WakeandBake
Well-known member
that was to Palma who has complained of his poverty when needed
Biggest Reform EVER passed thread
- Thread starter dartsndeacs
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
myDeaconmyhand
First man to get a team of horses up Bear Mountain
I know you were.
Gooner
Pit League Fantasy Football Commissioner
ConnorEl
Well-known member
Taxpayers, You’ve Been Scammed
Quote
—————
So you go out for dinner with a wealthy acquaintance. “I’ll take care of everything,” he says, and orders you a hamburger. Then he orders himself an expensive steak and a bottle of wine, which he doesn’t share. And when the waiter comes with the check, he points at you and says, “Charge it to his credit card.”
Now you understand the essence of the Trump tax cut, signed into law a little over two months ago.
The key thing you need to know is that right now the U.S. government has no business cutting taxes. We need more revenue, not less.
Why? The federal government, as an old line says, is a giant insurance company with an army. Most of its costs come from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and all three programs are becoming more expensive as ever more baby boomers reach retirement age. This means that unless we cut back sharply on benefits that middle-class Americans count on, we will need to raise more revenue than in the past.
Yet even before the tax cut, federal tax receipts were looking weak for an economy with low unemployment and a rising stock market — for example, far lower as a percentage of G.D.P. than the tax take during the Clinton boom of the 1990s, and even a bit lower than they were at the end of the Bush-era expansion. The tax cut will push them lower still. Something will have to give.
And we already know what will give, if Republicans get their way: programs that benefit working Americans. In fact, the usual suspects like Paul Ryan were talking about the need for “entitlement reform” — meaning cuts in Medicare and Medicaid — to reduce deficits even as they were passing a huge tax cut that will make those deficits much worse.
Hence my analogy about the guy who “gives” you a hamburger, then bills it to your credit card. Ryan celebrated the tax cut with a tweet about a teacher saving $1.50 a week on her taxes; that’s like saying you should feel grateful for a “gift” that’s actually being charged to your own credit card. How’s that $75-a-year saving going to look when the teacher finds out that, partly because of that tax cut, her mother’s Medicare plan has been converted into an inadequate voucher system and Medicaid won’t pay for her father’s nursing home care?
Meanwhile, about your companion’s steak dinner: Most of the tax cut actually consisted of huge tax breaks for corporations, which is in effect a big tax cut for stockholders. And while many Americans own a bit of stock via their retirement accounts, even if you include these indirect holdings, more than 80 percent of stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10 percent of the population. So on the face of it, the wealthy are giving themselves a big gift, and sending the bill to the middle class.
Now, the tax cut’s defenders insist that it won’t really work that way, that the benefits of lower corporate taxes will trickle down to workers instead. How’s that supposed to happen?
Well, the theory is that lower corporate taxes will draw in lots of money from overseas, which corporations will invest in new plants and equipment, which will drive up the demand for labor, which will raise wages. And to be fair, there’s probably something to this theory — something, but not very much.
First of all, even if the process were to work as advertised, it would take a long time — probably decades. Even the most optimistic analyses suggest that there would be little effect on wages for the first few years, which means that for now what looks like a tax break for the wealthy is, in fact, a tax break for the wealthy.
Second, the story relies on a long chain of events with multiple weak links. For example, corporations with monopoly power won’t see lower taxes as a reason to invest more; they’ll just take the money. Meanwhile, there’s growing evidence that big employers are using their power to suppress wages; cutting their taxes won’t change that fact. So even in the long run we shouldn’t expect a lot of trickle-down.
But wait — weren’t there a lot of stories about companies using the tax cut to give their workers bonuses? Yes, there were — but only because the news media let themselves get played. Most of those bonuses would have happened anyway: In an economy with low unemployment, there are always some companies deciding to pay a bit more to attract workers. But companies had every incentive to pretend that the tax cut was responsible, if only to curry favor with the Trump administration.
And in any case the bonus hype was out of all proportion to the reality. So far, we’ve seen about $6 billion in bonuses versus more than $170 billion in stock buybacks, that is, handing money to wealthy stockholders. And money spent on buybacks is money that isn’t being invested in plants and equipment, the supposed point of the tax cut.
So the message to middle-class taxpayers is, if you think you were helped by the tax cut, think again. Donald Trump and his allies pretended to give you a gift, but they gave themselves and their wealthy patrons much bigger gifts — and they’re going to stick you with the bill. You’ve been scammed.
—————
Quote
—————
So you go out for dinner with a wealthy acquaintance. “I’ll take care of everything,” he says, and orders you a hamburger. Then he orders himself an expensive steak and a bottle of wine, which he doesn’t share. And when the waiter comes with the check, he points at you and says, “Charge it to his credit card.”
Now you understand the essence of the Trump tax cut, signed into law a little over two months ago.
The key thing you need to know is that right now the U.S. government has no business cutting taxes. We need more revenue, not less.
Why? The federal government, as an old line says, is a giant insurance company with an army. Most of its costs come from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and all three programs are becoming more expensive as ever more baby boomers reach retirement age. This means that unless we cut back sharply on benefits that middle-class Americans count on, we will need to raise more revenue than in the past.
Yet even before the tax cut, federal tax receipts were looking weak for an economy with low unemployment and a rising stock market — for example, far lower as a percentage of G.D.P. than the tax take during the Clinton boom of the 1990s, and even a bit lower than they were at the end of the Bush-era expansion. The tax cut will push them lower still. Something will have to give.
And we already know what will give, if Republicans get their way: programs that benefit working Americans. In fact, the usual suspects like Paul Ryan were talking about the need for “entitlement reform” — meaning cuts in Medicare and Medicaid — to reduce deficits even as they were passing a huge tax cut that will make those deficits much worse.
Hence my analogy about the guy who “gives” you a hamburger, then bills it to your credit card. Ryan celebrated the tax cut with a tweet about a teacher saving $1.50 a week on her taxes; that’s like saying you should feel grateful for a “gift” that’s actually being charged to your own credit card. How’s that $75-a-year saving going to look when the teacher finds out that, partly because of that tax cut, her mother’s Medicare plan has been converted into an inadequate voucher system and Medicaid won’t pay for her father’s nursing home care?
Meanwhile, about your companion’s steak dinner: Most of the tax cut actually consisted of huge tax breaks for corporations, which is in effect a big tax cut for stockholders. And while many Americans own a bit of stock via their retirement accounts, even if you include these indirect holdings, more than 80 percent of stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10 percent of the population. So on the face of it, the wealthy are giving themselves a big gift, and sending the bill to the middle class.
Now, the tax cut’s defenders insist that it won’t really work that way, that the benefits of lower corporate taxes will trickle down to workers instead. How’s that supposed to happen?
Well, the theory is that lower corporate taxes will draw in lots of money from overseas, which corporations will invest in new plants and equipment, which will drive up the demand for labor, which will raise wages. And to be fair, there’s probably something to this theory — something, but not very much.
First of all, even if the process were to work as advertised, it would take a long time — probably decades. Even the most optimistic analyses suggest that there would be little effect on wages for the first few years, which means that for now what looks like a tax break for the wealthy is, in fact, a tax break for the wealthy.
Second, the story relies on a long chain of events with multiple weak links. For example, corporations with monopoly power won’t see lower taxes as a reason to invest more; they’ll just take the money. Meanwhile, there’s growing evidence that big employers are using their power to suppress wages; cutting their taxes won’t change that fact. So even in the long run we shouldn’t expect a lot of trickle-down.
But wait — weren’t there a lot of stories about companies using the tax cut to give their workers bonuses? Yes, there were — but only because the news media let themselves get played. Most of those bonuses would have happened anyway: In an economy with low unemployment, there are always some companies deciding to pay a bit more to attract workers. But companies had every incentive to pretend that the tax cut was responsible, if only to curry favor with the Trump administration.
And in any case the bonus hype was out of all proportion to the reality. So far, we’ve seen about $6 billion in bonuses versus more than $170 billion in stock buybacks, that is, handing money to wealthy stockholders. And money spent on buybacks is money that isn’t being invested in plants and equipment, the supposed point of the tax cut.
So the message to middle-class taxpayers is, if you think you were helped by the tax cut, think again. Donald Trump and his allies pretended to give you a gift, but they gave themselves and their wealthy patrons much bigger gifts — and they’re going to stick you with the bill. You’ve been scammed.
—————
PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 154,983
- Reaction score
- 22,013
I saw a good opinion column yesterday or Wednesday that broke down the wage increases vs. stock buybacks.
Then it had a great discussion about how Republicans blatantly lie about the impact of their policies and Democrats rely on fact based arguments instead of saying things like “a new DACA deal would create a million jobs.”
Unfortunately, I read it linked off Facebook and can’t find it now. I went through the NYT and WaPo op-Ed’s and couldn’t find it.
Then it had a great discussion about how Republicans blatantly lie about the impact of their policies and Democrats rely on fact based arguments instead of saying things like “a new DACA deal would create a million jobs.”
Unfortunately, I read it linked off Facebook and can’t find it now. I went through the NYT and WaPo op-Ed’s and couldn’t find it.
Colonel Angus
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,703
- Reaction score
- 541
Did you check Newsweek? What about Huff Po? Daily Kos?
avalon
Antwan Scott
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2011
- Messages
- 18,713
- Reaction score
- 1,341
The numbers are pretty crazy, we've already hit a record level of stock buybacks for a quarter.
Trump’s Tax Cuts in Hand, Companies Spend More on Themselves Than on Wages
Tax cut scoreboard: Workers $6 billion; Shareholders $171 billion
But the bonuses get more press coverage because they are planned publicity stunts.
Trump’s Tax Cuts in Hand, Companies Spend More on Themselves Than on Wages
Tax cut scoreboard: Workers $6 billion; Shareholders $171 billion
But the bonuses get more press coverage because they are planned publicity stunts.
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
If you like your doctor, you can keep him
WakeandBake
Well-known member
Nobody really likes their doctor
ConnorEl
Well-known member
I didn't have to change my plan or doctor.
So it's all good.
So it's all good.
WakeandBake
Well-known member
I haven’t had to either, but I have by moving or changing jobs/insurance etc. Who gives a shit about that really? I guess if you have a specialist you like, but seems like a snowflakey argument to gripe about Obama.
warak
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 8,269
- Reaction score
- 789
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...-small-business-owners-say-they-will-not-hire
"The feel-good media coverage of corporate bonuses and raises tied to the new tax law overlooks one important question: what tangible economic impact is the law having on the country’s 30 million small businesses and the people they employ?
It could be that the dearth of news coverage is due to the fact that the byzantine new rules for small business owners make it hard to calculate the law’s impact. It could be because the meager tax savings small business owners may receive are temporary and unremarkable when compared to the permanent 40 percent tax cut their corporate brethren were gifted. Or, as a new poll by Businesses for Responsible Tax Reform suggests, it could be that there is not much to report because small business owners don’t expect the law to help them grow their businesses or invest in their employees."
who could have expected this.....
"The feel-good media coverage of corporate bonuses and raises tied to the new tax law overlooks one important question: what tangible economic impact is the law having on the country’s 30 million small businesses and the people they employ?
It could be that the dearth of news coverage is due to the fact that the byzantine new rules for small business owners make it hard to calculate the law’s impact. It could be because the meager tax savings small business owners may receive are temporary and unremarkable when compared to the permanent 40 percent tax cut their corporate brethren were gifted. Or, as a new poll by Businesses for Responsible Tax Reform suggests, it could be that there is not much to report because small business owners don’t expect the law to help them grow their businesses or invest in their employees."
who could have expected this.....
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
Well the tax reform for the small businesses isn't going to be first felt until they file their 2018 taxes in mid to late 2019.
warak
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 8,269
- Reaction score
- 789
from article:
Seven in 10 small business owners said they would not hire a new employee as a result of the new tax law.
Six in 10 small business owners said they would not be giving their employees raises.
54 percent of small business owners say the tax law favors large corporations over small businesses.
55 percent of respondents do not believe the law puts small businesses on a level playing field with big businesses.
Importantly, given the partisan nature of the law, 41 percent identify as Republican, 31 percent as Democrat and 28 percent as independent or something else.
ImTheCaptain
I disagree with you
first of all, what is a "small business" and secondly, who are the small business owners who think the tax law benefits small businesses over large corps
dartsndeacs
THE quintessential dwarf
So 30% of business owners will hire a new employee due to the new tax law? That's pretty good.
PhDeac
PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 154,983
- Reaction score
- 22,013
First month with over 300K jobs created under Trump. Happened 8 times under Obama.
And of course, the Feb number could be adjusted down.
warak
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 8,269
- Reaction score
- 789
just want to make sure since i am talking to a Trump voter. are we still in 2017? i said 2017, not 2018, so essentially...
