Biden Peddles Fiction About Trump Tax Cuts in SOTU

[Dadoalex]

Move to a PROGRESSIVE country if it makes you feel any better.
Keep your hands off money that you didn't earn.
IT IS NOT YOURS!

This country has a progressive tax code.
Has been that way since 1917
It's a shame they didn't teach you that in school.
Perhaps you wouldn't look so silly so often.

 

[BS Filter]

No, 1% effective rate is not more.

1% of a million is a lot more than 1% of 50,000. Did you flunk at math?

 

[leftwinger]

so you're saying Trump was opposed to tax cuts for the wealthiest?

You are
A. A liar
B. Wholly ignorant
C. A wholly ignorant liar.

"You all just got a lot richer," Trump tells friends, referencing tax overhaul

Trump kicked off his holiday weekend at Mar-a-Lago Friday night at a dinner

www.cbsnews.com

"President Trump kicked off his holiday weekend at Mar-a-Lago Friday night at a dinner where he told friends, "You all just got a lot richer," referencing the sweeping tax overhaul he signed into law hours earlier. "

so? Stating a fact doesnt mean it was his plan. I lived it. The top bracket had no cut until Pelosi/ Schumer rammed it in the last two weeks. Again SALT whiners lit them up. These are the criminals who shut Trumps GOVT for 39 days over spending. Trump was smart to take the good. you’re a desperate little man often bragging on his wealth. If you want to pay more (you have so much?) just do it.

 

[Oddball]

It was absolutely true in both scope and content.

The Great Republican Tax Giveaway to the Rich, is the largest sum of the $34 Trillion debt. It is the main driver of the deficit, and is 100% responsible for the destruction of the middleclass that was at its strongest between 1945-1980.

The trickle down scam is done son.

There's no "giveaway" in letting me keep what I earned, Karl.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Biden is a senile dirt bag Liar. He will never change.

 

[BS Filter]

Biden is a senile dirt bag Liar. He will never change.

Biden's always been a liar, a racist and a plagiarist.

 

[mikegriffith1]

It was absolutely true in both scope and content.

The Great Republican Tax Giveaway to the Rich, is the largest sum of the $34 Trillion debt. It is the main driver of the deficit, and is 100% responsible for the destruction of the middleclass that was at its strongest between 1945-1980.

The trickle down scam is done son.

Umm, did you not the actual numbers in the OP? Federal revenue has gone up substantially since the tax cuts, and the rich had their income tax rates cut by only 3.5 percentage points in total, while the middle class had their income tax rates cut by nearly triple that amount, by 10 percentage points.

 

[dudmuck]

Umm, did you not the actual numbers in the OP? Federal revenue has gone up substantially since the tax cuts, and the rich had their income tax rates cut by only 3.5 percentage points in total, while the middle class had their income tax rates cut by nearly triple that amount, by 10 percentage points.

 

[mikegriffith1]

You can't be serious. It is amazing that you could fall for that phony analysis. Using dollar amounts to judge the fairness of the tax cuts is misleading and invalid. It ignores the undeniable fact that the tax cuts gave the largest rate cuts to middle-income people, not to the rich, and that under the tax cuts, middle-income people get to keep a larger share/percentage of their income than do high-income people.

Let's apply your silly logic to two people who both get a pay raise. John Doe makes $50K per year and gets a 5% pay raise, so his salary goes up by $2,500. Mary Jane makes $100K per year and gets a pay raise of 3%, so her salary goes up by $3,000. Will John Doe be so foolish and ignorant as to tell his boss that his raise is "unfair" because Mary Jane's salary is going up by $3,000 while his is going up by $2,500?

The fact that Jane's salary is going up by a larger dollar amount is merely a function of math, since 2% of $100K per year is more than 5% of $50K. Nobody in their right mind would argue that John Doe's raise was unfair.

If Joe Middle Class earns $60K per year and gets a 3% tax cut and if John Low Income earns $30K per year and gets a 5% tax cut, do you think John Low Income will claim the tax cut is unfair because he saves $1,500 but Joe Middle Class saves $1,800? No, of course not, because John Low Income is getting to keep a larger share of his income than does Joe Middle Class.

 

[mikegriffith1]

You can't be serious. It is amazing that you could fall for that phony analysis. Using dollar amounts to judge the fairness of the tax cuts is misleading and invalid. It ignores the undeniable fact that the tax cuts gave the largest rate cuts to middle-income people, not to the rich, and that under the tax cuts, middle-income people get to keep a larger share/percentage of their income than do high-income people.

Let's apply your silly logic to two people who both get a pay raise. John Doe makes $50K per year and gets a 5% pay raise, so his salary goes up by $2,500. Mary Jane makes $100K per year and gets a pay raise of 3%, so her salary goes up by $3,000. Will John Doe be so foolish and ignorant as to tell his boss that his raise is "unfair" because Mary Jane's salary is going up by $3,000 while his is going up by $2,500?

The fact that Jane's salary is going up by a larger dollar amount is merely a function of math, since 2% of $100K per year is more than 5% of $50K. Nobody in their right mind would argue that John Doe's raise was unfair.

If Joe Middle Class earns $60K per year and gets a 3% tax cut and if John Low Income earns $30K per year and gets a 5% tax cut, do you think John Low Income will claim the tax cut is unfair because he saves $1,500 but Joe Middle Class saves $1,800? No, of course not, because John Low Income is getting to keep a larger share of his income than does Joe Middle Class.

Let it be noted that no liberal in this thread has explained how the Trump tax cuts favored the rich when those tax cuts indisputably gave the largest rate cuts to the middle-income tax brackets (second, third, and fourth brackets). To put it another way, under the Trump tax cuts, middle-income people get to keep a much larger share of their income than do rich people.

One liberal used the phony, sophomoric argument that the Trump tax cuts gave rich people more money in gross dollar amounts than they gave to middle-income people, and that therefore the tax cuts favored the rich.

That's as silly as saying that $150K-per-year employee John Doe who gets a 2% pay raise is getting a better deal than $50K-per-year employee John Bond who gets a 5% raise because John Doe's salary is going up by $3,000 per year in gross dollars while John Bond's salary is "only" going up by $2,500.

Such a silly argument shows a very poor grasp of basic math. 1% of $1 million will always be more than 10% of $100K, but no person in his right mind earning $100K who got a 10% tax cut would complain that the person earning $1 million who got a 1% tax cut got the bigger tax cut.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Said Biden, "The last administration enacted a $2 trillion tax cut that overwhelmingly benefits the very wealthy and the biggest corporations and exploded the federal deficit."

This is both false and demagogic.

One, federal revenue has risen substantially since the Trump tax cuts, going from $3.3 trillion in 2016 to $4.7 trillion in 2023, a whopping 41% increase.

Two, runaway federal spending has canceled out the huge revenue increase generated since the Trump tax cuts. If we had maintained federal spending at 2016-Obama levels while only allowing spending to increase at the rate of inflation, we would have no deficit and would be paying down the national debt.

Federal spending has exploded from $3.85 trillion in 2016 to $6.1 trillion in 2023.

Three, the Trump income tax cuts were heavily weighted to the middle class. The year the tax cuts were passed, 2017, the tax rate for married couples was 15% in the second tax bracket, 25% in the third bracket, 28% in the fourth bracket, 33% in the fifth bracket, 35% in the sixth bracket, and 39.5% percent in the seventh bracket. The Trump tax cuts reduced those rates as follows:

Middle Income
2nd bracket -- from 15% down to 12% (3 percentage points)
3rd bracket -- from 25% down to 22% (3 percentage points)
4th bracket -- from 28% down to 24% (4 percentage points)

High Income
5th bracket -- from 33% down to 32% (1 percentage point)
6th bracket -- No change
7th bracket -- from 39.5% down to 37% (2.5 percentage points)

So the three middle-income brackets--the second, third, and fourth brackets--had their rates reduced by a total of 10 percentage points, while the high-income brackets--the fifth, sixth, and seventh brackets--had their rates reduced by only 3.5 percentage points.

Bump.

The reason why you may have to pay MORE tax in 2026

Trump made sweeping changes to the tax landscape in 2017, but these are due to expire at the end of 2025 which could send tax rates soaring.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[mikegriffith1]

Bump.

The reason why you may have to pay MORE tax in 2026

Trump made sweeping changes to the tax landscape in 2017, but these are due to expire at the end of 2025 which could send tax rates soaring.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Yes, indeed. The chart shows what tax rates were before and after the Trump tax cuts. As anyone can see, the largest cuts went to the middle-income brackets, i.e., the second, third, and fourth brackets.

The favorite argument, really the only argument, that liberals offer is to cite the irrelevant gross dollar reductions that result from the tax cuts. This is a misleading, juvenile argument.

If John Doe makes $800K per year, his 2.6% Trump tax cut equals a savings of $20,800 per year. If Mary Jane makes $60K per year, her 3% Trump tax cut equals a savings of $1,800 per year. Obviously, Mary is actually the one who gets to keep a larger share of her income. John's gross dollar reduction is only larger than Mary's because his income is 13.3 times higher Mary's. John is getting to keep a smaller share of his income than Mary is getting to keep.

Or, think of how silly citing gross dollar amounts would be when you're talking about pay raises. If Mary Jane, earning $80K per year, gets a 6% raise, she gets a $4,800 raise in gross dollars. If John Doe, earning $1.5M per year, gets a 3% raise, he gets a $45,000 raise in gross dollars. Obviously, Mary is getting the better raise--her pay raise is double John's pay raise. John's gross-dollars increase is only more than Mary's because his salary was nearly 19 times higher than Mary's when they got the raises.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Said Biden, "The last administration enacted a $2 trillion tax cut that overwhelmingly benefits the very wealthy and the biggest corporations and exploded the federal deficit."

This is both false and demagogic.

One, federal revenue has risen substantially since the Trump tax cuts, going from $3.3 trillion in 2016 to $4.7 trillion in 2023, a whopping 41% increase.

Two, runaway federal spending has canceled out the huge revenue increase generated since the Trump tax cuts. If we had maintained federal spending at 2016-Obama levels while only allowing spending to increase at the rate of inflation, we would have no deficit and would be paying down the national debt.

Federal spending has exploded from $3.85 trillion in 2016 to $6.1 trillion in 2023.

Three, the Trump income tax cuts were heavily weighted to the middle class. The year the tax cuts were passed, 2017, the tax rate for married couples was 15% in the second tax bracket, 25% in the third bracket, 28% in the fourth bracket, 33% in the fifth bracket, 35% in the sixth bracket, and 39.5% percent in the seventh bracket. The Trump tax cuts reduced those rates as follows:

Middle Income
2nd bracket -- from 15% down to 12% (3 percentage points)
3rd bracket -- from 25% down to 22% (3 percentage points)
4th bracket -- from 28% down to 24% (4 percentage points)

High Income
5th bracket -- from 33% down to 32% (1 percentage point)
6th bracket -- No change
7th bracket -- from 39.5% down to 37% (2.5 percentage points)

So the three middle-income brackets--the second, third, and fourth brackets--had their rates reduced by a total of 10 percentage points, while the high-income brackets--the fifth, sixth, and seventh brackets--had their rates reduced by only 3.5 percentage points.

Trump supporters complaining about people lying.... priceless.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Yes, indeed. The chart shows what tax rates were before and after the Trump tax cuts. As anyone can see, the largest cuts went to the middle-income brackets, i.e., the second, third, and fourth brackets.

The favorite argument, really the only argument, that liberals offer is to cite the irrelevant gross dollar reductions that result from the tax cuts. This is a misleading, juvenile argument.

If John Doe makes $800K per year, his 2.6% Trump tax cut equals a savings of $20,800 per year. If Mary Jane makes $60K per year, her 3% Trump tax cut equals a savings of $1,800 per year. Obviously, Mary is actually the one who gets to keep a larger share of her income. John's gross dollar reduction is only larger than Mary's because his income is 13.3 times higher Mary's. John is getting to keep a smaller share of his income than Mary is getting to keep.

Or, think of how silly citing gross dollar amounts would be when you're talking about pay raises. If Mary Jane, earning $80K per year, gets a 6% raise, she gets a $4,800 raise in gross dollars. If John Doe, earning $1.5M per year, gets a 3% raise, he gets a $45,000 raise in gross dollars. Obviously, Mary is getting the better raise--her pay raise is double John's pay raise. John's gross-dollars increase is only more than Mary's because his salary was nearly 19 times higher than Mary's when they got the raises.

I certainly saved a bundle, and the higher standard deduction helped too.

And the extra money is used to fuel the economy here, as opposed to funding pensions of politicians in Ukraine.