IRS data proves Trump tax cuts benefited middle, working-class Americans most

[hadit]

They decreased for the first 12 months, then after that they increased at a slower rate than before the cuts.



Hard to do when both parties spend like drunken sailors on shore leave.

That's insulting to drunken sailors on shore leave. They've baked in automatic increases in the budget which makes them run around screeching about draconian cuts when a program grows by 6% instead of a projected 8%.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Sorry, it was his next best was Dec 2015, In 2008 it was 3.8% increase, higher than Obama ever got. Thanks for pointing out the error.

Yup right before Dubya crashed everything, glad I pointed that out!!!!
MAGA

 

[Nostra]

Yup right before Dubya crashed everything, glad I pointed that out!!!!
MAGA

Bush warned of the housing crisis going back to 2001. Dimwingers said he was wrong and ignored it.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Bush warned of the housing crisis going back to 2001. Dimwingers said he was wrong and ignored it.

So did he and the rest of the Rethugikkkons!!!!!!
MAGA

 

[Papageorgio]

What a BULLSHIT article. The whole premises is that taxes were reduced by a larger percentage of total income for lower and middle class workers - 16% decrease for low income workers, 9% for workers earning more than $500,000.

Tax rate for workers earning $40,000 are 12% or $4,800. If you reduce their taxes by 16%, that's $768 which works out to $68 per month. Tax rate for those making $500,000 is 35% or $175,00. That worker will get a 9% refund or $15,750, or $1312.50 per month.

This bullshit article claims that since lower wage workers received a tax cut which is a larger percentage of taxes they paid, the low wage workers got a bigger tax break than those making in excess of $500,000 and thus received more benefit from Trump's tax breaks. No matter how you slice it, $758 per year is a WHOLE lot less than the $15,750 that the high wage workers received.

This is why we say "Figures never lie, by liars often figure".

And yet those in the top 5% pay over 90% of the taxes. Not sure what your point is.

 

[Papageorgio]

Yup right before Dubya crashed everything, glad I pointed that out!!!!
MAGA

If you believe it was all Bush's fault then you really have no clue on how the economy works. Thanks for pointing that out.

Who Was to Blame for the Subprime Crisis?

From lenders to buyers to hedge funds, when it comes to the subprime mortgage crisis, everyone had blood on their hands.

www.investopedia.com

Major Players in the 2008 Financial Crisis: Where Are They Now?

The impact of the 2008 financial crisis was felt around the world. Here is a look at how some of the primary players fared in the years after the failure.

www.investopedia.com

Who Is to Blame for the 2008 Financial Crisis? - ProMarket

The IGM Center at the University of Chicago has asked its American and European economist panel to rate the main causes of the financial crisis. For both American and European economists, the main culprit of the crisis was financial regulation and supervision. “Most economists agree that the...

promarket.org

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

The good intentions, bad managers and greed behind the meltdown...

content.time.com

The 2008 Meltdown And Where The Blame Falls

(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife) Note: This blog is based on my notes for a speech at the Harvard Class of 1957 55th reunion in Cambridge, Mass. on May 22nd. Armageddon was threatening the financial system on Wednesday, September 17, 2008. The largest bankruptcy in American history...

www.forbes.com

Causes of the 2008 Financial Crisis

There were three causes of the 2008 global financial crisis: deregulation, securitization, and the Fed's poor timing in lowering and raising interest rates.

www.thebalance.com

MAGA

 

[Independentthinker]

Our economy and revenues have been growing since 2010. Did tax cuts that didn't go into effect until 2018 cause it too?

Revenues increased more after the tax cuts.

 

[AntonToo]

Revenues increased more after the tax cuts.

Source? Because it sounds like it's coming straight from your ass.

And while you are at it, maybe you can also point to even a single economist who would claim that Trump tax cuts not only paid for themselves but actually increased revenues.

 

[AntonToo]

And yet those in the top 5% pay over 90% of the taxes. Not sure what your point is.

Bullshit.

 

[Independentthinker]

Source? Because it sounds like it's coming straight from your ass.

And while you are at it, maybe you can also point to even a single economist who would claim that Trump tax cuts not only paid for themselves but actually increased revenues.

LOL. You guys are too funny. The facts are right there for anyone to see. All you have to do is look up federal tax revenues by year and you will see that they went up. If you can't figure that much out by yourself then you really shouldn't be posting on sites. The others I have been debating with haven't denied that revenues went up. They were trying to make absurd claims that tax revenues including money we were borrowing. Tax revenues are tax revenues.

 

[Papageorgio]

Bullshit.

Yep, I agree, I pulled it from my memory which is faulty, the top 5% pay 60.3%. Top 50% pay 97.1% of the taxes, the bottom 50% pay 2.9%. I knew the 90% number was somewhere, my apologies.

 

[pknopp]

Because tax cuts spurred economic growth. Tax revenues grew and you just can't stand the fact that Republican policies work. The debt increased only because we spent more, your "billions" interjected into the market. How about cutting spending?

How do you propose that happens? Under Trump we went 8 trillion more in debt? (and we only had economic growth because of the billions being printed)

One understands that the time to raise taxes to address debt is when the economy is good. Trump was telling us we had the best economy ever. Did he address the debt? No, he cut taxes and added 8 trillion more in debt. If you consider that a success well.............

I was 100% against pumping the billions from the beginning.

 

[AntonToo]

LOL. You guys are too funny. The facts are right there for anyone to see.

Thats true, they are there, and they say you don't know what you are talking about.

You can see we've posted pretty solid GDP growth for the two tax-cut years of 2018 and 2019, but there was relatively little revenue increase to show for it. 2013-2015 posted similar average growth, but much more revenue growth (and a lot smaller deficits).

 

[struth]

How do you propose that happens? Under Trump we went 8 trillion more in debt? (and we only had economic growth because of the billions being printed)

One understands that the time to raise taxes to address debt is when the economy is good. Trump was telling us we had the best economy ever. Did he address the debt? No, he cut taxes and added 8 trillion more in debt. If you consider that a success well.............

I was 100% against pumping the billions from the beginning.

You never lower the debt by rising taxes. You lower the debt by cutting spending. Until the largest drivers of debt, entitlements, in particular medicare, and medicaid are addressed, then debt will continue to climb.

It doesn't help passing a 2 trillion dollar social welfare spending piece of legislation at all.

 

[pknopp]

You never lower the debt by rising taxes. You lower the debt by cutting spending. Until the largest drivers of debt, entitlements, in particular medicare, and medicaid are addressed, then debt will continue to climb.

It doesn't help passing a 2 trillion dollar social welfare spending piece of legislation at all.

The argument has long been that you raise taxes when the economy is good. Trump said we had the greatest economy ever (while arguing for the Fed to keep pumping).

 

[LeftofLeft]

Democrats are so sure that tax cuts only benefited the high income earners. Once Trump took office, I noticed that all things being relatively constant or the same, my net pay was higher as did many other members of the middle class. This indicates the Federal Government was taking less of my gross pay.

If the Middle Class is keeping less of its net pay under Biden and the Democrats, that’s a problem. I could give two shits about the higher income earners keeping more of their take home pay as long as I get to keep more of my own take home pay.

Class warfare and class envy only serve to lock in a true one percent and kill a middle class as we see in Socialist countries.

 

[Dana7360]

the tax cuts were terrific. we need more

IRS data proves Trump tax cuts benefited middle, working-class Americans most

Republicans’ 2017 tax reform law did exactly what was promised: It lowered taxes for all income groups.

thehill.com

No we don't.

We have a multi trillion dollar debt.

It's totally irresponsible to cut taxes.

Especially when it's not paid for.

It's totally irresponsible to increase spending when it's not paid for.

The whole tax code needs to be fixed. The filthy rich need to start paying the same rates as the rest of us or higher.

Unearned income needs to be taxed higher than income that is earned by working.

Corporations that don't and haven't paid federal income taxes in years, need to start paying taxes.

We need to start paying our debt.

This irresponsible economics started in the 80s with reagan and it's only gotten worse since.

By the way, I didn't get a tax cut.

 

[Dana7360]

No, I think the Republicans know exactly what they’re doing. They’re getting elected.

Cut spending and you cut GDP. There goes the stimulatory effect from tax cuts.

At the end of the day, deficit spending stimulates the economy. Whether it’s deficits from high spending or deficits from low taxes. That’s what’s stimulatory. You can’t cut the deficit without “harming” the economy. There’s no free lunch.

I'm sorry but that's not true.

Bill Clinton cut the deficit to the point that he had it down to zero with billions in surplus.

The bush boy blew it with his tax cuts and out of control spending.

Obama cut the bush boy deficit from 1.4 trillion down to 400 and something billion.

Neither harmed our economy.

In fact, Clinton brought our economy out of the worst recession this country had gone through since reagan's recession.

Obama brought our economy out of the worst economic crash since the last republican depression.

Cutting the deficit can be done responsibly without harming our economy.

We have lived through it twice in our lifetimes.

 

[Foolardi]

And yet those in the top 5% pay over 90% of the taxes. Not sure what your point is.

And those making 50K and less pay NO Federal Income Tax.
That is one reason Mitt Romney lost in 2012.He had a closed door
meeting with donors that got spied-on and recorded.The number 47 kept
being mentioned.It was 47%.As in 47 % of Americans who { those backing
Obama } are "victims " and " dependent upon government " and " pay no
Income tax ". Corn wrote an article about it that instantly went viral.
He received a Polk Award { For intrepid Journalism } .That was in mid-September
of 2012.

 

[Foolardi]

I'm sorry but that's not true.

Bill Clinton cut the deficit to the point that he had it down to zero with billions in surplus.

The bush boy blew it with his tax cuts and out of control spending.

Obama cut the bush boy deficit from 1.4 trillion down to 400 and something billion.

Neither harmed our economy.

In fact, Clinton brought our economy out of the worst recession this country had gone through since reagan's recession.

Obama brought our economy out of the worst economic crash since the last republican depression.

Cutting the deficit can be done responsibly without harming our economy.

We have lived through it twice in our lifetimes.

Barack Obama had the Largest { by leaps and bounds } Budget deficits in
American History.For Context ... Bush 43 had a 2007 Budget deficit of $ 162 Billion.
Barack Obama averaged Over $ 1.2 Trillion in budget deficits{annually} in his first term.
He somewhat got away with it due to slowly trimming those deficits down starting in the
the latter stages of his first term.