You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Highlight of My Morning...
Here's what I don't understand. Under what political political theory is this "tax reform" bill a good thing? Left wingers should hate it, since it's a tax cut that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthy and large corporations, and because it contains many tax-irrelevant provisions that are hated, like opening up ANWR for drilling. Right wingers should hate it because it vastly increases the budget deficit at a time when we should be decreasing it, and because it won't grow the economy in the long term. So who really won here, other than wealthy elites and large corporations?
"Under what political theory is this "tax reform" bill a good thing?" That would be the political theory that you should get to keep more of your own money. And the fact that you specify democrats and Republicans is the very thing that drives me insane. You're adhering to this ideology that "I'm a Democrat, so I should be against this. Who cares if my taxes are $1,200 less?" Who the hell cares what political party you identify with. The fact is, everyone will take home more money, and you're upset about this.
-"Hey, we were talking and we decided to give a thousand dollars of your own money back to you."
-"Oh my... how dare you! You Republicans should be ashamed!!!"
See how ridiculous this sounds?
Obama more than doubled the public debt and no one blinked an eye... Trump proposes a tax reform bill that puts more money in everyone's pocket and the only think liberals can think of is, "But it increases the debt."
We won't even know those figures for several years. We could come out positive... It could break even... it could be -$500B, it could be -$1.5T. We don't know. But the fact that every single Obama supporter was okay with that while he raised taxes, but not okay with it while Trump lowers taxes is laughable.
It benefits nearly every single American household. Just because it helps those that are already covering 80% of tax revenue more than helps some sap that isn't paying any taxes, does not mean that it hurts Americans outside of the uber wealthy. Those two aren't mutually exclusive. And I think the Finance Committee made the right call on making the corporate tax cuts permanent. We're already the highest taxing nation in industrial civilizations and number 3 in the world. In order to make us more competitive in regards to bringing companies in, we should be more competitive in the world of taxes. If you want to increase the overall economy, the corporations are the key to that. And while we don't know for sure where we're going to be 10 years from now, there is certainly room for growth over that period that would help us come close to breaking even. I think that this is pretty apparent given the comments made by the likes of ATT, Comcast, and Boeing after the vote.
To your point about the fluff that was thrown in like the ANWR... this shit drives me insane. I hate the fact that we can't pass a bill without throwing in random shit, but that happens on both sides of the political spectrum and has been a common practice for as long as I've been interested in politics.
In the long run though, the average American won't be keeping more of their own money, because all this does is shift recent burden onto debt, which would be fine if an investment were being made, but the money multiplier on this kind of tax break is well less than one. You'll just be paying more on the long run. The only folks who will experience a net benefit are the very rich, due to the unbalanced impact. And during a market upswing! Every economist thinks this is insane policy. Republicans could have cut defense spending, but instead, they all suddenly transform into twisted caricatures of Keynesians when the prospect of shoveling money into the pockets of those who already have more than they know what to do with is on the table. This legislation is pure bubble fuel.
I agree with you on the fact that we're shifting lost revenue to potential debt, but that's about the extent of it.
Here's the problem with people like you that are naive enough to believe in this bull shit where you all cry about the "very rich" getting more tax breaks than you and that they "already have more money than they know what to do with"... You have no idea what you're talking about. You're sitting back regurgitating half read articles in reference to topics that you don't understand.
For starters... feel free to do a little research of your own and look at who's actually paying taxes. Check out the number of people paying zero dollars in federal tax money. Check out who's covering 90% of our tax revenue right now. Once you get done with that, come back and let me know how you're going to give tax breaks to people that aren't paying any taxes.
Next up, look up how taxes work for small business owners. People that are running their businesses on their own. You have this ignorant misconception that the only people benefiting from this tax plan are billionaire elites that are pondering which Ferrari to drive for the day, when you should be looking at sole proprietor that's feeding a family of 5 with income from his small business.
This isn't "pure bubble fuel"... it's putting more money in nearly every American household's pocket, and people like you are sitting back trying to figure out someway to complain about it, and the only thing that you guys have been able to come up with so far is-
Are you kidding me!? This is a laughable argument at best, and a pathetic excuse to complain about Trump at worst.
You don't even know what the term "money multiplier" means, do you.
Edit: Technically, I'm talking about a fiscal multiplier. Maybe that's the source of your confusion?
No... I don't know what the term "money multiplier" is, because it sounds like something that you completely made up, and as such, I ignored it completely.
To that note... every one of my points are still in fact accurate., including the notion that you have no idea what you're talking about. Anyone that has actually studied economics wouldn't confuse made up terminology with actual economic theory.
Oh man, we're off in Poe's Law land here...
Your use of Poe's Law is also incorrect...
The problem is that the government is "sucking on taxpayers tits until they get sore" and whatever the tax is there or not. If the tax was not reduced then the government would only increase its spending. Now they have to eventually reduce it.
Starve the beast falls apart as a justifiable strategy when you realize that it's being waged through the government itself. If Republicans wanted to reduce spending, they could have simply done that directly without the need for scorched ledger tactics.
Now, I am not a US citizen so I may not have the first hand sources but the Reps and Democrats are both big government parties. If they wanted to reduce deficit they could, that is true. But the motivation behind the action is not as important as the consequence of the action. If the consequences are good then the action is good.
And reducing (nominal) taxes may have thah bizzare effect of increasing the revenue from taxes, vide Laffer curve.
We're on the wrong side of the curve. The money multiplier on a tax cut like this is going be well less than one. You want a net increase in revenue, spend more on food stamps!
Well, the thing with that curve is that you don't know where you are at it.