Did Moderates and Indy’s get a bonus from the Trump tax cuts? Will they vote to give that back?

[BrokeLoser]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

This is how much American workers saved during the first year after Trump tax overhaul

Trump is pledging another tax cut, while Democratic candidates vow to increase taxes on the rich and corporations.

www.marketwatch.com

 

[BluesLegend]

Biden and Dems will absolutely take back the Trump tax cuts from Americans. They need this money to buy votes from illegals.

- Step one amnesty and the right to vote for 20 million illegals to cancel out the votes of Americans.
- Step two purchase votes from the illegals with government handouts paid for by Americans.

If allowed this will guarantee Dem party to rule with an iron fist for at least a half century.

 

[night_son]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

This is how much American workers saved during the first year after Trump tax overhaul

Trump is pledging another tax cut, while Democratic candidates vow to increase taxes on the rich and corporations.

www.marketwatch.com

We have reached a point, it seems, where ideology and rabid hatred have erased the common sense of millions of Americans and replaced their concern for such "earthly" matters with religious-like fervor. I also do not believe in moderates or independents—that they exist—outside of internet message boards. We are living in very "black" and "white times" (nothing to with race) where one either stands for or against anti-human evil. Anyone who truly is an independent, a fence sitter, would have to cherry pick good, pro-human issues from one side to support while also picking evil, anti-human issues to support from the other side as well. I just can't see it.

 

[buckeye45_73]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

This is how much American workers saved during the first year after Trump tax overhaul

Trump is pledging another tax cut, while Democratic candidates vow to increase taxes on the rich and corporations.

www.marketwatch.com

Well ain't this a *****
Taxpayers making between $40,000 and $50,000 a year had the largest fall in average tax liability, a 14.5% drop, while high-end households making between $250,000 and $500,000 had the second largest decrease, with a 14.4% liability reduction.


So it wasn't just the rich, who knew?

 

[BluesLegend]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

This is how much American workers saved during the first year after Trump tax overhaul

Trump is pledging another tax cut, while Democratic candidates vow to increase taxes on the rich and corporations.

www.marketwatch.com

Well ain't this a *****
Taxpayers making between $40,000 and $50,000 a year had the largest fall in average tax liability, a 14.5% drop, while high-end households making between $250,000 and $500,000 had the second largest decrease, with a 14.4% liability reduction.


So it wasn't just the rich, who knew?

Everyone knew, Dems and the pukes in the fake news just lie about it.

 

[BrokeLoser]

I was hoping to hear from a few of our resident fence sitters....
dblack help us out..are you cool with sending your Trump tax break to Mexico?

 

[Oddball]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

This is how much American workers saved during the first year after Trump tax overhaul

Trump is pledging another tax cut, while Democratic candidates vow to increase taxes on the rich and corporations.

www.marketwatch.com

Well ain't this a *****
Taxpayers making between $40,000 and $50,000 a year had the largest fall in average tax liability, a 14.5% drop, while high-end households making between $250,000 and $500,000 had the second largest decrease, with a 14.4% liability reduction.


So it wasn't just the rich, who knew?

If you have a job, you're "rich" to the looters.

 

[Norman]

Americans saved more than Obamacare cost us.

 

[alang1216]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

Since there was no corresponding spending cuts, the tax 'breaks' were really just us borrowing money to put in our pockets. It still needs to be paid back. There is no free lunch.

 

[BrokeLoser]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

Since there was no corresponding spending cuts, the tax 'breaks' were really just us borrowing money to put in our pockets. It still needs to be paid back. There is no free lunch.

The US Treasury took in record tax revenues as a direct result of the tax cuts. This is what businesses with successful business models do....they spend to gain...You wouldn’t understand this rudimentary capitalist principle though.

 

[alang1216]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

Since there was no corresponding spending cuts, the tax 'breaks' were really just us borrowing money to put in our pockets. It still needs to be paid back. There is no free lunch.

The US Treasury took in record tax revenues as a direct result of the tax cuts. This is what businesses with successful business models do....they spend to gain...You wouldn’t understand this rudimentary capitalist principle though.

Here are some more examples that don't understand this rudimentary capitalist principle either:

Did the TCJA spur enough growth to maintain federal revenue levels?
While some TCJA supporters observe that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year 2018 (which began Oct. 1, 2017) than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of the TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.
So did the TCJA pay for itself?
The TCJA did not pay for itself, nor is it likely to do so in the future. There are many debates to have about the TCJA, but whether it raised or reduced revenues in 2018 should not be one of them.


Did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Pay for Itself in 2018?
Were you surprised that the 2017 tax overhaul, commonly referred as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), did not increase revenues in 2018? Probably not, but several prominent conservatives, including Republicans in the House and Senate, former Reagan economist Art Laffer, and members of the Trump Administration, would be disappointed if they looked at the data. They have repeatedly claimed that TCJA either increased revenues or will pay for itself.
In principle, a tax cut could “pay for itself” if it spurred substantial economic growth. Revenues would rise from the combination of higher wages and hours worked, greater investment returns, and larger corporate profits. Under this scenario, that “dynamic” effect would more than offset the entire “static” revenue loss of the tax cut.
TCJA, however, is not that tax cut. While some TCJA supporters are touting that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year (FY) 2018 than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.

 

[BrokeLoser]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

Since there was no corresponding spending cuts, the tax 'breaks' were really just us borrowing money to put in our pockets. It still needs to be paid back. There is no free lunch.

The US Treasury took in record tax revenues as a direct result of the tax cuts. This is what businesses with successful business models do....they spend to gain...You wouldn’t understand this rudimentary capitalist principle though.

Here are some more examples that don't understand this rudimentary capitalist principle either:

Did the TCJA spur enough growth to maintain federal revenue levels?
While some TCJA supporters observe that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year 2018 (which began Oct. 1, 2017) than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of the TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.
So did the TCJA pay for itself?
The TCJA did not pay for itself, nor is it likely to do so in the future. There are many debates to have about the TCJA, but whether it raised or reduced revenues in 2018 should not be one of them.


Did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Pay for Itself in 2018?
Were you surprised that the 2017 tax overhaul, commonly referred as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), did not increase revenues in 2018? Probably not, but several prominent conservatives, including Republicans in the House and Senate, former Reagan economist Art Laffer, and members of the Trump Administration, would be disappointed if they looked at the data. They have repeatedly claimed that TCJA either increased revenues or will pay for itself.
In principle, a tax cut could “pay for itself” if it spurred substantial economic growth. Revenues would rise from the combination of higher wages and hours worked, greater investment returns, and larger corporate profits. Under this scenario, that “dynamic” effect would more than offset the entire “static” revenue loss of the tax cut.
TCJA, however, is not that tax cut. While some TCJA supporters are touting that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year (FY) 2018 than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.

Hmm...weird.

Go Figure: Federal Revenues Hit All-Time Highs Under Trump Tax Cuts

Critics of the Trump tax cuts said they would blow a hole in the deficit. Yet individual income taxes climbed 6% in the just-ended fiscal 2018.

www.investors.com

 

[alang1216]

What will compel Indy’s and Moderates to want to send their Trump tax breaks to illegal aliens and the like?

Since there was no corresponding spending cuts, the tax 'breaks' were really just us borrowing money to put in our pockets. It still needs to be paid back. There is no free lunch.

The US Treasury took in record tax revenues as a direct result of the tax cuts. This is what businesses with successful business models do....they spend to gain...You wouldn’t understand this rudimentary capitalist principle though.

Here are some more examples that don't understand this rudimentary capitalist principle either:

Did the TCJA spur enough growth to maintain federal revenue levels?
While some TCJA supporters observe that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year 2018 (which began Oct. 1, 2017) than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of the TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.
So did the TCJA pay for itself?
The TCJA did not pay for itself, nor is it likely to do so in the future. There are many debates to have about the TCJA, but whether it raised or reduced revenues in 2018 should not be one of them.


Did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Pay for Itself in 2018?
Were you surprised that the 2017 tax overhaul, commonly referred as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), did not increase revenues in 2018? Probably not, but several prominent conservatives, including Republicans in the House and Senate, former Reagan economist Art Laffer, and members of the Trump Administration, would be disappointed if they looked at the data. They have repeatedly claimed that TCJA either increased revenues or will pay for itself.
In principle, a tax cut could “pay for itself” if it spurred substantial economic growth. Revenues would rise from the combination of higher wages and hours worked, greater investment returns, and larger corporate profits. Under this scenario, that “dynamic” effect would more than offset the entire “static” revenue loss of the tax cut.
TCJA, however, is not that tax cut. While some TCJA supporters are touting that nominal revenues were higher in fiscal year (FY) 2018 than in FY2017, that comparison does not address the question of TCJA’s effects. Nominal revenues rise because of inflation and economic growth. Adjusted for inflation, total revenues fell from FY2017 to FY2018 (Figure 1). Adjusted for the size of the economy, they fell even more.

Hmm...weird.

Go Figure: Federal Revenues Hit All-Time Highs Under Trump Tax Cuts

Critics of the Trump tax cuts said they would blow a hole in the deficit. Yet individual income taxes climbed 6% in the just-ended fiscal 2018.

www.investors.com

First, due to inflation the revenue received by the gov't should increase every year. The question my posts asked was if the increase in revenue after the tax cuts was up due to the cuts or to inflation. Both say the tax cuts didn't explain it.

From your link:

Overall, federal revenues came in slightly higher in FY 2018 — up 0.5%.​

Spending, on the other hand, was $127 billion higher in fiscal 2018. As a result, deficits for 2018 climbed $113 billion.​