Remember How Great California Was? (day care, calculator, tax return)

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Nope. That's not proof of anything.

Moreover, I think you're confusing Republicans with JFK. President Kennedy was the first in the post-war era to cut taxes, with positive results.

Context is everything....Remember back then the top marginal tax rate was 91 percent - and he wanted to reduce it to 65 percent. Today it's 35 percent. Also, JFK wasn't using the tax cuts to gut public education...unlike Governor Brownback.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...ide-tax-cutter

Anyway, just heard that Secretary of State Kris Kobach announced he is running for governor. The vote-supressor in chief. Lovely.

[StanleysOwl]

Originally Posted by silverkris

Context is everything....Remember back then the top marginal tax rate was 91 percent - and he wanted to reduce it to 65 percent. Today it's 35 percent. Also, JFK wasn't using the tax cuts to gut public education...unlike Governor Brownback.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...ide-tax-cutter

Anyway, just heard that Secretary of State Kris Kobach announced he is running for governor. The vote-supressor in chief. Lovely.

Oh details details ...

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Maybe this will help: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...nomic-disaster

It failed for the same reason supply side theory always fails. Giving large tax cuts to the wealthy doesn't stimulate the economy. It would be nice to think that they would use that extra money to grow their business, but why would they unless there is an increased demand for their goods and services? And when the tax cuts for the poor and middle class are small or non-existent there is nothing to stimulate demand, so businesses with lower taxes just take their profit and call it a day.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...nomic-disaster

Two problems I see.

Instead, Goossen claims, the money has gone to a small group of wealthy Kansans while the state’s budget has been left with a roughly $1bn shortfall.

“We have consistently said Kansas must first fix our spending problem, then and only then address the tax code.

If you cut taxes for a few it does not help. Plus if you over spend it just gets worse.

If something is not done right it fails.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Two problems I see.

Instead, Goossen claims, the money has gone to a small group of wealthy Kansans while the state’s budget has been left with a roughly $1bn shortfall.

“We have consistently said Kansas must first fix our spending problem, then and only then address the tax code.

If you cut taxes for a few it does not help. Plus if you over spend it just gets worse.

If something is not done right it fails.

tax cuts never pay for themselves. tax cuts for the rich do not generate revenue. There is no way to cut taxes substantially for the middle class when your agenda is to cut taxes for the wealthy, supply side by it's very nature benefits the rich at the expense of the working class.

This is how Kansas cut taxes:

"The poorest 20 percent of households -- those making less than $23,000 a year -- are paying about $200 more, on average, according to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy in Washington. For the middle class, the changes have been a wash, with less-affluent households paying somewhat more and more-affluent households giving up a little less. Meanwhile, the wealthiest 1 percent of households, those making at least $493,000 a year, are saving an average of $25,000".
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b9e240498fe8

And even after the Kansas legislature raised taxes they did so in a way that the rich are not thrown under the bus but instead the tax increases hit the poor and the middle class

"The richest household in every 100 will pay about 1.7 percentage points more as a result of this week's vote — an average of $31,000 more a year. And the bill does not bring the sales tax down to pre-2015 levels. Instead, it includes other provisions that will modestly increase taxes on some households among the poor and the middle class. The marginal rate on their incomes will be increased. Also, married couples earning less than $12,500 are generally exempt from paying taxes now, but that threshold will decline to $5,000. In total, the new legislation will increase the share of their income the poorest household in every five pays in state taxes by 0.1 percentage points on average. Among Kansas's middle class, the share the typical household pays in state taxes will increase by 0.3 percentage points, or an average of $160 more annually. Overall, the new law increases taxes for about three quarters of middle-class households in Kansas. Others will benefit when deductions and credits for child-care, mortgage payments and other expenses are restored."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/ne...orscreenreader

And Trump's tax plan looks a whole lot like the one that just about destroyed the economy of Kansas:
David Nicklaus: Trump's tax cut looks like Kansas writ large - Chicago Tribune

talk about Republican supply siders doubling down on stupid...

[taimaishu]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Nope. That's not proof of anything.

Moreover, I think you're confusing Republicans with JFK. President Kennedy was the first in the post-war era to cut taxes, with positive results.

But JFK not only "Cut"taxes, but he didn't go on a spending spree like Bush and Obama. JFK also wanted to get rid of Secret Govt, Federal Reserve, etc etc.

They made sure that NO Future president would have the same mindset after JFK.

That's why Ron Paul didn't win, and that's why Bernie Sanders didn't have a chance. Even though they both dominated the polls and exit polls.

[payutenyodagimas]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Two problems I see.

Plus if you over spend it just gets worse.

If something is not done right it fails.

they didnt only cut taxes, they cut state spending too. that's why the people are revolting. no funds for roads, education, etc. I wonder why they didn't just dissolved their state govt and let private sector provide/sell needed services?

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by silverkris

Context is everything....Remember back then the top marginal tax rate was 91 percent - and he wanted to reduce it to 65 percent. Today it's 35 percent. Also, JFK wasn't using the tax cuts to gut public education...unlike Governor Brownback.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...ide-tax-cutter

Anyway, just heard that Secretary of State Kris Kobach announced he is running for governor. The vote-supressor in chief. Lovely.

Maybe JER-RY! could run for Att'y Gen'l again, to keep an eye on that.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Maybe JER-RY! could run for Att'y Gen'l again, to keep an eye on that.

I'm sorry - I was referring to Kansas. I don't see any equivalent of a Kobach or Hustead in our state likely to be elected.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

tax cuts never pay for themselves. tax cuts for the rich do not generate revenue. There is no way to cut taxes substantially for the middle class when your agenda is to cut taxes for the wealthy, supply side by it's very nature benefits the rich at the expense of the working class.

This is how Kansas cut taxes:

"The poorest 20 percent of households -- those making less than $23,000 a year -- are paying about $200 more, on average, according to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy in Washington. For the middle class, the changes have been a wash, with less-affluent households paying somewhat more and more-affluent households giving up a little less. Meanwhile, the wealthiest 1 percent of households, those making at least $493,000 a year, are saving an average of $25,000".
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b9e240498fe8

And even after the Kansas legislature raised taxes they did so in a way that the rich are not thrown under the bus but instead the tax increases hit the poor and the middle class

"The richest household in every 100 will pay about 1.7 percentage points more as a result of this week's vote — an average of $31,000 more a year. And the bill does not bring the sales tax down to pre-2015 levels. Instead, it includes other provisions that will modestly increase taxes on some households among the poor and the middle class. The marginal rate on their incomes will be increased. Also, married couples earning less than $12,500 are generally exempt from paying taxes now, but that threshold will decline to $5,000. In total, the new legislation will increase the share of their income the poorest household in every five pays in state taxes by 0.1 percentage points on average. Among Kansas's middle class, the share the typical household pays in state taxes will increase by 0.3 percentage points, or an average of $160 more annually. Overall, the new law increases taxes for about three quarters of middle-class households in Kansas. Others will benefit when deductions and credits for child-care, mortgage payments and other expenses are restored."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/ne...orscreenreader

And Trump's tax plan looks a whole lot like the one that just about destroyed the economy of Kansas:
David Nicklaus: Trump's tax cut looks like Kansas writ large - Chicago Tribune

talk about Republican supply siders doubling down on stupid...

That was my point, they only lowered taxes on the rich.

Tax cuts across the board is a different issue.

No one knows what is in Trump's tax plan so we will just have to wait and see.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by payutenyodagimas

they didnt only cut taxes, they cut state spending too. that's why the people are revolting. no funds for roads, education, etc. I wonder why they didn't just dissolved their state govt and let private sector provide/sell needed services?

They did it wrong. It looks that way.

They should do it like CA; raise taxes and fees and ...... still not spend anymore money on what the increases were for. That works in CA right?