有谁看懂马斯克是在批评“大而美”法案那一点不好

[pseudo]

疯狂增加了美国的国债

5T 一点儿都不多呀，

大家看吧，这都撑不到Trump任期结束，过两年国会还会继续上演国债上限撕逼。

[clock]

musk這個2B連基本運作都沒搞清楚就胡噴

舔的真好。

☆ 发自新买提 Android 25.05.07

[windy]

就算鲍鱼推迟6个月减息，这6个月发多少国债？而且美联储决定的是短期利率，对长期国债的利率只有间接影响。并不是美联储降1%，国债利率也降1%。而且即使鲍鱼不当美联储主席，顶多也就降2个基点，也就是0.5%而已。就算这0.5%完全反应在10年期国债上，Q2,Q3总共发行大约1T国债，0.5%大约增加5B一年，10年多付50B,也就是0.05T,和你算的差100倍！

你不会算数？ 十年期国债不就是影响十年？ 30年国债影响30年。

你看今年 10 年， 20年， 30年的国债发了多少？

1% 的利率就是大概 0.3T的利息。 5% 和 2% 的差别就是一年多付 1T利息。 中国，欧洲 2% 利率， 为什么美国就得 4.5%?

[h2o]

计算不能根据“鲍鱼不当美联储主席就降息”的预期。事实和预期不能混。

就算鲍鱼推迟6个月减息，这6个月发多少国债？而且美联储决定的是短期利率，对长期国债的利率只有间接影响。并不是美联储降1%，国债利率也降1%。而且即使鲍鱼不当美联储主席，顶多也就降2个基点，也就是0.5%而已。就算这0.5%完全反应在10年期国债上，Q2,Q3总共发行大约1T国债，0.5%大约增加5B一年，10年多付50B,也就是0.05T,和你算的差100倍！

[Zephyrca]

这种话术也有人信？该减的支出不减，怨利息太高，Fed不降息，是因为关税，要加关税，是为了保护本国产业，要保护美国产业，所以减不了支出。死循环，谁都有理由。都是胡说八道。把各个部门的预算统统缩减5％，一点问题也没有。

同意这个，我有朋友在政府部门，已经被通知裁员了
既然砍了政府预算，还要加关税，为什么居然还有这么大的赤字？

[h2o]

谢谢解释。很有道理。

非法移民medicaid 的条款为什么在众院能通过，在参院却被两党砍掉？

美国不是中国， 想干啥就干啥。

Q1 GDP 已经负数， 一上来就减 5% 预算， Q2 就得-2%， 2026 就得大萧条。

国会的不给非法移民medicaid 的条款在参院让两党废了， 拿掉新能源补贴MUSK 疯了， 你说砍哪个来减少开支？

能减掉的主要是两大块， 军工和医疗， 总不能砍军工自断GOP手脚，然后你敢动医疗？你要不要选了？你的法案能通过？

这个减税法案主要不是新减税， 而是要维持目前的状态， 不通过就相当于加税， 2026-2028就是大萧条， 哪个总统想任期中大萧条？ 除非是 2000 和 2008 那样的执政末期两党合作的reset。

[windy]

那你说怎么算？他把这个国会预算委员会算出来的大美丽带来的10年5T屎盆子扣在美联储不减息上。我算给他看，就算美联储同意减息，也就是0.05T的区别。

计算不能根据“鲍鱼不当美联储主席就降息”的预期。事实和预期不能混。

[geniushanbiao]

马斯克反对的不完全是大美丽法案的条款本身（当然这些条款对他自己是不利的），他反对的是时机。看看2025年这半年多，由于马斯克的乱搞，特斯拉销量每况愈下，各种促销手段都用上了仍然没啥起色，然后他指着robotaxi拉一波，结果这robotaxi一出来就是个扶不起的阿斗，到处出状况，无奈又祭出self delivery来找回点场子。这样的情况下老川扔出来这么个大美丽法案，简直就是给他雪上加霜。

[HBBH]

今年是10T， 相当于总债务的 1/3 到 1/4. 按平均算，任期4年， 每年就是 1/4, 就是 9-10T。 5-6 月是高峰， 再降已经晚了。

In 2025, the United States faces a significant debt refinancing challenge, with estimates varying slightly across sources. The U.S. Treasury is projected to refinance approximately $9.2 trillion in maturing debt this year. This figure includes a substantial portion of the publicly held marketable debt, with about 32% of such debt maturing within 12 months as of Q2 2025. Additionally, the federal government is expected to borrow an extra $1.9 trillion to cover the projected budget deficit, pushing total Treasury issuance above $10 trillion for the year. Over half of this debt is front-loaded, with significant maturities occurring in the first half of 2025, particularly between January and June.

These figures are based on recent analyses and reflect the combination of maturing Treasury securities and new borrowing needs. The exact amount may vary due to fluctuations in revenue collections, spending, and economic conditions, but $9.2 trillion is a commonly cited estimate for the refinancing task in 2025.

就算鲍鱼推迟6个月减息，这6个月发多少国债？而且美联储决定的是短期利率，对长期国债的利率只有间接影响。并不是美联储降1%，国债利率也降1%。而且即使鲍鱼不当美联储主席，顶多也就降2个基点，也就是0.5%而已。就算这0.5%完全反应在10年期国债上，Q2,Q3总共发行大约1T国债，0.5%大约增加5B一年，10年多付50B,也就是0.05T,和你算的差100倍！

[windy]

你这是在搅混水。10T里Q2,Q3打算发行的长债只有差不多1T.

Based on Treasury Department projections, privately-held net marketable borrowing is estimated to be $514 billion in Q2 2025 (April - June 2025) and $554 billion in Q3 2025 (July - September 2025). These estimates assume an end-of-quarter cash balance of $850 billion for both periods. The Q2 estimate reflects adjustments due to a lower starting cash balance and anticipated lower net cash flows, partially offset by reduced Federal Reserve System Open Market Account (SOMA) redemptions.

今年是10T， 相当于总债务的 1/3 到 1/4. 按平均算，任期4年， 每年就是 1/4, 就是 9-10T。 5-6 月是高峰， 再降已经晚了。

In 2025, the United States faces a significant debt refinancing challenge, with estimates varying slightly across sources. The U.S. Treasury is projected to refinance approximately $9.2 trillion in maturing debt this year. This figure includes a substantial portion of the publicly held marketable debt, with about 32% of such debt maturing within 12 months as of Q2 2025. Additionally, the federal government is expected to borrow an extra $1.9 trillion to cover the projected budget deficit, pushing total Treasury issuance above $10 trillion for the year. Over half of this debt is front-loaded, with significant maturities occurring in the first half of 2025, particularly between January and June.

These figures are based on recent analyses and reflect the combination of maturing Treasury securities and new borrowing needs. The exact amount may vary due to fluctuations in revenue collections, spending, and economic conditions, but $9.2 trillion is a commonly cited estimate for the refinancing task in 2025.

[sobering]

10年增加国债$5T 并不是这个法案引起的， 是老鲍不降息， 每年要多付 0.5-1T利息。

不增加国债上限$5T ， 今年美国国债就要违约。

MUSK 批评的主要原因是补贴了油，却砍了电池， 电车和太阳能的补贴。

当然是多个原因。但是，如果穿仆现在说，好，富人的稅不减了，debt ceiling只增加3T或4T（没有计算），很多人肯定闭嘴。至少我不会再说什么。

[sunnycoast]

因为把太阳能和ev的mandate拿掉了，无他。

又开始添金毛了？ 你的空仓死定了，逃不掉的。

[赖美豪中]

请问这个案子里面那一份是减了‘富人’得税，请你指出来

当然是多个原因。但是，如果穿仆现在说，好，富人的稅不减了，debt ceiling只增加3T或4T（没有计算），很多人肯定闭嘴。至少我不会再说什么。

[YouHi]

又开始添金毛了？ 你的空仓死定了，逃不掉的。

人艰不拆

[HBBH]

你自己没有搞明白， borrowing 是借新债， 还要refiance到期的国债 9-10T， 5-6月高峰已过。

你这是在搅混水。10T里Q2,Q3打算发行的长债只有差不多1T.

Based on Treasury Department projections, privately-held net marketable borrowing is estimated to be $514 billion in Q2 2025 (April - June 2025) and $554 billion in Q3 2025 (July - September 2025). These estimates assume an end-of-quarter cash balance of $850 billion for both periods. The Q2 estimate reflects adjustments due to a lower starting cash balance and anticipated lower net cash flows, partially offset by reduced Federal Reserve System Open Market Account (SOMA) redemptions.

[neuron66]

美国从上到下都是习惯借钱度日，只顾当日，不顾明天，要学阿根廷，俄国休克疗法降低赤字，根本做不到。至于国家哪天崩溃，没人在意

[windy]

Here's how it works
“Privately‑held net marketable borrowing” — the key number the Treasury reports — excludes rollovers of Fed-held debt, but includes any refinancing via new auctions of debt held by the public (private investors) 
bankofsingapore.com
+6
home.treasury.gov
+6
home.treasury.gov
+6
.

For example, in the April–June 2025 quarter, the Treasury expected to borrow just $123 billion net, assuming its cash balance—but total gross issuance was much higher, including rollovers of maturing privately‑held debt 
home.treasury.gov
.

The forecasts you mentioned — “$500 + billion each quarter in 2025” — come from the Quarterly Refunding Statements, where the Treasury outlines gross auction sizes for auctioned bills, notes, bonds, including refinancing portions 
home.treasury.gov
+3
home.treasury.gov
+3
treasurydirect.gov
+3
.

In short:
Yes, that $500B+ per quarter does include refinancing (rolling over maturing debt).

The net borrowing figure (after accounting for cash balances) will be lower.

The Treasury reports both gross issuance targets (for auctions) and net borrowing estimates, depending on context.

你自己没有搞明白， borrowing 是借新债， 还要refiance到期的国债 9-10T， 5-6月高峰已过。

[sobering]

请问这个案子里面那一份是减了‘富人’得税，请你指出来

自己读。

我承认，这个分析有偏见，而且部分也有惠予中产，但是大部分都是为top 1%的人设计的。


The “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB), passed by the House on May 22, 2025, and under consideration in the Senate, includes several provisions that critics argue disproportionately benefit wealthy individuals and entities. Below is a list of specific items in the bill that are identified as providing tax cuts or benefits primarily to high-income earners, based on available analyses from web sources:

1. Permanent Extension of 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) Individual Income Tax Rates and Brackets:
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s lower personal income tax rates, including the top rate of 37% for high earners, which benefits those in the highest income brackets the most. The top 1% of earners (approximately those earning $4,325,000 and up) receive significant tax savings compared to lower- and middle-income groups.

2. Increase in the Estate and Gift Tax Exemption:
• The bill permanently increases the unified credit for estate and gift taxes, as well as the generation-skipping transfer tax (GSTT) exemption, from $10 million to $15 million per individual (indexed for inflation). This change primarily benefits high-net-worth individuals and families by allowing them to transfer greater wealth without incurring federal taxes.

3. Increase in the State and Local Tax (SALT) Deduction Cap:
• The SALT deduction cap is raised from $10,000 to $40,000. This provision disproportionately benefits high-income households in high-tax states, as they are more likely to itemize deductions and have larger state and local tax liabilities. The bottom 80% of earners see no benefit from this change.

4. Enhanced Pass-Through Business Deduction (Section 199A):
• The deduction for qualified business income under Section 199A is increased from 20% to 23% and made permanent, reducing the effective tax rate for pass-through entities (e.g., LLCs, partnerships) to 28.49% from 29.6%. This benefits high-income business owners, as pass-through income is concentrated among wealthier individuals.

5. Permanent Extension of Opportunity Zone Tax Cuts:
• The bill extends and broadens capital gains tax relief for long-term investments in designated Opportunity Zones. This provision primarily benefits wealthy investors who can defer or reduce capital gains taxes, as capital gains are highly concentrated among high-income households.

6. Modifications to Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI) and Foreign-Derived Intangible Income (FDII):
• The bill adjusts GILTI and FDII deduction rates to 49.2% (from 50%) and 36.5% (from 37.5%), respectively, for tax years starting after December 31, 2025. These changes benefit multinational corporations and their high-income shareholders by reducing taxes on foreign income.

7. Permanent Corporate Tax Rate Reduction:
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. This benefits corporations and their shareholders, who are predominantly high-income individuals, as corporate tax savings often translate to increased dividends or stock value. From 2018 to 2021, top corporations saved $240 billion due to this cut.

8. Permanent 100% Expensing for Business Investments:
• The bill allows businesses to immediately expense 100% of the cost of qualified property (e.g., factories, equipment) acquired after January 20, 2025, through 2029. This provision, which also includes domestic research and development expensing, benefits large corporations and wealthy business owners by reducing taxable income significantly.
9. Less Restrictive Limitation on Interest Deductions (Section 163(j)):
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s less restrictive rules on interest deductions, using a more favorable EBITDA-based definition for adjusted taxable income through 2028. This benefits highly leveraged businesses, often owned by high-income individuals or large corporations.

Analyses, such as those from the Tax Policy Center, Yale Budget Lab, and the Congressional Budget Office, indicate that these provisions deliver substantial benefits to the top 1% and top 5% of earners. For example, the richest 1% are estimated to receive an average tax cut of $68,000 to $80,000 annually, while the top 5% receive about 45% of the bill’s net tax cuts.

Note: Some sources, like the White House and Ways and Means Committee, argue that the bill prioritizes working-class families, citing provisions like no taxes on tips or overtime and an expanded child tax credit. However, critics highlight that the financial benefits for lower- and middle-income households are modest compared to the significant tax cuts for the wealthy, and these are often offset by proposed cuts to programs like Medicaid and SNAP.
If you’d like further details on any specific provision or a deeper analysis of the distributional impacts, let me know!

[HBBH]

我说了，　就是主要是维持现状，　就是TRUMP第一任的减税法案永久化，　因为马上就要过期了。　

本来按GOP的计划，这个屎盆子是猪党要端的，　结果JB偷了四年，　把屎盆子又转到TRUMP　手上了。　

自己读。

我承认，这个分析有偏见，而且部分也有惠予中产，但是大部分都是为top 1%的人设计的。


The “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB), passed by the House on May 22, 2025, and under consideration in the Senate, includes several provisions that critics argue disproportionately benefit wealthy individuals and entities. Below is a list of specific items in the bill that are identified as providing tax cuts or benefits primarily to high-income earners, based on available analyses from web sources:

1. Permanent Extension of 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) Individual Income Tax Rates and Brackets:
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s lower personal income tax rates, including the top rate of 37% for high earners, which benefits those in the highest income brackets the most. The top 1% of earners (approximately those earning $4,325,000 and up) receive significant tax savings compared to lower- and middle-income groups.

2. Increase in the Estate and Gift Tax Exemption:
• The bill permanently increases the unified credit for estate and gift taxes, as well as the generation-skipping transfer tax (GSTT) exemption, from $10 million to $15 million per individual (indexed for inflation). This change primarily benefits high-net-worth individuals and families by allowing them to transfer greater wealth without incurring federal taxes.

3. Increase in the State and Local Tax (SALT) Deduction Cap:
• The SALT deduction cap is raised from $10,000 to $40,000. This provision disproportionately benefits high-income households in high-tax states, as they are more likely to itemize deductions and have larger state and local tax liabilities. The bottom 80% of earners see no benefit from this change.

4. Enhanced Pass-Through Business Deduction (Section 199A):
• The deduction for qualified business income under Section 199A is increased from 20% to 23% and made permanent, reducing the effective tax rate for pass-through entities (e.g., LLCs, partnerships) to 28.49% from 29.6%. This benefits high-income business owners, as pass-through income is concentrated among wealthier individuals.

5. Permanent Extension of Opportunity Zone Tax Cuts:
• The bill extends and broadens capital gains tax relief for long-term investments in designated Opportunity Zones. This provision primarily benefits wealthy investors who can defer or reduce capital gains taxes, as capital gains are highly concentrated among high-income households.

6. Modifications to Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI) and Foreign-Derived Intangible Income (FDII):
• The bill adjusts GILTI and FDII deduction rates to 49.2% (from 50%) and 36.5% (from 37.5%), respectively, for tax years starting after December 31, 2025. These changes benefit multinational corporations and their high-income shareholders by reducing taxes on foreign income.

7. Permanent Corporate Tax Rate Reduction:
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. This benefits corporations and their shareholders, who are predominantly high-income individuals, as corporate tax savings often translate to increased dividends or stock value. From 2018 to 2021, top corporations saved $240 billion due to this cut.

8. Permanent 100% Expensing for Business Investments:
• The bill allows businesses to immediately expense 100% of the cost of qualified property (e.g., factories, equipment) acquired after January 20, 2025, through 2029. This provision, which also includes domestic research and development expensing, benefits large corporations and wealthy business owners by reducing taxable income significantly.
9. Less Restrictive Limitation on Interest Deductions (Section 163(j)):
• The bill makes permanent the TCJA’s less restrictive rules on interest deductions, using a more favorable EBITDA-based definition for adjusted taxable income through 2028. This benefits highly leveraged businesses, often owned by high-income individuals or large corporations.

Analyses, such as those from the Tax Policy Center, Yale Budget Lab, and the Congressional Budget Office, indicate that these provisions deliver substantial benefits to the top 1% and top 5% of earners. For example, the richest 1% are estimated to receive an average tax cut of $68,000 to $80,000 annually, while the top 5% receive about 45% of the bill’s net tax cuts.

Note: Some sources, like the White House and Ways and Means Committee, argue that the bill prioritizes working-class families, citing provisions like no taxes on tips or overtime and an expanded child tax credit. However, critics highlight that the financial benefits for lower- and middle-income households are modest compared to the significant tax cuts for the wealthy, and these are often offset by proposed cuts to programs like Medicaid and SNAP.
If you’d like further details on any specific provision or a deeper analysis of the distributional impacts, let me know!

[sobering]

Key Observations

• The total cost of the OBBB’s tax provisions is estimated at $3.7 trillion to $4.7 trillion over 10 years, with $2.5 trillion to $3.44 trillion (roughly 67%–73%) benefiting the top 5% of earners or wealthy entities, according to analyses from the Tax Policy Center, ITEP, and CBO.

• The richest 1% alone receive an estimated $1.2 trillion to $1.6 trillion in tax cuts, averaging $68,000 to $80,000 per household annually in 2026.

• These estimates are conventional (not accounting for economic growth). Dynamic scoring, which includes GDP growth (estimated at 0.8%–1.1% long-run increase), reduces the net revenue loss to $3.1 trillion to $3.8 trillion for the entire bill, but the distributional skew toward the wealthy remains.

• Critics note that these tax cuts are partially offset by $1.3 trillion to $1.6 trillion in spending cuts (e.g., Medicaid, SNAP), which disproportionately affect low-income households, exacerbating the regressive impact.