantly soaring upwards due to political pressure.
Who the fuck do you think is responsible for creating this artificial scarcity?
You can do this without having to support, promote, and defend reactionary shit like private home ownership.

Wait, everybody, hold off for a second and let him answer this first:
What is reactionary about owning a home, exactly?

Rents are going up because investors are buying all the properties that used to belong to people and holding them while prices go up. This is artificial scarcity. This is market pressure.

Investors, but that isn't going to change if you make it harder for individuals to own homes, retards. It will only mean that more people are forced to rent.

Home ownership isn't reactionary. It's the one thing that guarantees you a place to stay when your productive years run out under capitalism. Kill yourself, don't even bother reading anymore. It's clear you're too dense.

It is as reactinnary as having a toothbrush whitey.

This. We're coming for that toothbrush whitey

youtube.com/watch?v=l66v96u_kyY
rude

you've gotten nothing but negative replies this thread so I'm just posting to let you know that I agree with most of what you said.

Are you lurking this thread Morrakiu?

People are massivly exaggerating the severity of the tax cuts. Nothing will ultimately change with or without them. Focusing on the issue is a waste of time.

What are Moriaku’s arguments btw?

Totally not biased.

And private rent isn’t?

Ideally of course we would have cooperative housing, condos, and apartments, but that’s not what will take over if you just get rid of home ownership in the current system.

Paying off a loan for the rest of your life is so much better.

okay but can we talk about the content of the video?

Wealthy neoliberals are saying that the sky is falling because for them it literally is. The tax bill only really fucks people who currently enjoy some large deduction that is getting cut.
High income earners in blue states will no longer be able to write off their high state taxes or most of their property taxes. That's why blue porky is squealing so hard.

Holla Forums = socialism for white males*
*definition of white males might vary

Holla Forums = theorycrafting for white males*
*who insist they aren't white males

*who don’t care if they are or aren’t white or male

30 years is not the rest of my life, and I at least will have something to show for it at the end, unlike a rent, which will see me kicked out in the street as soon as I stop paying.

I kinda get what you're saying, if you own a home you do have to keep an eye on the exchange value side of things much more than is the case with other use values you use. Your home is both a financial asset (used to secure loans against and save for retirement or something) and something you directly use. However, you aren't bougie for owning a home unless you start renting it out to someone to extract value from them.

Tell me more about the Cato Institute.

Whining about Jews in banking doesn't qualify as "anticapitalism".

You're almost as dumb as an ancap
, read a damn book instead of using words like "bourgeois" without understanding what they mean.

Everyone, including the middle class, only see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires rather than wage drones living in constant poverty

Yea yea I know. You can't afford to live onyour own so it's everyone else's fault.

Nah if there were no homeowners there would be a MUCH higher demand for rent and in turn the rent prices will skyrocket.

Push for more affordable PERMANENT housing.

The tax cuts are part of larger tax reform that closes out loopholes. So it looks worse on paper than it actually is, the reason neoLIEberals are kvetching so much is because it fucks them over. I don't see why Holla Forums should be agitating against a little old bit of class conflict though. Isn't this what you want? :^)

this is why most normies hate commies. They think they're out to collectivise your tooth brushes. By all means, keep feeding into reactionary sentiment.

Except this didn't happen. Why do you live in your own reality?

It only closed out specific loopholes. It barely remedies the issue. Who are you talking about when you say neolibs and how are they fucked over by the tax reform?

Why is lowering the corporate tax good? And btw the effective rate is already lower than the proposed level so that makes me think that the effective rate of the new taxes will be lower still.

Yes, paying to eventually own the property that you live in is a lot fucking better than paying to own nothing

LOL Good luck paying those property taxes without engaging in wage labor.

Hey smartass, if you don't like paying taxes, you can sell the property. This isn't even up for debate, paying to own what is more or less equivalent in value to what you paid is objectively better than paying to own NOTHING

If you can pay off house payments, why wouldn't you be able to pay property taxes?
Are you actually this retarded, or am I being taken for a ride?