You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Hey Steemit Economists: Trump Tax Plan is More Failed Trickle Down Economics
The plan does seem to lower taxes for the middle class. People saying it doesn’t, but I’m looking at it and it seems to help. Maybe you could point some things out to me where it shows that the middle class is hurt. Because from what I’m seeing, yes some will be hurt, but some are always hurt. It was the same with Obamacare. Some received some were penalized. But this tax plan seems to lower taxes for almost any earner
over the long term, once temporary provisions elapse, it will raise taxes for more than 50% of americans while providing major cuts to the richest, including the top 1% and the top 0.2%
What are these temporary provisions? And how does it raise taxes? No offense but i just hear people repeating these talking points without explaining it. Maybe you could explain it?
Almost all tax cuts go like this. They cut your taxes today, and take all of it back from you 5-10 years down the road with increases. No one talks about that side of it, but that is how they do it. You don't think they are actually paying for these cuts with reductions in spending do you?
The whole 1% getting more cuts than other people is also intentional. By making the issue about class warfare instead of economics, they can keep us all busy while they rob everyone.
The truth is, the top 1% of income earners pay about 35% of all income taxes. The top 50% of income earners pay about 99% of all income taxes. If there are to be tax cuts, they should be distributed based on how much money you put into the pot in the first place.
But how? Nobody seems to be able to answer that question. Why would our taxes increase in 4 years from this bill? I have searched for this answer and asked many people on other sites, read articles and everything. But it all is the same answer “taxes will be reduced right now, but down the road it will hurt more people” ok... but how? The how seems to get left out always.maybe you could shed some light on this?
I am all for Trump's tax plan, I think it is fantastic (I'm not an economist). We had something similar in Australia anyway.
During the GFC, we were given $40billion of handouts - $900 to every person in Australia earning under a certain amount - we ended up avoiding a recession. This temporarily boosted our growth, kept businesses actually in business. This money was wasted mainly on whitegoods/electrical goods and other depreciating assets which are all probably broken now - rather than invested.
But this put us in debt - from actually having money in the bank - I think we had 30billion in the bank. Since then our debt has been spiraling out of control.
They've had to increase our income tax, add levy's, and other hidden taxes to make up for the shortfall. We've ended up paying far more than $900 back. I know my tax rate has gone up from 34% -> 37.5% which is approximately $4000 a year.
What I am saying is, it might be a good short term measure to increase growth. What will happen in the long term? You have to pay extra the 1 trillion in interest compounding yearly. You'd hell want to be making that back in growth at a minimum.
Again I am all for the tax break & hope it does work for the Americans. I hate paying nearly 40% tax myself which is wasted on rubbish yearly.
Correct me if I am far off the mark.
The tax break is very temporary and after 2019 most people will be paying more in taxes and not able to claim deductions allowed previously. Most people don't know what is in the tax plan yet, including the politicians that approved it. Did you read the whle thing?
The notion that people will be paying more when the tax cuts sunset, is completely false. When (if) the Trump tax cuts expire, rates will return to where they are now. That is not an increase, it's a return to normalcy.
Secondly, why is no one talking about why the tax cuts are temporary? They are temporary to conform to the House rules. Democrats have come out in force against this tax bill from the beginning. In order to pass the bill without a Democrat filibuster, it had to go through reconciliation - where it could be passed with a simple majority, not the 60 votes normally needed. One of the strings that comes with reconciliation is the Byrd rule - that a bill can not add to the deficit outside of 10 years, which means it has to expire. For all the talk coming from Democrats about personal tax rates "raising" in 10 years, all they had to do was give the Republicans a 60 vote majority, and they would have been permanent. Instead, they are filling you people full of lies, in order to scare you into voting for them in 2018.
Because the bill is specifically written that way. The rates are lower for x number of years and then they jump right back up. That is how the bill is written. Really a simple concept. It lowers taxes temporarily then takes it all back with higher rates down the road after this president is out of office.
I dont really see that in the bill though
See my post above. The reason the cuts are temporary is because Democrats are politicizing the process. If only a few Democrats voted with the Republicans, the cuts would have been permanent. It really is that simple.
I don't know how else to state this so you understand it. Bills are written documents that create laws. This bill is a tax bill. It has some verbiage in it that lowers taxes for certain people under certain circumstances.
The bill has language that lays out how long this reduction is to last. The bill then has language stating what will happen when the tax cuts end.
Specifically in this case, when the tax cuts end in X years, taxes increase again by an amount laid out in the bill.
For example, the bill might say something like this:
The tax rate for the money you earn under $100,000 will now be 10% (lets say it used to be 15%). This will last for 10 years. After 10 years, the tax rate for money earned under $100,000 will go to 20% and stay there. This will occur unless some new bill is passed into law that changes it.
The bill literally says that the cuts will last for x amount of time and after that time the new rates will change to a higher rate.
Hopefully this makes sense to you.
Just so you are aware, by 2027, which is 8 years away, most people will only see small tax cuts or a slight rise in taxes.to me that sounds good right? Tax cuts for 8 years is a good thing. And thank you for dumbing down things for me like i dont understand things. But i was asking for where in the bill you read that it was going to expire in how many years
You will have to find it yourself.
Raise the taxes to where? Back to where they are in 2017?
More busyness by Trump and a quid pro quo to his kronies...
A Uranium mint on the pillow.
Trump's way of saying "Thanks For Checking Out Of NY/USA" take the money and run...