Tax scam of $1.5 Trillion......and an increase in debt of $1.5 Trillion

[rightwinger]

Unlike Obama's retarded deficit spending, the Trump tax reform bill may increase tax revenues to pay for the tax cuts plus additional tax revenues to lower the deficit. One Dem senator who wanted to vote for the bill, lobbied for a test, to not lower the corporate tax quite that far and see if it works after 3-4 years then lower it further. Trump a go big or go home guy said no we are going all in.

Winner, winner! Chicken Dinner!

All tax cuts pay for themselves

 

[danielpalos]

Tax cuts: Economists see modest impact on workers, economy as corporate taxes fall

Will the corporate tax cut trickle down to workers and the broader economy? Or will it simply fatten the cash reserves of the largest U.S. companies and their shareholders?

Republican lawmakers argue the reduction in the corporate rate from 35% to 21% will spark a boom in business investment that ultimately lifts the paychecks of average Americans.

If true, that could be the saving grace of tax reform legislation whose cuts for middle-class households are criticized by Democrats as temporary and limited compared with the windfall for the wealthy.

Some leading economists say the $1.5 trillion in cuts will juice business capital spending and wages — but just modestly, and those effects will likely be largely offset by higher interest rates triggered by a jump in the deficit.

One source of their skepticism is this: Non-financial companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index are already flush, sitting on an estimated $1.63 trillion in cash, according to data from S&P Dow Jones Indices. Yet that hasn’t led to an investment boom.

The right wing loves to operate in a vacuum of special pleading.

What do economists opine about the market based reality of lowering taxes during alleged times of war?

Only real times of peace may permit lowering taxes not real times of War. That should only happen in right wing fantasy.

 

[WillowTree]

Unlike Obama's retarded deficit spending

What Obama spending comes anywhere NEAR 1.7 Trillion this bill costs in revenues?

The entire Stimulus, passed in the middle of GREAT RECESSION, was just 870 billion.

Obummer care

Nonsence, CBO scored and re-scored ACA to REDUCE Federal deficit over 10 years.

That's what we call a fiscally responsible, PAID FOR bill.

Here's How Many Billions Obamacare Will Cost in 2016


President Obama has touted Affordable Care Act as a way to save money on health care costs. New projections from the Congressional Budget Office, however, anticipate that the federal government will need to spend more on Obamacare than previously thought.

The non-partisan office estimates that the program will cost the federal government $1.34 trillion over the next decade, an increase of $136 billion from the CBO’s predictions in 2015. In 2016 alone, Obamacare will cost a total of $110 billion.

 

[Flash]

Well, the party of "fiscal responsibility" must have been told that party donors would NOT give the congressional whores another penny unless they got some HUGE tax cuts......(or else)

Has anyone wondered how come the same EXACT amount of tax breaks is the same EXACT amount of money treasury has to borrow?

IS every single dollar of a tax give-away a borrowed dollar to be placed on the ledger of future generations?

(now watch right wingers begin their moronic rant, "since I was screwed by democrats on debt, I'm more than willing to be screwed again by elected republicans....")

You are confused Moon Bat.

There will be no deficit because of this tax cut. That is a lie put out by the filthy ass Democrats. Fake news, We hear those lies every day out of the Democrats. They are bad about lying.

All we need for this tax cut to be revenue neutral is .4% economic growth. The tax cuts will produce at least ten times that much.

Besides just when have you stupid hypocritical Moon Bats ever been concerned with deficits when your little incompetent Boy was running up $10 trillion in debt? Didn't hear you Moon Bats say a damn word about that.

 

[nat4900]

WHO would have objected if Trump had decided to do this while the economy is BOOMING (thanks to a very large extent to the economy he inherited):

Keep the tax revenue the same

advocate that government spending be allocated to LOWERING the debt.

Earmark 20% of tax revenue toward infrastructure rebuilding and retraining of Americans with outdated job skills.


WHO WOULD OBJECT TO THAT?????................Rich donors.

 

[Thinker101]

WHO would have objected if Trump had decided to do this while the economy is BOOMING (thanks to a very large extent to the economy he inherited):

Keep the tax revenue the same

advocate that government spending be allocated to LOWERING the debt.

Earmark 20% of tax revenue toward infrastructure rebuilding and retraining of Americans with outdated job skills.


WHO WOULD OBJECT TO THAT?????................Rich donors.

How about telling us which politician(s) would actually lower the debt.

 

[nat4900]

How about telling us which politician(s) would actually lower the debt.

Sure.......TRUMP

Trump Promised to Eliminate National Debt in Eight Years. Good Luck ...

Trump: I will eliminate U.S. debt in 8 years | TheHill

 

[Thinker101]

How about telling us which politician(s) would actually lower the debt.

Sure.......TRUMP

Trump Promised to Eliminate National Debt in Eight Years. Good Luck ...

Trump: I will eliminate U.S. debt in 8 years | TheHill

Great, you want the debt to be lowered but not by Trump.

 

[BluesLegend]

True......because raising taxes worked so well for Obama.

IDIOT.....Obama CUT taxes

From Obama, the Tax Cut Nobody Heard Of - The New York Times

Obama Tax Cuts: Facts, List, Who Was Affected - The Balance

Are you completely nuts? He raised taxes on the rich then slammed the country with Obamacare taxes.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I wonder where we're gonna get that 500 billion that was snuck into the tax bill to make Europe great again. Can you believe that? Hundreds of billions of it will be spent to build bases there, too.

 

[danielpalos]

The right wing only has a problem with income redistribution when the poor benefit.

Democrats have always and continue to support 'economic slavery' - getting Americans hooked / dependent on government handouts instead of coming up with a plan / way to help Americans prosper to a point where they no longer need government handouts....it's how Democrats keep securing their votes.

Americans need a Hand UP, not an economic enslaving Hand OUT.

Dude, that is just right wing propaganda.

The left is for health care reform and a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage.

 

[danielpalos]

I wonder where we're gonna get that 500 billion that was snuck into the tax bill to make Europe great again. Can you believe that? Hundreds of billions of it will be to build bases there, too.

We need War on Terror tax rates, or it doesn't exist.

 

[easyt65]

Dude, that is just right wing propaganda.

'Dude', 'THIS' is just Left-Wing DENIAL!

 

[bendog]

Well, the party of "fiscal responsibility" must have been told that party donors would NOT give the congressional whores another penny unless they got some HUGE tax cuts......(or else)

Has anyone wondered how come the same EXACT amount of tax breaks is the same EXACT amount of money treasury has to borrow?

IS every single dollar of a tax give-away a borrowed dollar to be placed on the ledger of future generations?

(now watch right wingers begin their moronic rant, "since I was screwed by democrats on debt, I'm more than willing to be screwed again by elected republicans....")

The tax bills are many things to many people. First it's a gamble that the portion of the additional disposable income people, mostly workers, initially have to spend will get us to 3.5% growth. IF that happens and IF the gop can cut future spending for medicare and social security, the % of debt to gnp may become manageable. That is the overriding gamble. And they have to cut entitlements before the 18 elections, because they won't ever get any help from dems now after passing the coolaid part of the bills. Fiscal responsibility through wealth redistribution

The coolaid. It's simple gop orthodoxy that any tax cut primarily go on a per taxpayer basis to the wealthy. The basis for the orthodoxy is not Reagan nor the
Reagan era tax cuts. Those tax cuts removed expenditures that allowing the upper earners to avoid higher rates than we have now, and the result was the wealthy actually ended up paying more of the total tax picture. The current gop orthodoxy is based in some belief that upper earners are "wealth creators" or some term denoting their greater importance than workers. It's no more true than the orthodoxy that led to 90% rates on upper earners. Basic economics operates on a supply/demand curve. Politics are often about favoring one or the other.

Elections. The gop is also betting that voters will not punish them for the coolaid. They'll be happy with a few hundred bucks. And the gop is betting on getting loads of campaign contributions from the gop establishment to keep the establishment in power, which is what electing the Oranguton was all about anyway.

 

[eflatminor]

Both. Art Laffer showed unequivocally how Reagan's tax cuts lead to an improved economy and more government revenue. In other cases, tax cuts did not improve the economy and revenues fell, and visa versa.

To hell with both of them. Taxation is theft and placing the burden of our largess on those yet born is most definitely immoral.

no he didn't, you are clueless.

Reagan raised taxes in the second half of his presidency because even he didn't believe this bullshit you just wrote.

Well there's a well-reasoned and compelling retort.

Do you specialize in logical fallacies?

 

[eflatminor]

NOW the leftists are worried about debt? Hypocrites the lot of 'em.

Yet ANOTHER right wing moron chimes in to confirm what I wrote in my O/P

(now watch right wingers begin their moronic rant, "since I was screwed by democrats on debt, I'm more than willing to be screwed again by elected republicans....")

THANKS......LOL

Boy do you not get it.

I am a libertarian. A true Rotherbardian anarcho capitalist. That you would associate a classical liberal like myself with your arch enemy, modern Republicans, is beyond laughable. Stated differently, your ignorance is on full display.

Wallow in it.

 

[AntonToo]

Both. Art Laffer showed unequivocally how Reagan's tax cuts lead to an improved economy and more government revenue. In other cases, tax cuts did not improve the economy and revenues fell, and visa versa.

To hell with both of them. Taxation is theft and placing the burden of our largess on those yet born is most definitely immoral.

no he didn't, you are clueless.

Reagan raised taxes in the second half of his presidency because even he didn't believe this bullshit you just wrote.

Well there's a well-reasoned and compelling retort.

Do you specialize in logical fallacies?

Well there is a ZERO CONTENT response.

 

[eflatminor]

Both. Art Laffer showed unequivocally how Reagan's tax cuts lead to an improved economy and more government revenue. In other cases, tax cuts did not improve the economy and revenues fell, and visa versa.

To hell with both of them. Taxation is theft and placing the burden of our largess on those yet born is most definitely immoral.

no he didn't, you are clueless.

Reagan raised taxes in the second half of his presidency because even he didn't believe this bullshit you just wrote.

Well there's a well-reasoned and compelling retort.

Do you specialize in logical fallacies?

Well there is a ZERO CONTENT response.

Run along now.

Pot, kettle...I see you've met.

My goodness man, you accuse me of a sin YOU JUST COMMITTED.

 

[AntonToo]

Both. Art Laffer showed unequivocally how Reagan's tax cuts lead to an improved economy and more government revenue. In other cases, tax cuts did not improve the economy and revenues fell, and visa versa.

To hell with both of them. Taxation is theft and placing the burden of our largess on those yet born is most definitely immoral.

no he didn't, you are clueless.

Reagan raised taxes in the second half of his presidency because even he didn't believe this bullshit you just wrote.

Well there's a well-reasoned and compelling retort.

Do you specialize in logical fallacies?

Well there is a ZERO CONTENT response.

Run along now.

Pot, kettle...I see you've met.

My goodness man, you accuse me of a sin YOU JUST COMMITTED.

Fucking idiot, no response is need to zero content non-argument.

Reagan, Bush and Clinton all raised taxes after Laffer supposedly proved that tax-cuts are fundamentally self financing and are a free economic lunch for everyone. RIIIIGHT

 

[eflatminor]

Both. Art Laffer showed unequivocally how Reagan's tax cuts lead to an improved economy and more government revenue. In other cases, tax cuts did not improve the economy and revenues fell, and visa versa.

To hell with both of them. Taxation is theft and placing the burden of our largess on those yet born is most definitely immoral.

no he didn't, you are clueless.

Reagan raised taxes in the second half of his presidency because even he didn't believe this bullshit you just wrote.

Well there's a well-reasoned and compelling retort.

Do you specialize in logical fallacies?

Well there is a ZERO CONTENT response.

Run along now.

Pot, kettle...I see you've met.

My goodness man, you accuse me of a sin YOU JUST COMMITTED.

Fucking idiot, no response is need to zero content non-argument.

Reagan, Bush and Clinton all raised taxes after Laffer supposedly proved that tax-cuts are fundamentally self financing and are a free economic lunch for everyone. RIIIIGHT

You've not made an argument. You'e stated nothing to refute Laffer, whom you've clearly not read. Sorry, but "RIIIIGHT' is just not a valid retort.

I'm smelling a troll.