Tax cut on deck

[bbhaag]

He used it to stimulate an economy still in recovery from a recession. Which is when you are supposed to stimulate! It’s not like he had a ton of options on the table in 2011 given the GOP’s position.

Trump is braying about the fed which is nearing its limits for stimulus by interest rate cuts, contemplating tax half baked strategy to pump up consumer spending, and raving about how the media is making up problematic economic indications. That is desperate.

So what your saying is the current economy is not in a recession and is doing fine so there is no need for a pointless payroll tax cut?
I also noticed you averted answering my other questions. Was there a reason why?

 

[sportage]

Well, this would be SO DONALD TRUMP.
Any tax cut, that is.
I swear this guy Trump is dead set determined to destroy the economy before the election.
Just maybe it is true that we are enjoying an economy from not Donald Trump, but an economy that President Obama planned for.
If that is true, and it probably is, then Trump and his policies are trying hard to find the breaking point, economically speaking.
And considering the history of Donald Trump when it comes to business and planning, Trump may just find that breaking point.
Then what will he do?
Break it! What else?

 

[K1052]

So what your saying is the current economy is not in a recession and is doing fine so there is no need for a pointless payroll tax cut?
I also noticed you averted answering my other questions. Was there a reason why?

Basically yes. Trump giving up his tariffs and fostering a stable business climate would be far more productive than a payroll cut but he’s not going to do that. Instead we’re going to lurch down this same road with steadfast ineptitude and growing signs of economic trouble on the horizon.

 

[shortylickens]

what kind of morons believe its ok to spend money without income?

 

[dawp]

Trust me

nope

 

[DrDoug]

I've been reading the Calculated Risk blog for a long time and he has something up about the success of the 2017 tax cuts:

We all remember the promises for the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA):

1) "Boost growth to 3.5 percent per year on average, with the potential to reach a 4 percent growth rate."

2) Boost business investment

3) Pay for itself (Not increase deficit)

4) Give the typical American household around a $4,000 pay raise

Here are a few quotes from 2017:
"This change, along with a lower business tax rate, would likely give the typical American household around a $4,000 pay raise." Donald Trump, October 19, 2017

“Not only will this tax plan pay for itself, but it will pay down debt,” Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, Sept 2017

“I think this tax bill is going to reduce the size of our deficits going forward,” Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), November 2017

"I think to the extent we get the tax deal done, the stock market will go up higher." Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, October 2017

He then goes on to provide economic information that shows that the tax cuts failed on all four points. He closes with:

Supporters of the TCJA could argue that other policies (the trade war and/or monetary policy) have limited the impact of the TCJA. Yes, the trade was has had a negative impact on the economy, but the TCJA was never going to meet these promises. Also I don't think monetary policy is to blame.

In summary, there was no discernible boost in investment. No sustained increase in GDP growth. No $4,000 pay raise. And the TCJA didn't pay for itself (significant increase in deficit).

Tax cuts are the Republican answer to everything that ails us. House on fire? Tax cuts. Pregnant? Tax cuts. Shootings in schools and, well... everywhere? Tax cuts. Sick? Dying from inability to afford medical care? Tax cuts. Most people will barely notice the effect of the tax cuts on their paycheck but that doesn't matter, because TAX CUTS!

Since those tax cuts didn't work as intended, it's time for more tax cuts because Republicans believe that if something they tried didn't work then the best thing to do is just keep trying the same thing and hope for a better result.

 

[dawp]

I've been reading the Calculated Risk blog for a long time and he has something up about the success of the 2017 tax cuts:



He then goes on to provide economic information that shows that the tax cuts failed on all four points. He closes with:



Tax cuts are the Republican answer to everything that ails us. House on fire? Tax cuts. Pregnant? Tax cuts. Shootings in schools and, well... everywhere? Tax cuts. Sick? Dying from inability to afford medical care? Tax cuts. Most people will barely notice the effect of the tax cuts on their paycheck but that doesn't matter, because TAX CUTS!

Since those tax cuts didn't work as intended, it's time for more tax cuts because Republicans believe that if something they tried didn't work then the best thing to do is just keep trying the same thing and hope for a better result.

yup, and TAX CUTS worked so well in Kansas, didn't they.

 

[DrDoug]

yup, and TAX CUTS worked so well in Kansas, didn't they.

The tax cuts worked so good in in Kansas that the voters elected a Democrat for governor. Let's hope that the Republicans have the same success at the national level. 😀

 

[cytg111]

Another federal tax cut at this time would be a mistake.

Wtf is this?

 

[cytg111]

Analysis : Trump sees his 2020 chances slide into "outlook not so good" with a looming recession and all, and with a little tax cut hopes to buy some votes back
Prognosis : Trump fcked.

 

[zinfamous]

I've gotten two raises in the last eight months, I take home more of the money that I earn after the last tax cut, and now perhaps another? MAGA2020.

lol. none of this is true.

 

[ch33zw1z]

lol. none of this is true.

Russians hand out raises to their favored propagandists

 

[glenn1]

If we spend too much on social programs, why do we have so much poverty & so many homeless? It's not like the GOP & revered job creators have any intention of fixing that, is there? Hey, maybe if we give 'em another tax cut they'll do something...

^ This is why I support tax cuts, it's basically a first strike against people who would deficit spend to the same amount or more on welfare spending so the poors can have some more Cheetos and beer - you'd be better off burning the money. The tax money and deficit spending is going to happen, it's simply a matter of who gets to control it.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

^ This is why I support tax cuts, it's basically a first strike against people who would deficit spend to the same amount or more on welfare spending so the poors can have some more Cheetos and beer - you'd be better off burning the money. The tax money and deficit spending is going to happen, it's simply a matter of who gets to control it.

Okay let’s increase taxes on those earning $250k plus per year a bit, increase a lot on $350k plus. Increase corporate tax/close corporate loop holes. Decrease taxes a bit on under $50-30k and totally eliminate them for under $30k.

Deal?

 

[SlowSpyder]

If we spend too much on social programs, why do we have so much poverty & so many homeless? It's not like the GOP & revered job creators have any intention of fixing that, is there? Hey, maybe if we give 'em another tax cut they'll do something...

It isn't government's job to support those that will not support themselves. Life is made up of choices, choose well.

 

[DrDoug]

^ This is why I support tax cuts, it's basically a first strike against people who would deficit spend to the same amount or more on welfare spending so the poors can have some more Cheetos and beer - you'd be better off burning the money. The tax money and deficit spending is going to happen, it's simply a matter of who gets to control it.

This is why I support taxing the Hell out of people like yourself. You and people that think like you. If you think it would be better to burn the money than help people then you have too much fucking money and I support our government relieving you of some of it.

You fuckers live the IGMFY life and expect everyone to go along with it. Up yours with a rusty farm implement.

 

[fskimospy]

^ This is why I support tax cuts, it's basically a first strike against people who would deficit spend to the same amount or more on welfare spending so the poors can have some more Cheetos and beer - you'd be better off burning the money. The tax money and deficit spending is going to happen, it's simply a matter of who gets to control it.

Well that’s silly, first in that deficits are only constrained by inflation and I’ve got some bad news for you - inflation is worst for people who are net creditors. (ie: rich people)

So really all Democrats need to do is adopt the same cavalier attitude towards the deficit as Republicans have. Then the only question is if the rich want to pay through taxes or through what is effectively debt forgiveness through inflation. Doesn’t matter to me!

This is all based on the deeply silly idea that the disproportionate wealth that the rich have amassed in recent years is related to their relative economic contributions. That would only be true if literally all increases in productivity were the result of the top 1%, which is clearly nonsense. It’s just Cheeto and beer money but for the rich.

 

[cytg111]

It isn't government's job to support those that will not support themselves. Life is made up of choices, choose well.

You have about the foresight of 2.5 seconds... I know crows who problem solves better than you.

 

[Jhhnn]

So what your saying is the current economy is not in a recession and is doing fine so there is no need for a pointless payroll tax cut?
I also noticed you averted answering my other questions. Was there a reason why?

Cutting SS contributions is trading in tomorrow for today.

 

[Jhhnn]

It isn't government's job to support those that will not support themselves. Life is made up of choices, choose well.

As if that's all there is to it.

 

[IJTSSG]

Why so? Is it a deficit concern, something else?

Deficit concern, national debt concern, no data that says another tax cut would do any good.
I am a huge proponent of people keeping as much of their money as possible but people demand services from their government. Those services have to be paid for and this endless cycle of deficit spending, increased debt, raising the debt ceiling, etc. isn't sustainable.

 

[glenn1]

Well that’s silly, first in that deficits are only constrained by inflation and I’ve got some bad news for you - inflation is worst for people who are net creditors. (ie: rich people)

So really all Democrats need to do is adopt the same cavalier attitude towards the deficit as Republicans have. Then the only question is if the rich want to pay through taxes or through what is effectively debt forgiveness through inflation. Doesn’t matter to me!

This is all based on the deeply silly idea that the disproportionate wealth that the rich have amassed in recent years is related to their relative economic contributions. That would only be true if literally all increases in productivity were the result of the top 1%, which is clearly nonsense. It’s just Cheeto and beer money but for the rich.

If it creates inflation that's what TIPS (Treasury Inflation Protected Securities) or natural resources stocks are for. And it really doesn't matter if it caused inflation, deflation, or stagnation the worst use of taxpayer funds is for transfer payments to the poor.

 

[fskimospy]

If it creates inflation that's what TIPS (Treasury Inflation Protected Securities) or natural resources stocks are for.

Doesn't matter. Inflation reduces the real value of debt and generally speaking rich people are net creditors and poor/middle class people are net debtors. You can transfer income to the poor so they can pay off their credit card debt or instead we just inflate it away. In the end it's the same thing.

Like I said, it doesn't really matter which way you want to do it to me so just let me know.

And it really doesn't matter if it caused inflation, deflation, or stagnation the worst use of taxpayer funds is for transfer payments to the poor.

Well reality disagrees with you on that one but since something tells me you weren't really looking at this from a reality based perspective I'll just leave you to your opinion. More importantly though, who cares? Democrats clearly think that's not the case and if they just embraced the conservatives' love of deficits and debt we can get started on this. I hope they do and all this requires is for liberals to be as 'fiscally responsible' as conservatives.

 

[thraashman]

Trump's economic policy reminds me of a "math" problem a friend once told me.
Knowledge is power so mathematically Knowledge=Power.
Time is money so Time = Money
In physics Power = Work/Time

Use some substitution to get
Knowledge = Work/Money

So using a bit of Algebra we multiply both sides by Money to have
Money*Knowledge = Work.

We then divide both sides by Knowledge to get
Money = Work/Knowledge

So if we now take the limit as Knowledge approaches zero, Money will approach infinity regardless of the amount of work done.

And I do believe I've now just explained the economic policy of the Donald Trump administration.

 

[HomerJS]

It isn't government's job to support those that will not support themselves. Life is made up of choices, choose well.

and that new welfare for farmers is going away when? Life is full of choices and those idiots weren't forced to vote for Trump.

Let them starve.