Hey Steemit Economists: Trump Tax Plan is More Failed Trickle Down Economics

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

A balanced budget isn't necessarily good for the economy. Debt drives growth. It's all arbitrary anyway. None of it is real. It's just pieces of paper and pieces of data that indicate the value of something, so the idea that we wouldn't just print what we need to reach the needs of poor and suffering humans is crazy. Funny how we can always print more for war though and no one seems to freak over that like they do about the pittance we spend on food stamps. We also have no problem jacking up debt for the oligarchs either.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

Half of our annual budget is spent on entitlement programs. I wouldn't call it a pittance. If you print more money you devalue existing dollars and they are worth less. Plenty of examples of hyperinflation exist for you to read up on.

Debt is the reason why so many people fail to get ahead in life and find themselves flat broke when they reach retirement age. They "need" to get that new car, iPhone, college degree in a useless field, and on and on. They buy things they cannot afford with money they do not have. Easy credit is a poison for people who do not have the impulse control to use it wisely or better yet don't use it at all.

Debt works a little different for a country, but it is still not a good thing. Eventually you have to pay the piper. Propping up an economy with debt is not a long term strategy that we should embrace.

I agree with you 100% that we need to call all our troops back home. We have been fighting illegal "wars" for years now and it needs to end. The cost of the wars combined with all the money we then spend rebuilding the infrastructure we just destroyed is a complete waste and creates no value for our country.

The other consideration is all of the money spent outside of the budget itself. The budget is only a part of the bigger picture. They can draw up a so called balanced budget and pat themselves on the back knowing that they will just write spending bills all year to finance all the crap they didn't put in the budget. That needs to be done away with. If you want to spend it, put it in the budget and put your name on it.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

You just changed what I said buddy, I said food stamps are a pittance of our budget, not all entitlements are a pittance. At any rate, how expensive these programs are is as a result of terrible policies that allow them to be. Our healthcare costs are not high simply "because we have more people" as some love to point out, but is actually high as a proportion. That's because the government bends over backward to allow corporations the monopolies they want.

The fact that we don't have the federal government negotiate pharma prices with foreign pharmaceutical companies is a significant factor driving up the costs. Pfizer moves shop to Ireland and dodges taxes which gives them an unfair tax advantage over US companies which destroys competitiveness.

Your bit about people's personal spending being a cause of their own problems makes me think you may be short on life experience. Sorry to say that but if you think in the modern economy it is a choice to have a personal laptop or electronics that is ridiculous. Also, college degrees that are worthless? lol. Yes so every person can be an engineer and we have no poetry art films or anything else. No one can know politics or international relations because they aren't STEM majors. You realize automation is actually going to crush the STEM majors first right? Those will be the less important majors with in our lifetime.

You don't have to pay the popper if you are the US. Again it's a fallacy. Who is going to come and repossess our tanks and airplanes? No one. Nobody can do anything about our debt, and no one can do anything about any other major countries debt either.

We can print money for bank bailouts when they rob us but not bail out ourselves when the economy crashes? We can't get healthcare or social services but weapons companies can keep being subsidized by the state? What about corporate welfare that subsidizes corporations all over the country?

People need to understand what social class they're in and fight for their own interests. Don't worry about corporations they can take care of themselves. Worry about your own wellbeing and future. Ultimately, You have to live among the poor, not them. When they are desperate and have nothing left, it's you they will eat first.

$0.00

brianbonner (35) · 7 years ago

It really does not matter because all so-called entitlements, by the national govt, are unconstitutional!

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

Well, I'll be concerned about that just as soon as we deal with corporate handouts and subsidies. Until then, class war.

If we strip our selves of social programs while simultaneously increasing enititlement programs for oligarchs, we are just disarming ourselves.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

If you think STEM degrees will be made worthless by automation then you need to think again. Automation is created and maintained by people with STEM degrees or backgrounds.

All bailouts, handouts, subsidies, and other government giveaways need to end for everyone individuals and companies. Food stamps alone are a pittance sure, but where do you draw the line? So far we spend half our budget on entitlements and we have yet to draw a line.

Yes a laptop is still a luxury item. You can access computers at any public library. Having a cell phone is becoming necessary, but that doesn't mean you have to have a $600 iPhone when a simple flip phone will suffice to keep you connected. You are really missing my point though by focusing on the need to have a laptop or cellphone. Those were just examples. A laptop and a cell phone are not breaking people. What is breaking people is the fact that they insist on living beyond their means across the board. They have a house they can barely afford, a car payment, an expensive cell phone, take yearly vacations, and on and on. They live paycheck to paycheck not because they don't make enough money, but because they spend every dime they make rather than saving.

Taking out a loan to get a degree that will never do anything to allow you to pay off that debt is foolish. There are STEM majors out there up to their eyeballs in debt that they will spend the rest of their lives trying to pay off even with a job in a STEM field because they chose to go to a very expensive school rather than a state school. No one particular major is immune to bad debt, but there are majors that are much more likely to be poor investments. Poets and artists in no way require a degree by the way.

People have been brainwashed to believe that getting a college degree is necessary for success and that if you get said degree you will be successful. Both of these ideas are wrong. Most job growth in the next decade or so will be in the skilled trades. Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, mechanics, millwrights, machinists, etc. are going to be in extremely high demand because so many of them are retiring and there is no one trained to replace them because of the two fallacies I mentioned above.

The reality is people do not want to delay their gratification until they can afford it. That is why so many households have tons of debt and no savings. They are unwilling to live frugally, below their means in order to build wealth. This is not true of everyone, but of most households it is. Debt is bad. Easy credit exists because the credit card companies love that sweet, sweet interest that their slaves pay them every month. Personal debt and refusing to delay gratification is a large reason why the middle class is shrinking and the lower classes are not moving up.

No one is going to repossess our tanks. What will happen is people will eventually lose faith in our ability to pay our debts (eventually we will default by the way) and at that point they will downgrade our debt. No one will be willing to extend us credit, and our economy will implode followed by the world economy. Printing money is not a long term solution. Eventually inflation will catch up to you. We are not always going to be the big kid on the block. China is poised to surpass us very rapidly particularly as they begin to develop a middle class. They will be the ones driving the world economy and we will be sitting here with our national debt unable to get credit and unable to meet our obligations to the citizens who paid into the systems that were supposed to be there for them when they retire.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

Programs will write programs.

Again, if your concern was genuine about both social programs for people as well as corporate welfare and jingoism, you would be equally ranting against both. But you seem fixated on people's ability to get food or cancer treatment first. Why would that be the priority and not first going after the richest people in the country who aren't in a life or death situation? Alos, we have drawn a line, clearly, we cover less of peoples healthcare than any modern developed nation. The biggest issue we have is not how many people or how much we are covering people. You can easily drop the percentage of our budget that health services take up if we fight to reduce the actual health services and products costs like Canada does.

That you can access a computer at any library is somehow relevant once again highlights that you just don't have the life experience. Either you are very old or very young. There are few modern jobs that don't require you to bring your own laptop. Most of the jobs you seem to support in the STEM majors require a high-end setup as well btw. You can't tell your boss hey I'm actually not coming into the office because I'm working out of my local library...

Skilled trades are not the economy... plumbers, electricians, carpenters, mechanics, millwrights, machinists, etc. need to work for people, and those people have highly specialized jobs because of the advanced economy we live in, which requires an education. Btw those job growth projections from the US Bureau of Labor say those are just amongst jobs that will grow. It isn't to the exclusion of other jobs. The overwhelming number of the jobs are actually in positions that require an education.

Education makes poets and artists better. And yes many of the singers, actresses, and artists you have heard of went to art schools. Even 2Pac went to an art school.

In regards to people's issue of gratification. First off you act like those impulses aren't created, encouraged, and coerced by the same companies selling them stuff. They have been advertising and brainwashing people into a lack of impulse control their whole lives. And second off the impulse control is a very minimal aspect of the issue. You're taking a super narrow issue that doesn't even affect everyone and choosing to blame that for much more obvious issues.
Like the complete stall in income growth as the cost of everything else has gone up. What is my generation supposed to do? Our disposable income is being strangled but if we don't spend the economy stalls.

China is overtaking us because of massive public spending and government using the state to drive the economy or shore up economic crises in the country. You're using them as an example of what is overtaking us as well as saying that is what not to do. The world's highest entitlements spenders happen to also be the richest and most successful states...

It is almost like public spending drives the economy.

And once again, these other states welfare systems are less problematic because they have national negotiations on pharmaceuticals as well as medical products being imported. It's not complicated how we can fix this, we don't need to let people starve suffer or die. Bernie Sanders tried to fix the pharmaceutical issue but he was betrayed by Cory Booker who tanked the bill being passed even though Sanders had gotten the Republican voted to pass it. Yet another reason Centrists are trash.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

Sorry but we are nowhere close to programs writing programs on an industrial scale. It will be decades before humans are mostly removed from programming on a large scale. Even then, you will still need humans for creative thinking. We have not yet come up with AI. When we reach that point supplies of most everything will outstrip demand so much so that most necessities in life will cost nothing. At that point you are talking about an entirely different type of economy. I would like to talk about current affairs though if you don't mind.

I am against government handouts in general. If anything I am more against corporate handouts than those for individuals. Businesses have to be allowed to fail when they make poor decisions or they will keep making them because they know they will be bailed out. People are not too dissimilar, but companies impact far more people than an individual can, and I have compassion for people in need and none for a poorly run company. I just happened to respond to your one comment which happened to be about handouts to individuals.

I never said that blue collar jobs would grow and no others would, I just said that there would be significant growth in those jobs compared to white collar jobs simply due to the fact that very few people are training to become skilled workers because everyone wants to be white collar. Supply and demand will drive up the value of blue collar work compared to white collar jobs.

We actually have not drawn a line. No one has tried to slow the increasing cost of entitlements at all. Our solution is to print more money, vote to raise our debt ceiling, and then stick our heads back in the sand hoping that our benevolent and wise government will take care of us.

I am glad to see we agree that people are brainwashed to consume. That is a major issue whether you believe it or not. It should concern you that the majority of families in this country have less than $1000 in savings. This is one of the reasons so many people feel they have to have a government safety net to protect them because they have chosen not to provide one for themselves.

You seem to be focused on the outliers of the economic bell curve while I am talking about the majority. Yes there are people who cannot afford to save money because they don't make enough to do so. Their issues are different than the majority of Americans. I don't mind them getting some assistance to help them get on their feet, but the kinds of "assistance" our government gives does not encourage people to try to better themselves. It encourages them to do the opposite. If they start to make more money and get ahead, then they lose their assistance before they can afford to lose it. That makes no sense. There are better solutions that will encourage people to try to get ahead rather than keep them impoverished.

Where we really differ though is you believe government is the solution to all our problems while I believe that people are better suited to solve their problems.

Oh and nice try with the ad hominem attacks. Try to focus on attacking my arguments rather than me.

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

Do you run up your credit cards, then claim financial success? The only reason debt would drive growth is if our entire monetary system were based on debt... Oh wait...

There is a reason the framers called for a sound money system, backed by gold and silver.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

So you just restated what I said? lol

Yes we are in a debt based system so debt does drive growth...

The founders established a gold backed system because they were in the 18th century...

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

Being in the 18th century had nothing to do with the system they set up. It was set up that way so that wealth would not be under the central control of the State, and so the currency of the nation would actually have intrinsic value. That same system is just as relevant and possible today, as then. If sound money were an 18th century ideal, why would the Chinese be busy buying gold, and not releasing figures as to how much they actually own?

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

And, I wasn't restating what you said, I was mocking it. We do have a debt based economy, and you could call its expansion "growth", but in reality, the expansion of debt is not growth.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago (edited)

Russia is buying gold too, it's just to stabilize their currency to make sure it doesn't collapse up against US sanctions. China is doing the same but less because of sanctions, and more because the value of gold is constantly going up which allows them easy profits, but also because if they control a larger share of the gold in the world, they are less susceptible to currency spikes or changes which spurs domestic investment. Gold is a product to buy and sell and profit from. The purchase of it isn't indicative of any major shift in the perception of the economy. Btw the US still holds the largest amount of gold and we have 4 times the amount China does... yet we have a speculative system...

Public debt is an imagined problem. We are VERY far away from not being able to deal with that problem. The major issue is private debt. People's wages have been stagnating while costs have gone up everywhere. If people's basic necessities like rent have all shot up and they don't make more money then it goes on credit card debt. Then a larger and larger share of people's disposable income is going towards credit card payments. Then they cant spend money on stuff which stalls the economy. Like it or not that's the situation. The government has two choices, either force debt forgiveness, or subsidize the hell out of healthcare, education, and social services to eliminate those strains on people's disposable income so they can pay their debts and buy things. This means public debt drives growth because it offsets private debt.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

Except that the lords did pay taxes to the king. Far more than commoners did. The last statement is certainly not true. Why would they have more money just because someone else did.

I get that this is supposed to be a dig at conservatives, but I would like it to at least be somewhat factual and make some sense. Not only that but serfdom is a far cry from a free market economy. You can't really compare the two.

$0.10

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

It's clearly a rip on trickle down... which says when corporations get tax cuts they create more jobs and pay employees more. Which is crazy.

I would actually say the new economy is a form of Serfdom. No one is supposed to own anything, all assets are hoarded by a small group of people. Everyone simply pays or works for the right to use those assets or make money for themselves using those platforms that are owned by the small group. Uber, Airbnb, apartment and home rentals, these are many forms of serfdom which are dominating more and more sectors of the economy.

The last part not making sense isn't as a result of the meme being problematic, but the logic of trickle down.... lol

$0.00

dch (41) · 7 years ago

the new economy is a form of Serfdom

Buddy, it's always been serfdom. Democracy just made it more palatable.

$0.00

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/12/22/heres-a-list-or-companies-giving-worker-bonuses-aftee-tax-reform-n2426226

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

"It's clearly a rip on trickle down... which says when corporations get tax cuts they create more jobs and pay employees more. Which is crazy."

$0.00

jstwrt (28) · 7 years ago

Exactly they have screamed trickle down forever but the tax code really doesn't matter what matters is how the courts interpret and enforce the new tax code. It can say anything but if it isnt adopted and enforced it really wont do anything good or bad." We The People" seems to be forgotten we are the 99% If we do not like it we need to stand up for our rights. And the taxes are pretty far down on my list compared to how homeland security and "OUR" government remove rights silently and behind the scenes. No one notices or even bats an eye it is just get up work your 40 and take it someone else will stand up for you right? Definitively not it is our time we can change anything "I was following orders" is all I see and here that did not protect war criminals. We have a duty if for nothing else than for our children to draw a line and say NO NOT TODAY OR EVER AGAIN.

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

Please show the economic theory that pushes "trickle down" economics. "Trickle down" is a made up term that the Left uses to scare people when engaging in tax debates. What economist ever pushed this as a system? The notion that those who have paid more into the system will get the biggest break is not new, or bad. Even when those in the lower income brackets will see a decrease in taxes, why should they envy someone who has paid more, also receiving a decrease?

$0.00

sweecee (55) · 7 years ago

real issue : administrative corporate efficiencies aren't used by the public administration... said otherwise, productivity gains and deflation aren't implemented in gov workers because they threaten and strikes, making them even more out of touch with biz practices. their costs is too high for the productivity they do. while corporate world, trims and leans, they bloat and goat... discrepancies is unsustainable. will be resolved venezuela way.

$0.00

the-monocle (25) · 7 years ago

nope

$0.00

ginquitti (51) · 7 years ago

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

$0.00

3 votes

davidpakman (76) · 7 years ago

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%

$0.55

6 votes

ginquitti (51) · 7 years ago

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?

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

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.

$0.20

ginquitti (51) · 7 years ago

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?

$0.00

jinxr (35) · 7 years ago (edited)

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.

$0.00

socialmedia (45) · 7 years ago

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?

$0.00

3 votes

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

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.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

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.

$0.00

ginquitti (51) · 7 years ago

I dont really see that in the bill though

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

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.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

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.

$0.00

ginquitti (51) · 7 years ago

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

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

You will have to find it yourself.

$0.00

dch (41) · 7 years ago

Raise the taxes to where? Back to where they are in 2017?

$0.00

terryxxjones (43) · 7 years ago

More busyness by Trump and a quid pro quo to his kronies...

$0.00

terryxxjones (43) · 7 years ago

A Uranium mint on the pillow.

$0.00

terryxxjones (43) · 7 years ago

Trump's way of saying "Thanks For Checking Out Of NY/USA" take the money and run...

$0.00

theclear (45) · 7 years ago

Every trader in the US must know this.

All crypto trades are taxable events in US 2018
Merry Christmas

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

That seems strange. Typically with stocks you only get taxed on your gains once you sell the stock for USD. Trading one coin for another seems different since you never monetize the gain and just reinvest it. Perhaps they plan to treat the crypto more like currency than stocks. In any case, I don't plan to sell very often and I am sure someone will come up with a way to do crypto to crypto trades without needing to have an exchange account. At least I hope they will.

$0.00

smithab78 (25) · 7 years ago

Taxation is theft. I’m in favor of any reduction in taxes. Tax cuts somehow always bring more revenue to the government as well. While the bill isn’t perfect. I’ll take it.

$0.00

nokodemion (59) · 7 years ago

When they they come at you with a dildo in one hand and a knife in the other, what do You do?

Yeah, right.

Just pay it and quit bitchin.

$0.25

sweecee (55) · 7 years ago

you mean that obama goons and hillary pedofriends aren't worth of everything you have? aren't they "gods"? I find your discourse particularly seditious ! I think it is appropriate to ban you for ever from steem, seize your wallet and...

:).

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

Taxation is absolutely theft. Too bad we will never be able to free ourselves from the yoke the government has fit us with without taking some serious action. Income tax needs to be done away with. Do not punish people for earning. If there has to be taxes, and I am not sure that there has to be, then tax people on what the buy instead.

$0.00

backpackingmonk (52) · 7 years ago (edited)

$0.00

sweecee (55) · 7 years ago

all your taxes should be wired to me ! please use pivx ! I will use it for the common goods, by making me richer, the total goods improve ! I will use your money better than you...

$0.00

cryptofamilyman (25) · 7 years ago

Thanks for this video! This is really interesting stuff. People looking for handouts will always look for handouts and make excuses as to why they can't what they think is owed to them.

$0.00

dukmaster (46) · 7 years ago

Nice video!

$0.00

diogosantos (62) · 7 years ago

It still early to understand all the impacts!
I´ve posted about this too!

$0.00

jstwrt (28) · 7 years ago

Yes you should take a look at the cbs interview of 3 seperate families that all will pay less taxes and pay less out of every paycheck
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjn-fqA7KzYAhXj7YMKHfG-DmAQtwIIKTAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com%2Fvideo%2F2017%2F12%2F22%2Fcbs_how_will_tax_cuts_affect_your_family.html&usg=AOvVaw3EqxJGVf63ok699JjD2P2V

$0.00

davidpakman (76) · 7 years ago

couple of issues here. First is that three families is completely anecdotal data. Second is that over the LONG TERM more than half of all families will see a tax increase.

$0.96

jstwrt (28) · 7 years ago

I also find it funny how so many are quick to judge write off and scorn when really none of you have done the slightest bit of research. Reading what people say on Facebook Reddit and steem isn't research. Most of what the tax plan will do is yet to be seen but what is for sure only the top 5% of the wealthiest people will pay more tax and lets face it they can afford to. Everyone else and i do mean everyone will pay less tax out of there paychecks along with less tax at the end of the year. Its simple Trump has cut spending which means we can pay less tax and the government will still operate as it did when your beloved Obama or your Hillary would of been in charge. Our country did the worst economically than almost ever while Obama tried to hump a door knob like a monkey. You cant fix stupid. Anyway the people on the otherside in the government are crying because trumps tax plan means a cut in there pay which they determine. Why wouldn't they lie cheat and steal to try and make the public think Trump is hurting us all when really hes cutting there pay! Here is a link to some truth!

$0.00

davidpakman (76) · 7 years ago

what you are saying is factually untrue. over the long term, this plan will increase the effective tax rate for more than half of all Americans, according to numerous analyses.

$0.98

jstwrt (28) · 7 years ago

You site numerous analysis I have done a lot of research but would do more if you can post the sites or where you found ling term data that shows what your saying the cbs interview is just one place I found easy information most people could understand the tax code is thousands of pages. Glad more people are doing research but all I've found shows less tax now and future. Anyone can say anything doesn't make it true. That's the problem with social media this site too since I don't put hundreds in my account most of my posts aren't seen. More of the richer you are the more your opinion counts is what I'm seeing with this site along with the world nothing new under the sun.

$0.00

chemaholic (25) · 7 years ago

He has not cut spending. He talks about cutting spending but nothing significant has been cut. I am all for tax cuts for everyone, but if you cut taxes without also cutting spending then you are borrowing money from someone to make ends meet. I hope he follows through with all the spending cuts he talks about and more though. We could do without 80% of the federal government fairly easily.

$0.00

clumsysilverdad (64) · 7 years ago

Not to get too technical, but :

Shit in ----> Shit out

$0.00

sagor5828 (58) · 7 years ago

I always like dtube content.

$0.00

terryxxjones (43) · 7 years ago

I don't think that tweaking taxes is going to solve much of USA's problems.

USA's problems are foundations in failure mode and lawlessness in law run amok.

You have no courts, no contracts, no credit or bond ratings, and no banks from what I see and then with that lost most of your tax base being people who produce your GDP.

Too much self harm overall.

$0.00

jstwrt (28) · 7 years ago

Agreed we need to start fresh kick out everyone and startover. Too bad that will not happen untill america is destroyed by another country.

$0.00

terryxxjones (43) · 7 years ago

America already has been destroyed from within. US Police did most of that ongoing far as I know since 1960's.

$0.00

bitgeek (62) · 7 years ago

Congratulations @davidpakman, this post is the forth most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Superuser account holder (accounts that hold between 1 and 10 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Superuser account holders during this period was 1021 and the total pending payments to posts in this category was $9604.85. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.

If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.

$0.00

penston (55) · 7 years ago

I know people who voted for George W Bush solely because he promised tax cuts and they believed that he was talking about tax cuts for them. People who are drowning want to believe that someone is going to help them, so they'll clutch at that straw. They're ripe for exploitation and they've shown a remarkable fortitude for being mistreated.

$0.00

bloomberg215 (54) · 7 years ago

I agree. This tax plan will only help companies and big corporations. Caller Frank is so true. Deja vu all over again.

$0.00

reganarchist (25) · 7 years ago

Question should be ---can anyone defend any "federal" confiscation of a citizens income that is for any purpose other than that of the defense of the
of the homeland in order to protect the citizenry in their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness?

$0.00

justtryme90 (71) · 7 years ago

Roads, pipes, power lines, I don't know if any of those things are necessary to protect the citizenry. But I'm on board with my tax money paying for them.

$0.00

gooddaymate (36) · 7 years ago

I agree but, that should be taken at the local level not federal.

$0.00

truthseeker805 (25) · 7 years ago

Unless you live in California where your high tax dollars pay for illegal aliens to have healthcare, free food and subsidized housing.

$0.00

gooddaymate (36) · 7 years ago

Well then leaving California for another State will give you the power to make a point. By giving your tax dollars to a different state. Right? Same can’t be said with federal tax. Although you could leave the country, it is harder.

$0.00

nicholas83 (56) · 7 years ago

I am not an economist. What I am is an individual who has been sold the gospel of supply-side economics. I have yet to see it manifested. That said, it is not so much about Trump as it is about a way of thinking. Were it not Trump, it would have been someone else. This has been happening for a long time.

$0.00

gweedy (50) · 7 years ago

LOL That's simple. No. and No.

$0.00

lanceman (53) · 7 years ago (edited)

Looking forward to getting more in my take home pay come Feb. (and I am a long long way from rich!) Thank you sir Trump! Pee.S. And I voted neither R nor D . . .
............................o🌕o.............................
............................🌲o🌲..........................
...........................🌜🌲🌛........................
.........................🌞o🔅o🌞............................
......................o💡o🌲o💡o........................
.....................o❄oo✳oo❄o......................
..................💮oo💖oo💮oo💖....................
................o🌟oo🎋oo🎋oo🌟o..................
..............🌲oo🎆oo🌟oo🎆oo🌲................
............o💫oo💖oo🎉oo💖oo💫o..............
..........💖oo💫oo🔅oo🔅oo💫oo💖...........
........o🍭oo🔖oo🌲oo🌲oo🔖oo🍭o...............
....... MERRY X-MAS FRIENDS !!!.............

$0.00

brianbonner (35) · 7 years ago

Supply side economics: Presidents Harding and Coolidge with Treasurer Andrew Mellon who lowered the top rate to about 22%

$0.00

brianbonner (35) · 7 years ago

Oh, no such thing as trickle down economics. Find an economic paper explaining it!

$0.00

alberas (35) · 7 years ago

Interesting...

$0.00

gandhibaba (72) · 7 years ago

I am also interested in these questions : you just spoke my mind.

$0.00

konats (1) · 7 years ago

taxpayers are cutting taxes on a large part of very annoying earnings

$0.00

ivan71 (25) · 7 years ago

I would like to see someone cite evidence that 'supply side' economics doesn't work. Everyone seems to forget the fact that it's the wealthy, and corporations that create jobs. Giving them a break to the expense of doing business allows for more investment in capital (which leads to job creation), research and development (which leads to job creation), and job training (which leads to higher wages). We are talking about letting people keep more of what they make, so naturally, those that make more will keep more. People at the bottom 2 fifths typically don't pay taxes, so I don't see where they would be getting to keep "more" of what they make - unless you're going to advocate for transferring someone else's wealth to them. Taking from person A, and giving to person B, only hurts person A. If person A is being penalized for their success, they are less likely to invest in future success, if that success is being redistributed to those that didn't earn it.

$0.00

davidpakman (76) · 7 years ago

no no no, burden of proof. if you think that economic policies of supply side theory HAVE WORKED, then demonstrate that they have. this is like "prove that there is no god." If you claim there is, then prove it.

$0.75

yoshi04cgn (25) · 7 years ago

Bingo

$0.00