• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

60 percent of Americans say Trump tax plan will benefit wealthy (POLL)


given the wealthy can be anyone making more than the respondent to the poll, you might be dealing with most tax payers since half the country doesn't pay any federal income tax
 
Nickyjo said:
Look, this is the way it works with spending and deficits. The GOP tends to represent people who are well off. The dems tend to represent people who are less well off. Both parties would be happy if things got better for everyone. Naturally.
Click to expand...

Correction: the party's tend to represent interest groups, regardless of income. Republicans tend to represent farmers, rural, religious, small business, bigger business, the retired, and traditional industry. The Democrats tend to represent the lowest class, new technology industries, government employees (teachers, civil servants), grant/rent seekers, the non-religious, immigrants (legal and illegal), crony capitalists, and the cultural left.

Both sides claim to represent the middle-class.

Democrats are the party of tax and spend. Republicans are the party of spend but don't tax. If their scheme doesn't work, we have deficits and have to reduce spending.
Click to expand...

Correct. The upside of tax and don't spend is that it may force government to cease funding various forms of mooching and special pleadings.

Strangely, the fiscally profligate liberals with all their handouts to the poor (what handouts?) seem to have been better recently at reducing the deficit.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but it is also misleading. The deficit may delay the economic cost to overspending, but to keep raising taxes to fund increased spending also has its economic costs.

The multi-general ponzi scheme of Social Security and Medicare are coming apart, even though (on the books) they were "paid for".

Name your poison. History since 1980 suggests that supply side doesn't work. But the GOP keeps on like Wyle E. Coyote, with their new and improved Acme Tax Plan. Beep beep.
Click to expand...

Actually history since 1980 suggests that supply side partially works, but does not pay for itself. And history since 1992 suggests that the peace dividend is exhausted (national defense is half of what it once was), productivity rates have ceased growing, and the entitlement rolls are larger than ever. A ten years after the great recession, the US economy has had the slowest recovery in modern history.

Until such time as both parties have the spine to address the need for frugal government, and modest spending, and balanced budgets it will only get worse.
 
True.

But someone has to pay for that tax-cut? So who is it?
 
Excellent post.

The reason why supply-side has not been working, is because of two predominate concepts:

1] We are a consumer driven economy
2] Labor is a demand function

#1 is self explanatory as to why the middle-class need the tax cuts to grow the economy, not the corporate and affluent.

#2 can be contrasted with consumer consumption. Give a middle-class consumer more money, and he will purchase things he needs or desires, including better things of the ones he already has. Give a corporation more money, and they still will not hire employees they don't need, nor buy equipment that they don't need either.

However: The corporations will hire more employees and buy more equipment to satisfy consumer demand, which brings us back to the validity of #1 (vs #2) again.
 

Die hard Republcians arent going to judge the effectivness of tax cuts or tax policies base on Trump hate

" Die hard " Republicans are all for lowering the Corporate tax rate and any tax break and regulatory cut that leads tocutcreased investment in our economy

Canada cut their corporate rate and otther Western European Countries have a lower corporate rate than the US does.
 
Chomsky said:
True.

But someone has to pay for that tax-cut? So who is it?
Click to expand...

So someone has to pay for Americans and bussinesses being allowed to keep more of THEIR hard earned income ?

Thats nonsense. How about cutring spending to pay for it ?
 
If Trump & the GOP were serious and transparent about giving the middle-class a tax break, they'd simply reduce the rates by half as they're doing with the corporations.

Instead, they're cutting the rates of the corps, while playing a smoke-and-mirrors game with the middle-class, to hide the fact that the middle-class we'll have to pay the burden of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

Corps get a simple effective rate cut, the middle-class get more convoluted shell games to obfuscate reality.
 
It's amazing to me.

We have experienced major "tax cuts" for the Middle Class since Reagan.

And in this time, we have developed a solid 1% class above the rest, and a top 20% that keeps separating further from the bottom. (I happen to fall within the 20%, so I don't give a ****).

But when are the majority of Americans going to figure out that these "tax cuts" aren't really about them? It's the upper-Middle Class and the wealthy that make out every time. It all has centered around that bad ideology of "trickle down," which was proven to be false during the Great Recession.


In the mean time, here's to building that senseless ideological wall that we...um...Mexico...um we...are going to pay for!
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
So? What is the point of the tax cut? Taking money from the poor to give to the rich isn't morally right, productive to the economy, good policy or even American.
Click to expand...

Taking money from the rich to give to the poor is theft. Your point?
 
Fenton said:
So someone has to pay for Americans and bussinesses being allowed to keep more of THEIR hard earned income ?

Thats nonsense. How about cutring spending to pay for it ?
Click to expand...
Not nonsense at all, despite your dismissing it as such.

Someone indeed has to pay to keep the country running.

This plan is NOT cutting spending. The poor have no money. The corporations and wealthy get a tax cut. So the difference will have to be made up by the middle-class.
 
There's a lot of propaganda out there over the Tax Bill. So unless you have read what was actually being proposed then maybe you shouldn't start a thread over it.

Though I am not in agreement of all things proposed, I think there is a lot of good in this tax bill. Cutting Corporate rate to 20% and for small businesses to 25% is huge. All of a sudden we become competitive globally. And it is my understanding that for those companies that want to return their operations back to the U.S. bringing back jobs get a break on bringing all that wealth back to the U.S that is a huge incentive for U.S. companies to jump on as well as foreign companies wanting to set up operations. This means more jobs that will benefit the college grad that had to settle for a less of a job that he/she is over qualified or blue collar workers that are trained in a craft where opportunities were drying up. Opportunities for good paying jobs abound for both groups.
 
Chomsky said:
Exactly.

Those who don't get the tax cut - the middle-class.
Click to expand...

That's not true Chomsky, Even Wapo gave Democrats 4 Pinocchios for making such statements.
 
I'm not going to deny all that Trump's doing with dereg and Taxes will have some marginal effect.

But I think you're greatly off with jobs returning to the States in any significant numbers.

Taxes mean nothing, if there is not a business case to be made. Why move your manufacturing to use expensive labor in a litigious highly regulated country with high labor rates, when you are already up & running with a cheap and unregulated alternative? It makes no sense.

We're never going to accept jobs with the working standards of 3rd world countries.
 
Nap said:
What makes you think the middle class is not getting a tax cut?
Click to expand...
I've seen nothing of substance, besides a very complicated scenario that appears to me to be smoke and mirrors.

But again, if the poor can't pay and the corps and affluent get breaks, who is paying for this?

That is my question.
 
Well - you are right, in that until we get the whole details and some good analysis, we are guessing.

But the proposed corporate decreases of nearly 50% are a huge loss of revenue.

And I have no faith in the GOP's claim of the number of jobs and rising wages this will produce. Right now the only thing given is the deficit will rise. Meaning our kids owe more.

And I do not for a moment trust their 2T deficit number, because it is based upon their belief of a 5 or 6% growth every year over the next decade due to the tax cut's supposed stimulus effects. I think it's going to be significantly higher.
 
vesper said:
That's not true Chomsky, Even Wapo gave Democrats 4 Pinocchios for making such statements.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see that, I'm not aware. If indeed there is a middle class cut - I'm not saying there is - I suspect it will be minuscule in relation to the massive near 50% corporate cut. A mere bone thrown to the masses.

But going by your statement above, if everyone gets a cut, and services are not reduced, who pays to keep the lights on? Are we going to borrow against our kid's income?
 
It is pretty hard to imagine that this crew gets anything passed into law, if that were to actually happen somehow I likely would be concerned.

Congress is completely broken in part because of all of the low quality people we have sent to town, it is not clear that they could get the work done even if they did get a wild hair.
 
Chomsky said:
I'd like to see that, I'm not aware. If indeed there is a middle class cut - I'm not saying there is - I suspect it will be minuscule in relation to the massive near 50% corporate cut. A mere bone thrown to the masses.
Click to expand...
On average, $370 for the second quintile and $940 for the middle quintile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…