1moretimeagain
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,115
Trump / Musk (other than DOGE) Omnibus Thread
- Thread starter nycfan
- Start date
- Replies: 12K
- Views: 325K
- Politics
rodoheel
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,664
No shit Sherlock. This would be true even if we had a completely flat tax system, as opposed to a purportedly progressive system. No one can tell what point you're trying to make with this elementary school-level observation.
CFordUNC
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 4,381
I tell you what, man. May all of us have the unbridled confidence of a tater tot who wants to come to the ZZLP and try to pretend to be more knowledgeable on law and economics than a whole bunch of people who literally study, practice, and teach…law and economics. Every time I start to feel like I’m the dullest intellectual crayon in the box in this community, somebody like this dude comes along and makes me look like I belong in Mensa.
Silence Dogood
Exceptional Member
- Messages
- 219
How are Republican tax cuts benefitting the rich based on the numbers I gave? Why is this so hard for you guys? Trump also cut taxes on individuals on the lower end, something that keeps getting ignored.
Duke Mu
Honored Member
- Messages
- 786
Pretty much anything Musk or Trump claims is fabrication.
I have some hurricane inundated swampland on Florida to sell!
Elon is unelected, unappointed, unconfirmed, undemocratic, and unethical. Regardless of what Pres. Musk is called, we all know the facts on the ground. He's driving the DOGE train... straight to neo-nazi HQR in Germany and Moscow.
CFordUNC
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 4,381
As this debate unfolds, policymakers and the public should understand that the 2017 Trump tax law:
- Was skewed to the rich. Households with incomes in the top 1 percent will receive an average tax cut of more than $60,000 in 2025, compared to an average tax cut of less than $500 for households in the bottom 60 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center (TPC).[1] As a share of after-tax income, tax cuts at the top — for both households in the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent — are more than triple the total value of the tax cuts received for people with incomes in the bottom 60 percent.[2]
- Was expensive and eroded the U.S. revenue base. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated in 2018 that the 2017 law would cost $1.9 trillion over ten years,[3] and recent estimates show that making the law’s temporary individual income and estate tax cuts permanent would cost another roughly $400 billion a year beginning in 2027.[4] Together with the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts enacted under President Bush (most of which were made permanent in 2012), the law has severely eroded our country’s revenue base. Revenue as a share of GDP has fallen from about 19.5 percent in the years immediately preceding the Bush tax cuts to just 16.3 percent in the years immediately following the Trump tax cuts, with revenues expected to rise to an annual average of 16.9 percent of GDP in 2018-2026 (excluding pandemic years), according to CBO. This is simply not enough revenue given the nation’s investment needs and our commitments to Social Security and health coverage.
- Failed to deliver promised economic benefits.Trump Administration officials claimed their centerpiece corporate tax rate cut would “very conservatively” lead to a $4,000 boost in household income.[5] New research shows that workers who earned less than about $114,000 on average in 2016 saw “no change in earnings” from the corporate tax rate cut, while top executive salaries increased sharply.[6] Similarly, rigorous research concluded that the tax law’s 20 percent pass-through deduction, which was skewed in favor of wealthy business owners, has largely failed to trickle down to workers in those companies who aren’t owners.[7] Like the Bush tax cuts before it,[8] the 2017 Trump tax cut was a trickle-down failure.
CFordUNC
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 4,381
At a recent rally in Montana, President Trump claimed that “Republicans passed the biggest tax cuts in American history, the biggest in American history. Everybody in this room is better for them. Everybody is better for them.”
Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off.
To be fair, Republicans hope to extend the tax law beyond 2027, but that’s highly unlikely. There is also an argument that increased investment will lead to higher wages in the long run. The theory is that the lower corporate rate and temporarily expanded business expensing will spur investment in the United States, leading to more capital, and more productive workers. As worker productivity rises, firms will boost wages. All of this would happen gradually over the long term.
However, the evidence for this story about long-term growth is weak at best. According to two leading economists, one liberal and one conservative, annual GDP growth might rise by 0.02 percentage points over the next decade. So far, corporations are using their added profits primarily to buy back shares and boost dividends, not to invest. In addition, rising productivity in recent decades has not been fully shared with workers, suggesting a less competitive economy than many assume. Finally, deficit-financing means that middle-class households will likely be hit with big tax increases or spending cuts later and interest rates will rise in the interim as government borrowing explodes. While revenue-neutral, pro-growth tax reform (rather than costly tax cuts) is possible and desirable, the TCJA falls far short of this standard.
www.brookings.edu
Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off.
The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor
This fact is made all the more egregious in light of evidence that the middle class isn’t doing well and needs help. Stagnating incomes, opportunity gaps, and fragile families are all reasons to worry about the middle class. Public policy has done little to ameliorate these concerns. After accounting for taxes and transfers, growth in average middle-class household incomes has lagged significantly behind the lowest and, especially, the highest income quintiles. Incomes of the top 20 percent rose by 97 percent from 1979-2014—over twice as much as middle-class incomes. Even the lowest quintile has seen faster income growth, 69 percent, or two thirds higher than income growth for the middle class. In short, both public policy and the economy are leaving the middle class behind.The 2017 tax law doesn’t help the middle class
The new tax law—known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)—will exacerbate this trend. The benefits of the law tilt toward the well-off both now and in the future, according to the distributional analysis of the Tax Policy Center. By 2027, benefits of the tax law flow entirely to the rich. (The Joint Committee on Taxation finds similar results using a different measure.)To be fair, Republicans hope to extend the tax law beyond 2027, but that’s highly unlikely. There is also an argument that increased investment will lead to higher wages in the long run. The theory is that the lower corporate rate and temporarily expanded business expensing will spur investment in the United States, leading to more capital, and more productive workers. As worker productivity rises, firms will boost wages. All of this would happen gradually over the long term.
However, the evidence for this story about long-term growth is weak at best. According to two leading economists, one liberal and one conservative, annual GDP growth might rise by 0.02 percentage points over the next decade. So far, corporations are using their added profits primarily to buy back shares and boost dividends, not to invest. In addition, rising productivity in recent decades has not been fully shared with workers, suggesting a less competitive economy than many assume. Finally, deficit-financing means that middle-class households will likely be hit with big tax increases or spending cuts later and interest rates will rise in the interim as government borrowing explodes. While revenue-neutral, pro-growth tax reform (rather than costly tax cuts) is possible and desirable, the TCJA falls far short of this standard.
The middle class needs a tax cut: Trump didn't give it to them
Isabel Sawhill and Christopher Pulliam look at how President Trump's recent tax cuts will hurt the American middle class in the long run.
www.brookings.edu
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,725
Because we don’t care about cutting taxes as an end in and of itself. The implications of the tax cuts matter. If across the board tax cuts were demonstrated to create a more equal society, I would be for it. The opposite has been borne out time and time again.
ChapelHillSooner
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 674
I think you greatly underestimate the impact DOGE can have. What do you think will happen if they’re successful in getting rid of the department of education? And all of the research grants?
I can’t even imagine the impact on our schools? Chapel Hill would immediately be in a world of hurt.
You may say they won’t be successful and the courts will stop it. Well, maybe, but only because people are fighting against it.
Last edited:
Duke Mu
Honored Member
- Messages
- 786
Wrong-o. The 2017 #taxfraudbill decreased deductibles of truck drivers by 1/3. Many quit placing additional burden on the supply chain. Re: the Working and Middle class with a moderate mortgage and children, removing the personal exemptions was a disaster. For a family of four, that was $18,500 on the way to $20,000. In addition, deductions for state taxes and work at home were reduced. This placed many middle-class families like mine in a higher tax bracket. Given that our itemized deduction already added up $24,000 (today $27,500), raising the standard deduction from $12K to $24K provided no relief. We were screwed.
Many math averse people thought they were being paid more because the $ taken out of the paycheck was less, but it did not mean they owed Uncle Sam less.
Also, keep in mind that Trump's massive deficit spending funneling $$$ from ME and other working/middle class families to Billionaires and COVID giveaways to banks helped to ignite inflation...oh, wait it's happening again.
The Trump tax bill has cost me and my family well over $30,000.
The Trump 2017 tax bill was written to benefit Mango Duce
- Moving from a blue state to a red state
- Moving to a state with no income tax
- Massive reduction in tax rate for the top 1%
- Tax benefits for real estate owners
- 1 or no kids at home
Last edited:
Duke Mu
Honored Member
- Messages
- 786
- Education
- National Security
- Health Care (rural hospitals will close, more pandemics)
- Climate change
- Inflation
- Soft job market
- Fewer benefits
- Higher interest rates
- The Rent is Too Damn high!
Duke Mu
Honored Member
- Messages
- 786
Correct. And even worse - see my math.At a recent rally in Montana, President Trump claimed that “Republicans passed the biggest tax cuts in American history, the biggest in American history. Everybody in this room is better for them. Everybody is better for them.”
Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off.
The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor
This fact is made all the more egregious in light of evidence that the middle class isn’t doing well and needs help. Stagnating incomes, opportunity gaps, and fragile families are all reasons to worry about the middle class. Public policy has done little to ameliorate these concerns. After accounting for taxes and transfers, growth in average middle-class household incomes has lagged significantly behind the lowest and, especially, the highest income quintiles. Incomes of the top 20 percent rose by 97 percent from 1979-2014—over twice as much as middle-class incomes. Even the lowest quintile has seen faster income growth, 69 percent, or two thirds higher than income growth for the middle class. In short, both public policy and the economy are leaving the middle class behind.
The 2017 tax law doesn’t help the middle class
The new tax law—known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)—will exacerbate this trend. The benefits of the law tilt toward the well-off both now and in the future, according to the distributional analysis of the Tax Policy Center. By 2027, benefits of the tax law flow entirely to the rich. (The Joint Committee on Taxation finds similar results using a different measure.)
To be fair, Republicans hope to extend the tax law beyond 2027, but that’s highly unlikely. There is also an argument that increased investment will lead to higher wages in the long run. The theory is that the lower corporate rate and temporarily expanded business expensing will spur investment in the United States, leading to more capital, and more productive workers. As worker productivity rises, firms will boost wages. All of this would happen gradually over the long term.
However, the evidence for this story about long-term growth is weak at best. According to two leading economists, one liberal and one conservative, annual GDP growth might rise by 0.02 percentage points over the next decade. So far, corporations are using their added profits primarily to buy back shares and boost dividends, not to invest. In addition, rising productivity in recent decades has not been fully shared with workers, suggesting a less competitive economy than many assume. Finally, deficit-financing means that middle-class households will likely be hit with big tax increases or spending cuts later and interest rates will rise in the interim as government borrowing explodes. While revenue-neutral, pro-growth tax reform (rather than costly tax cuts) is possible and desirable, the TCJA falls far short of this standard.
The middle class needs a tax cut: Trump didn't give it to them
Isabel Sawhill and Christopher Pulliam look at how President Trump's recent tax cuts will hurt the American middle class in the long run.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,725
DOGE being viewed as simply a Musk vanity project is the feint, as is the stupid ass name. Republicans have wanted to take a sledgehammer to the administrative state for decades, and now they get the chance to do so. That’s why people like Russ Vought are lining up behind it.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,725
Can Federal Workers Stop Trump?
After what has felt like an eternity of Elon Musk and DOGE running rampant across the federal government, federal workers themselves and their unions are now leading the pushback.
jacobin.com
“I’ve never seen a billionaire carry the mail,” said Mark Smith, a patient educator at the Veterans Affairs (VA) in San Francisco and the president of National Federation of Federal Employee (NFFE) Local 1. “I’ve never seen a billionaire put out a forest fire. I’ve never seen a billionaire make sure people get their Social Security checks on time. I’ve never seen a billionaire answer a phone call from a suicidal veteran on a crisis line. So I don’t trust a billionaire to decide what happens to our public services — and that’s why we’re fighting to get this billionaire’s hands out of them.”
Dems need to be out there every day on the airwaves and social media highlighting individual government workers who were fired. Tell their story and show the consequences.
ZenMode
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,347
"The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor"At a recent rally in Montana, President Trump claimed that “Republicans passed the biggest tax cuts in American history, the biggest in American history. Everybody in this room is better for them. Everybody is better for them.”
Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off.
The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor
This fact is made all the more egregious in light of evidence that the middle class isn’t doing well and needs help. Stagnating incomes, opportunity gaps, and fragile families are all reasons to worry about the middle class. Public policy has done little to ameliorate these concerns. After accounting for taxes and transfers, growth in average middle-class household incomes has lagged significantly behind the lowest and, especially, the highest income quintiles. Incomes of the top 20 percent rose by 97 percent from 1979-2014—over twice as much as middle-class incomes. Even the lowest quintile has seen faster income growth, 69 percent, or two thirds higher than income growth for the middle class. In short, both public policy and the economy are leaving the middle class behind.
The 2017 tax law doesn’t help the middle class
The new tax law—known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)—will exacerbate this trend. The benefits of the law tilt toward the well-off both now and in the future, according to the distributional analysis of the Tax Policy Center. By 2027, benefits of the tax law flow entirely to the rich. (The Joint Committee on Taxation finds similar results using a different measure.)
To be fair, Republicans hope to extend the tax law beyond 2027, but that’s highly unlikely. There is also an argument that increased investment will lead to higher wages in the long run. The theory is that the lower corporate rate and temporarily expanded business expensing will spur investment in the United States, leading to more capital, and more productive workers. As worker productivity rises, firms will boost wages. All of this would happen gradually over the long term.
However, the evidence for this story about long-term growth is weak at best. According to two leading economists, one liberal and one conservative, annual GDP growth might rise by 0.02 percentage points over the next decade. So far, corporations are using their added profits primarily to buy back shares and boost dividends, not to invest. In addition, rising productivity in recent decades has not been fully shared with workers, suggesting a less competitive economy than many assume. Finally, deficit-financing means that middle-class households will likely be hit with big tax increases or spending cuts later and interest rates will rise in the interim as government borrowing explodes. While revenue-neutral, pro-growth tax reform (rather than costly tax cuts) is possible and desirable, the TCJA falls far short of this standard.
The middle class needs a tax cut: Trump didn't give it to them
Isabel Sawhill and Christopher Pulliam look at how President Trump's recent tax cuts will hurt the American middle class in the long run.
Could this (poor) be due to the forced increases in minimum wage? I'd venture that none in the middle class work for minimum wage while many poor do.
Minimum wage in AZ has close to doubled, but those already above aren't getting comparable increases.
Last edited:
Centerpiece
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,595
You can’t discuss anything above an elementary level with Silencedogood. He was the one on the Jesus thread talking how Pubs donate more cash to nonprofits etc. He’s trying to thread that camel through the eye of the needle.
lawtig02
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 2,772
I agree. I just don't think it's DOGE that's actually doing the meaningful demolition.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,725
Musk’s buffoonery is great cover for Vought, that’s for sure.
