Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trumps tax cuts contributed NOTHING to the deficit. Money to the Treasury increased, albeit only slightly. Increases in SPENDING are the real contributing factor. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...nment-spending
Wages have been up during his tenure....something you saw nothing of in the previous administration.
The pandemic is cycling through our population regardless of any action or inaction by Trump. As long as R naught is above 1 (currently calculated as between 2 and 3) and people refuse to use common sense, there is no way to stop it. The virus never sleeps!
Of course they did.
Quote:
Less than a week after Treasury Secretary Mnuchin repeated the fanciful claim that the Trump tax cuts of 2017 would pay for themselves, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) proved him wrong. If tax cuts actually paid for themselves, they would reduce deficits based on faster revenue growth that comes from faster economic growth. Deficits immediately shot up after the 2017 supply-side tax cuts. And CBO forecasts that those deficits will continue to stay high for the foreseeable future. This is the opposite of tax cuts paying for themselves. https://www.forbes.com/sites/christi.../#396d164a66c4
But not because businesses prospered from it but rather because they were buying back their own stock, in the long run that does not help the economy.
It helps the union pension funds (both public and private) and individuals' retirement accounts that own their stock. Believe me, there's a HUGE amount of pressure to NOT let pension funds and retirement accounts crash. That would plunge many tens of millions of Americans into abject poverty at retirement.
The top 1% richest paid more than the bottom 90% COMBINED!
The top 1% paid 38% of all taxes.
The top 50% paid 97% of taxes, the bottom 50% paid 3%! (this is outrageous )
umm yeah because that's how percentages work, 1% of a million is a lot less than 1% of $10,000. The bottom 50% have an AGI of < $41,740 How much would you like to see them pay without ending up making so little that they would qualify for food stamps and subsidized housing? To the wealthiest in this country $41,000 is probably a rounding error.
It helps the union pension funds (both public and private) and individuals' retirement accounts that own their stock. Believe me, there's a HUGE amount of pressure to NOT let pension funds and retirement accounts crash. That would plunge many tens of millions of Americans into abject poverty at retirement.
lol sure thing the rich are getting more so that we can stand under them and hold a bucket out for them to so that we can catch some of that trickle down. Trickle down economics never worked, and it doesn't work now. Pension and retirement funds would prosper if the tax breaks were tied to hiring, business expansions and wage increases. It's a fantasy to think that stock buybacks do anything other than to artificially inflate stock prices.
lol sure thing the rich are getting more so that we can stand under them and hold a bucket out for them to so that we can catch some of that trickle down. Trickle down economics never worked, and it doesn't work now. Pension and retirement funds would prosper if the tax breaks were tied to hiring, business expansions and wage increases. It's a fantasy to think that stock buybacks do anything other than to artificially inflate stock prices.
Pension funds, retirement accounts, and the rich all own the same stocks. As goes one, so go all. Your desire to impoverish the rich would also impoverish tens of millions (if not more) retirees. Are you good with that?
Pension funds, retirement accounts, and the rich all own the same stocks. As goes one, so go all. Your desire to impoverish the rich would also impoverish tens of millions (if not more) retirees. Are you good with that?
All true! Especially the part I bolded. I have to wonder why so many dumbf**ks kept whining "They're tax cuts for the rich! Tax cuts for the rich!" when the exact opposite was actually true.
I gave this example a few months ago to try to make people understand what really happened, but most are too stupid to get it:
The SALT tax deduction she took on her US 1040 for...
2017: $245,500
2018: just $10,000
The $235,500 over $10,000 she could no longer deduct in 2018 and going forward was taxed at her marginal rate, likely at 37% which would be an extra $87,135 in federal income tax. That's NOT a tax cut; it's a tax INCREASE on the rich.
To further illustrate the point, examples:
$150,000 household pays $15,000 in SALT.
Deduct $10,000. Taxed on that extra $5,000 at 22% marginal tax rate = $1,100
$1.5 million household pays $150,000 in SALT.
Deduct $10,000. Taxed on that extra $140,000 at 37% marginal tax rate = $51,800
There's a 10 times difference in household income and SALT between the two households, but the top 1%-er is paying about 50 timesmore in extra tax than the middle class household due to the new SALT deduction limit.
Understand? But Biden wants to repeal the $10,000 SALT deduction cap and reinstate the formerly unlimited deduction.
Why, Dems? Why?!?
Because these tax increases are not going to the states and their education, Park, and other services, they are going to footing the bill for US Govt basic operations in place of red state wealthy people getting to sit pretty. It’s a tax on New Yorkers to pay for Oklahomans when New York schools can use the money. They are going to a US Treasury that is unfairly taxing them and in place of 1%ers in red states.
Because these tax increases are not going to the states and their education, Park, and other services, they are going to footing the bill for US Govt basic operations in place of red state wealthy people getting to sit pretty. It’s a tax on New Yorkers to pay for Oklahomans when New York schools can use the money. They are going to a US Treasury that is unfairly taxing them and in place of 1%ers in red states.
How does the SALT deduction limit reduce the tax money paid to the state by its residents?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
