The BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL - PASSED THE HOUSE

[Big girl]

18 hours ago, baddog said:

Of course that’s where you’d go. Just because I didn’t say the able bodied, you assume the worst. Yes, get up off your butt and contribute. You don’t agree? Of course not.

Why didn't you say the able-bodied, and who do you want to determine if someone is able to work, Trump?

[baddog]

25 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Why didn't you say the able-bodied, and who do you want to determine if someone is able to work, Trump?

Would you have understood and agreed? Of course not. You always need someone to fill in the blanks, hold you by the hand, and walk you through every post. It’s a rather mundane task and you’re never satisfied. 

When you apply for Medicaid, doesn’t someone determine if you are eligible? A doctor’s physical can determine able-bodied or not. Lots of people are poor simply because they are lazy. Do I need to walk you through that?

Of course some of the best doctors in the world couldn’t tell if Biden was fit to work his job, so there’s that.

I am anxiously awaiting your next inane question.

[Big girl]

3 hours ago, baddog said:

Would you have understood and agreed? Of course not. You always need someone to fill in the blanks, hold you by the hand, and walk you through every post. It’s a rather mundane task and you’re never satisfied. 

When you apply for Medicaid, doesn’t someone determine if you are eligible? A doctor’s physical can determine able-bodied or not. Lots of people are poor simply because they are lazy. Do I need to walk you through that?

Of course some of the best doctors in the world couldn’t tell if Biden was fit to work his job, so there’s that.

I am anxiously awaiting your next inane question.

Medicaid is mostly income based. Medicaid Waiver programs are not based on the parents income  and the disabilities are documented by a physician. This is already being done

[OlDawg]

From my reading/understanding, Medicaid eligibility and enforcement is primarily up to the individual states. The Feds basically just provide the funds. I believe it’s supposed to be a 50/50 split. But, some states are taking advantage of some legal loopholes to increase their Fed matching money.

[Reagan]

23 hours ago, Big girl said:

Why didn't you say the able-bodied, and who do you want to determine if someone is able to work, Trump?

The last I heard what was in this bill was the an individual that doesn’t have any dependents and is able-bodied will have to work 80 hours a month.  I don’t think anyone can reasonably object to this!  

[baddog]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Reagan]

On 5/24/2025 at 4:02 PM, Big girl said:

Why didn't you say the able-bodied, and who do you want to determine if someone is able to work, Trump?

Speaker Johnson: There Are ‘More Than 1.4 Million Illegal Aliens on Medicaid’!  How much do you think this is costing you and me?  And the salient question is:  Is there anyone deserving Medicaid not getting it because of this fraud?  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Big girl]

On 5/24/2025 at 9:04 PM, OlDawg said:

From my reading/understanding, Medicaid eligibility and enforcement is primarily up to the individual states. The Feds basically just provide the funds. I believe it’s supposed to be a 50/50 split. But, some states are taking advantage of some legal loopholes to increase their Fed matching money.

So they need to address that instead of decreasing funding for eveyone

[thetragichippy]

15 hours ago, Big girl said:

So they need to address that instead of decreasing funding for eveyone

I think what you are missing is if Doctors, illegals and people who fraud the system are addressed, there would be no need for the same budget. 

The bill does not decrease funding for everyone.....

Lastly, you are criticizing this bill based on Media coverage - my guess the same media that told you he was running circles around 20 year old's......or that Trump was a Russian asset.....  I posted the entire bill - which my guess, like Obamacare, no one has read......

[OlDawg]

39 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

I think what you are missing is if Doctors, illegals and people who fraud the system are addressed, there would be no need for the same budget. 

The bill does not decrease funding for everyone.....

Lastly, you are criticizing this bill based on Media coverage - my guess the same media that told you he was running circles around 20 year old's......or that Trump was a Russian asset.....  I posted the entire bill - which my guess, like Obamacare, no one has read......

Honestly, I haven’t read it all yet because I’ve gotten to the point where I wait until its final. This Bill is going to have massive changes before/if it gets through.

[thetragichippy]

16 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

Honestly, I haven’t read it all yet because I’ve gotten to the point where I wait until its final. This Bill is going to have massive changes before/if it gets through.

I have not either - I'm taking the words of the writers of the bill versus the opposition. 

I may read it once it is final - 1000 pages is a pretty good investment in time lol

[OlDawg]

1 hour ago, thetragichippy said:

I have not either - I'm taking the words of the writers of the bill versus the opposition. 

I may read it once it is final - 1000 pages is a pretty good investment in time lol

I think it’s important to remember—as much as I may wonder about some aspects—if something doesn’t pass, everyone gets a major tax increase. Especially the middle to lower classes. Add layoffs on top of that because of tax increases and it’s gonna be bigly ugly.

Medicaid coverage will be secondary because people won’t have money to get to the doctor anyway.

Dems ran on letting the tax cuts we have now expire, raising taxes on top of that, and not doing anything to make the government more efficient. Then, they have the audacity to gripe about misuse of Medicaid?

Rich…

[BEARCPA]

I normally steer clear from this board, but I figured I'd add some context for this bill since there's a good chance it could directly affect my job.

I work in the nonprofit world. I know no one on here cares about those organizations near as much as they do about medicaid, but the OBBB could be detrimental (in a variety of ways) for a lot of nonprofits that do wonderful work in our communities. For example, the excise taxes my organization pays on investment income will more than triple if this bill passes in the Senate. A lot of nonprofits won't be able to foot those types of tax hikes and maintain adequate funding to carry on their mission.

*gets off soapbox*

[thetragichippy]

22 minutes ago, BEARCPA said:

For example, the excise taxes my organization pays on investment income will more than triple if this bill passes in the Senate.

Where is that addressed in the bill? I have not heard that criticism. 

[OlDawg]

3 hours ago, BEARCPA said:

I normally steer clear from this board, but I figured I'd add some context for this bill since there's a good chance it could directly affect my job.

I work in the nonprofit world. I know no one on here cares about those organizations near as much as they do about medicaid, but the OBBB could be detrimental (in a variety of ways) for a lot of nonprofits that do wonderful work in our communities. For example, the excise taxes my organization pays on investment income will more than triple if this bill passes in the Senate. A lot of nonprofits won't be able to foot those types of tax hikes and maintain adequate funding to carry on their mission.

*gets off soapbox*

So, you go from 1.39 to ? You need to have a sizable investment portfolio for this to really hit your nonprofit. We’re talking in the millions to billions range. I haven’t read the numbers. But, if you say triple, that’s still only about 5% tax on investment income. As a nonprofit private foundation charity, how much investment income is needed? Is there a need to sit on that much cash? I thought the purpose of a charity was to provide support by giving? Not make income. I understand operating costs as I started and ran a nonprofit for years. But, my goodness.

Will need to apportion out more carefully. That’s if this even stays in the final Bill.

Note:

After reading the proposed changes, a private nonprofit will still pay 1.39% on investments up to $50 Million. That’s a sizable investment portfolio.

Not sure you’re gonna get much sympathy from Joe/Jane Smith who will have their taxes go up a much higher pct. when they’re barely getting by and you crying about paying—at most—10% on BILLIONS of investment income when you’re a tax advantaged nonprofit charity. That’s still less than the 12% most middle income folks pay, and most will never see a million in their lifetimes. But, many still probably give to charities.

There may be many things not to like about this proposal. I haven’t read it all yet. But, I’m not sure this one is a biggie to the majority.

This one strikes me as tone deaf…

[UT alum]

On 5/25/2025 at 3:06 PM, Reagan said:

The last I heard what was in this bill was the an individual that doesn’t have any dependents and is able-bodied will have to work 80 hours a month.  I don’t think anyone can reasonably object to this!  

Many people are able bodied but not able minded. 

[OlDawg]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

Many people are able bodied but not able minded. 

Correct. That’s why the approximately 12 Million that crossed the southern border recently are a net negative per capita on the U.S. economy. I’ve already posted the numbers and data on this provided to Congress in another thread.

😬😉

Again, I suggest waiting to see what actually winds up in the Bill. I think it’s going to have a tough time in its present form. This might wind up like Texas SB25 (MAHA Bill) after HEB lobbied against it so hard because they don’t want you to know what’s in the food you’re buying from them. It’s watered down so much now, it’s practically useless.

[UT alum]

1 hour ago, OlDawg said:

Correct. That’s why the approximately 12 Million that crossed the southern border recently are a net negative per capita on the U.S. economy. I’ve already posted the numbers and data on this provided to Congress in another thread.

😬😉

Again, I suggest waiting to see what actually winds up in the Bill. I think it’s going to have a tough time in its present form. This might wind up like Texas SB25 (MAHA Bill) after HEB lobbied against it so hard because they don’t want you to know what’s in the food you’re buying from them. It’s watered down so much now, it’s practically useless.

You sure? Come harvest time, prices will rise with either labor cost increase or crops sitting in the field because the cheap labor source has been cut off. Does your research include soft costs, or you just looking at federal outlays?

[BEARCPA]

15 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

Where is that addressed in the bill? I have not heard that criticism. 

From a CPA firm in Houston that specializes in nonprofit and government work.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[OlDawg]

10 hours ago, UT alum said:

You sure? Come harvest time, prices will rise with either labor cost increase or crops sitting in the field because the cheap labor source has been cut off. Does your research include soft costs, or you just looking at federal outlays?

Let me see if I can answer without falling out of my chair laughing at the awesome liberal education you received as a teasipper. 🤣

• The U.S. imports 60% of it's fruit and 40% of it's vegetables. The major importer is Mexico.
• The U.S. issues roughly 500,000 H2A Visas (temporary farm worker visas) each year. There is no maximum allowable, and the number is set based on requests from the U.S. agricultural businesses themselves, so it fluctuates.
• There are approximately 2.4 million farmworkers employed each year in the U.S. Thirty percent are U.S. citizens, the aforementioned 500,000+ are here legally, which leaves about 1 million--give or take--illegal migrants.

It would take an awful lot of crop harvesting to make up for a negative cost of $65,000 per illegal immigrant to even come close to breaking even on outlays. I think the cost of your fruits and vegetables would be more impacted by a 10% tariff than any loss of harvesting due to lack of illegal labor. Still, that's a heckuva lot of guacamole.

[BEARCPA]

13 hours ago, OlDawg said:

So, you go from 1.39 to ? You need to have a sizable investment portfolio for this to really hit your nonprofit. We’re talking in the millions to billions range. I haven’t read the numbers. But, if you say triple, that’s still only about 5% tax on investment income. As a nonprofit private foundation charity, how much investment income is needed? Is there a need to sit on that much cash? I thought the purpose of a charity was to provide support by giving? Not make income. I understand operating costs as I started and ran a nonprofit for years. But, my goodness.

Will need to apportion out more carefully. That’s if this even stays in the final Bill.

Note:

After reading the proposed changes, a private nonprofit will still pay 1.39% on investments up to $50 Million. That’s a sizable investment portfolio.

Not sure you’re gonna get much sympathy from Joe/Jane Smith who will have their taxes go up a much higher pct. when they’re barely getting by and you crying about paying—at most—10% on BILLIONS of investment income when you’re a tax advantaged nonprofit charity. That’s still less than the 12% most middle income folks pay, and most will never see a million in their lifetimes. But, many still probably give to charities.

There may be many things not to like about this proposal. I haven’t read it all yet. But, I’m not sure this one is a biggie to the majority.

This one strikes me as tone deaf…

No one is crying, I just wanted to provide context that most people probably didn't know about. As you laid out, my organization should be fine. Our investment income is how we subsidized almost $20 million in direct charitable expenditures last year. We need that safety net, with minimal revenue sources outside of investments. I'm more concerned with the smaller nonprofits could feel a tighter squeeze if this bill is passed.

[OlDawg]

12 minutes ago, BEARCPA said:

No one is crying, I just wanted to provide context that most people probably didn't know about. As you laid out, my organization should be fine. Our investment income is how we subsidized almost $20 million in direct charitable expenditures last year. We need that safety net, with minimal revenue sources outside of investments. I'm more concerned with the smaller nonprofits could feel a tighter squeeze if this bill is passed.

Smaller charities may be helped by the reinstatement of the $300/$150 top line charitable deduction. Not sure how much since--as I understand it--most people actually file simple nowadays. I give a recurring monthly donation to the Michael J. Fox Foundation. I don't claim any of it. Many of us give because of the cause without seeking a tax benefit. Hopefully, this will continue.

[BEARCPA]

13 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

Smaller charities may be helped by the reinstatement of the $300/$150 top line charitable deduction. Not sure how much since--as I understand it--most people actually file simple nowadays. I give a recurring monthly donation to the Michael J. Fox Foundation. I don't claim any of it. Many of us give because of the cause without seeking a tax benefit. Hopefully, this will continue.

Yeah I'm glad they brought that deduction back, just wish it was higher than $300/$150. Same with the $300 educator expense adjustment. Most teachers pay significantly more than that to outfit their classrooms. Oh well, beggars can't be choosers. 

[OlDawg]

3 minutes ago, BEARCPA said:

Yeah I'm glad they brought that deduction back, just wish it was higher than $300/$150. Same with the $300 educator expense adjustment. Most teachers pay significantly more than that to outfit their classrooms. Oh well, beggars can't be choosers. 

We'll see what happens after Congress comes back from their long break. They're probably getting an ear full from their constituents.

[thetragichippy]

47 minutes ago, OlDawg said:

Let me see if I can answer without falling out of my chair laughing at the awesome liberal education you received as a teasipper. 🤣

😀

I'm entertained the back and forth as you brings facts and numbers and he brings CNN talking points