Democrats explode in frustration over stalled reconciliation spending spree: 'It's the effing progressives'

[jaeger19]

Um no.. ACTUAL conservatives of which I am one..
Understand the economy and taxes.
Right wingers such as yourself think government is the only way the economy can grow..( when there is a republican president of course)
The fact is the economy grew at the same trajectory under Trump ( before covid,)
As it did under the last few years under Obama...
The Trump tax cuts did not cause a boom in the economy. All they did was reduce the income that the federal government would have collected if left alone.
I cited tge evidence that proves my case.
The fact that you cannot understand it is well ..per your norm.
[/QUOTE]

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Do research and you will see that increases in the economy from tax cuts have never outweighed the loss of revenue from the lower taxes and thus increase the deficit.

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

However yes..some tax cuts are a boost to the economy..just not enough to offset revenue loss
The fact is though that trumps tax cuts did little to boost the economy

 

[jaeger19]

Um no.. ACTUAL conservatives of which I am one..
Understand the economy and taxes.
Right wingers such as yourself think government is the only way the economy can grow..( when there is a republican president of course)
The fact is the economy grew at the same trajectory under Trump ( before covid,)
As it did under the last few years under Obama...
The Trump tax cuts did not cause a boom in the economy. All they did was reduce the income that the federal government would have collected if left alone.
I cited tge evidence that proves my case.
The fact that you cannot understand it is well ..per your norm.

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.
[/QUOTE]
Great post but will got ignored by the left who believes it is the taxpayers role to fund personal responsibility issues and the more money the gov't has the less the people have which is what the left needs for power

Here is the data the left wants to ignore

Obama 14.7 to 18.7= 4.0 trillion in 8 years or 500 billion per year
Trump 18.7 to 21.4 = 2.7 trillion in 3 years or 900 billion per year

Pandemic results are what the Congress gave the country, 900 billion per year is what Trump policies gave the country. Does anyone believe the left that trajectory matters more than dollars?

BEA Interactive Data Application

Table 1.1.5. Gross Domestic Product

[Billions of dollars]

Bureau of Economic Analysis

Last Revised on: October 28, 2021 - Next Release Date November 24, 2021

Line

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Line

1

Gross domestic product

14769.9​

14478.1​

15049​

15599.7​

16254​

16843.2​

17550.7​

18206​

18695.1​

19479.6​

20527.2​

21372.6​

2

Personal consumption expenditures

10050.1​

9891.2​

10260.3​

10698.9​

11047.4​

11363.5​

11847.7​

12263.5​

12693.3​

13239.1​

13913.5​

14428.7​

[/QUOTE]
Already debunked.
I get it..you just aren't capable of understanding.

 

[Conservative]

Um no.. ACTUAL conservatives of which I am one..
Understand the economy and taxes.
Right wingers such as yourself think government is the only way the economy can grow..( when there is a republican president of course)
The fact is the economy grew at the same trajectory under Trump ( before covid,)
As it did under the last few years under Obama...
The Trump tax cuts did not cause a boom in the economy. All they did was reduce the income that the federal government would have collected if left alone.
I cited tge evidence that proves my case.
The fact that you cannot understand it is well ..per your norm.

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Do research and you will see that increases in the economy from tax cuts have never outweighed the loss of revenue from the lower taxes and thus increase the deficit.

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

However yes..some tax cuts are a boost to the economy..just not enough to offset revenue loss
The fact is though that trumps tax cuts did little to boost the economy
[/QUOTE]
What conservative believes tax cuts are an expense and have to be paid for? you keep embarrassing yourself with every post. Gave you the treasury data showing Trump 900 billion dollars per year in GDP dollar growth, Obama 500 billion in GDP dollar growth, you focus on percentage change and I will always focus on what matters dollar growth plus Americans keeping more of what they earn

 

[Conservative]

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.

Great post but will got ignored by the left who believes it is the taxpayers role to fund personal responsibility issues and the more money the gov't has the less the people have which is what the left needs for power

Here is the data the left wants to ignore

Obama 14.7 to 18.7= 4.0 trillion in 8 years or 500 billion per year
Trump 18.7 to 21.4 = 2.7 trillion in 3 years or 900 billion per year

Pandemic results are what the Congress gave the country, 900 billion per year is what Trump policies gave the country. Does anyone believe the left that trajectory matters more than dollars?

BEA Interactive Data Application

Table 1.1.5. Gross Domestic Product

[Billions of dollars]

Bureau of Economic Analysis

Last Revised on: October 28, 2021 - Next Release Date November 24, 2021

Line

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Line

1

Gross domestic product

14769.9​

14478.1​

15049​

15599.7​

16254​

16843.2​

17550.7​

18206​

18695.1​

19479.6​

20527.2​

21372.6​

2

Personal consumption expenditures

10050.1​

9891.2​

10260.3​

10698.9​

11047.4​

11363.5​

11847.7​

12263.5​

12693.3​

13239.1​

13913.5​

14428.7​

[/QUOTE]
Already debunked.
I get it..you just aren't capable of understanding.
[/QUOTE]
Understand quite well, maybe they should teach you math, 14.7 to 18.7 is 4 trillion in 8 years or 500 billion dollars per year, 18.7 to 21.4 is 2.7 trillion in three years or 900 billion per years. What part of that don't you understand

 

[MAGAnificent]

Um no.. ACTUAL conservatives of which I am one..
Understand the economy and taxes.
Right wingers such as yourself think government is the only way the economy can grow..( when there is a republican president of course)
The fact is the economy grew at the same trajectory under Trump ( before covid,)
As it did under the last few years under Obama...
The Trump tax cuts did not cause a boom in the economy. All they did was reduce the income that the federal government would have collected if left alone.
I cited tge evidence that proves my case.
The fact that you cannot understand it is well ..per your norm.

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Do research and you will see that increases in the economy from tax cuts have never outweighed the loss of revenue from the lower taxes and thus increase the deficit.

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

However yes..some tax cuts are a boost to the economy..just not enough to offset revenue loss
The fact is though that trumps tax cuts did little to boost the economy
[/QUOTE]

We will just have to disagree on that one.

 

[Plasmaball]

Can you three fix your posts? Jesus

@Conservative @jaeger19 @LetsGoBrandon

 

[jaeger19]

[/QUOTE]

We will just have to disagree on that one.
[/QUOTE]
Facts are facts.
Sorry

 

[MAGAnificent]

Um no.. ACTUAL conservatives of which I am one..
Understand the economy and taxes.
Right wingers such as yourself think government is the only way the economy can grow..( when there is a republican president of course)
The fact is the economy grew at the same trajectory under Trump ( before covid,)
As it did under the last few years under Obama...
The Trump tax cuts did not cause a boom in the economy. All they did was reduce the income that the federal government would have collected if left alone.
I cited tge evidence that proves my case.
The fact that you cannot understand it is well ..per your norm.

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Do research and you will see that increases in the economy from tax cuts have never outweighed the loss of revenue from the lower taxes and thus increase the deficit.

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

However yes..some tax cuts are a boost to the economy..just not enough to offset revenue loss
The fact is though that trumps tax cuts did little to boost the economy
[/QUOTE]

The across the board tax cuts always in the long run increase tax revenue. There are no net revenue losses. The only decrease comes from congress still managing to spend $1.40 for ever new tax dollar earned.

 

[jaeger19]

The across the board tax cuts always in the long run increase tax revenue. There are no net revenue losses. The only decrease comes from congress still managing to spend $1.40 for ever new tax dollar earned.

No. Income tax cuts do not result in long run increase tax revenue. They generally result in less revenue than would have been collected if there were no tax cuts...
What results in increases in tax revenue is increase in economic growth. Economy's can and do grow without any tax cuts. So.. for a tax cut to grow the economy.. you have to show that the economy grew as a result of that tax cut and not other forces. THEN you have to show that the revenue generated from that economic growth.. was MORE than the loss of the tax cut. And I cited evidence that shows that.

Let me give you a simpler example..

Lets say there is a company that makes widgets...
Every year for the last 5 years.. it has increased its sale of widgets by 10%
The last year.. the company sold 1000 widgets at 5 dollars a piece.. a revenue of 5000 dollars.
Conservative becomes CEO of the company and says "hey.. lets reduce the price of widgets to 4.75..and we will be better off.
So the next year.. the company sells 1100 widgets.. (the same growth as before)...and now its income is 5,225.

Now.. MR. Conservative runs around crowing about how "REVENUE WENT UP FROM LAST YEAR.. I GREW REVENUE.. I AM AWESOME!!"

Now.. would you agree with that? I hope not.. especially if you are a stockholder or owner you would realize that the even though revenue did go up.. the growth in the company was exactly the same as before.. so there was no increase in growth due to the decrease in price.
All Mr. Conservative ended up doing.. was decrease the amount of revenue he should have made. if he had left the price alone. .
Which was 1100 units at 5.00 a piece or 5500 dollars...
Mr. Conservative should be fired.

Does that help?

 

[MAGAnificent]

No. Income tax cuts do not result in long run increase tax revenue. They generally result in less revenue than would have been collected if there were no tax cuts...
What results in increases in tax revenue is increase in economic growth. Economy's can and do grow without any tax cuts. So.. for a tax cut to grow the economy.. you have to show that the economy grew as a result of that tax cut and not other forces. THEN you have to show that the revenue generated from that economic growth.. was MORE than the loss of the tax cut. And I cited evidence that shows that.

Let me give you a simpler example..

Lets say there is a company that makes widgets...
Every year for the last 5 years.. it has increased its sale of widgets by 10%
The last year.. the company sold 1000 widgets at 5 dollars a piece.. a revenue of 5000 dollars.
Conservative becomes CEO of the company and says "hey.. lets reduce the price of widgets to 4.75..and we will be better off.
So the next year.. the company sells 1100 widgets.. (the same growth as before)...and now its income is 5,225.

The problem is that you are still looking at taxes and retail as a zero sum game. 25 cents would not be much of a discount. Perhaps $4.00 per widget? Or buy 2 widgets and get one free? Sam Walton grew Walmart into the power house it is on that concept. Somewhere along the lines of selling women's panty hose at something like three for a dollar, rather then 50 cents a pair. Sure you make less per pair, but in the long run you more then make up for it if you sell enough panty hose. On the tax cuts, extra tax revenue is generated from money that would otherwise go to pay taxes being spent or invested in the private sector. In the long run that creates more investment, more jobs, and more earnings to pay taxes on. Once again in the long run, the Reagan tax cut nearly doubled tax revenue.

Now.. MR. Conservative runs around crowing about how "REVENUE WENT UP FROM LAST YEAR.. I GREW REVENUE.. I AM AWESOME!!"

Now.. would you agree with that? I hope not.. especially if you are a stockholder or owner you would realize that the even though revenue did go up.. the growth in the company was exactly the same as before.. so there was no increase in growth due to the decrease in price.
All Mr. Conservative ended up doing.. was decrease the amount of revenue he should have made. if he had left the price alone. .
Which was 1100 units at 5.00 a piece or 5500 dollars...
Mr. Conservative should be fired.

I have not done the math for the Trump tax cut, however if revenue did increase, the tax cut likely contributed. I have certainly spent more, including improvements to my house. However Trump did more then just individual income tax cuts. He cut corporate taxes, including capital gains taxes, and incentivized many corporations not to move operations overseas, He also repealed NAFTA, which was killing many American businesses. It destroyed my local economy on the gulf coast. It has take us over 30 years to recover.

 

[jaeger19]

The problem is that you are still looking at taxes and retail as a zero sum game. 25 cents would not be much of a discount. Perhaps $4.00 per widget? Or buy 2 widgets and get one free? Sam Walton grew Walmart into the power house it is on that concept. Somewhere along the lines of selling women's panty hose at something like three for a dollar, rather then 50 cents a pair. Sure you make less per pair, but in the long run you more then make up for it if you sell enough panty hose. On the tax cuts, extra tax revenue is generated from money that would otherwise go to pay taxes being spent or invested in the private sector. In the long run that creates more investment, more jobs, and more earnings to pay taxes on. Once again in the long run, the Reagan tax cut nearly doubled tax revenue.

Nope.. not looking at it as a zero sum game. Sure.. you can drop the price to 4.00 a widget.. BUT.. that means that you have to have much much more growth than you would without the price decrease to equal out the price decrease. If you do not experience the growth.. then you simply do not make as much revenue as you would.
"Extra" tax revenue is not necessarily generated that would go to pay taxes. Thats the point here. IF and ONLY IF.. the tax cuts generate an increase in growth that is greater than the loss due to the lower taxes.. can you say that "extra revenue was generated".
The Reagan tax cut did not pay for itself. Which is one of the reasons that Reagan ran such large deficits.
You are simply assuming that any growth is the result of the tax cut.. as my example shows.. thats simply not true. And thats what economists calculate.. the overall effect of the tax cuts on growth and on tax revenue.

I have not done the math for the Trump tax cut, however if revenue did increase, the tax cut likely contributed. I have certainly spent more, including improvements to my house. However Trump did more then just individual income tax cuts. He cut corporate taxes, including capital gains taxes, and incentivized many corporations not to move operations overseas, He also repealed NAFTA, which was killing many American businesses. It destroyed my local economy on the gulf coast. It has take us over 30 years to recover.

Actually the math has been done. I provided you with an analysis of the Trump tax cut and the fact was that the tax cut did little to improve the economy and mostly just expanded the deficit by reducing the amount of revenue that would have been collected if taxes had been left alone.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Nope.. not looking at it as a zero sum game. Sure.. you can drop the price to 4.00 a widget.. BUT.. that means that you have to have much much more growth than you would without the price decrease to equal out the price decrease. If you do not experience the growth.. then you simply do not make as much revenue as you would.
"Extra" tax revenue is not necessarily generated that would go to pay taxes. Thats the point here. IF and ONLY IF.. the tax cuts generate an increase in growth that is greater than the loss due to the lower taxes.. can you say that "extra revenue was generated".
The Reagan tax cut did not pay for itself. Which is one of the reasons that Reagan ran such large deficits.
You are simply assuming that any growth is the result of the tax cut.. as my example shows.. thats simply not true. And thats what economists calculate.. the overall effect of the tax cuts on growth and on tax revenue.


Actually the math has been done. I provided you with an analysis of the Trump tax cut and the fact was that the tax cut did little to improve the economy and mostly just expanded the deficit by reducing the amount of revenue that would have been collected if taxes had been left alone.

Can't blame tax cuts for deficits. Deficits come from deficit spending. Once again, the Reagan tax cuts nearly doubled tax revenue. And once again, congress still managed to spend a $1.40 for every new dollar earned. Try that with your own budget. And you are absolutely looking at tax revenue as a zero sum game. In a well functioning capitalist system tax revenue is largely dependent on economic activity, such as individuals and families spending money and the wealthy investing money. If you increase taxes, there is less for the average family to spend and the wealthy will hide as much income as they can in tax shelters. Lower taxes and there is more money available to spend in the private sector and more to invest.

 

[jaeger19]

Can't blame tax cuts for deficits. Deficits come from deficit spending. Once again, the Reagan tax cuts nearly doubled tax revenue. And once again, congress still managed to spend a $1.40 for every new dollar earned. Try that with your own budget. And you are absolutely looking at tax revenue as a zero sum game. In a well functioning capitalist system tax revenue is largely dependent on economic activity, such as individuals and families spending money and the wealthy investing money. If you increase taxes, there is less for the average family to spend and the wealthy will hide as much income as they can in tax shelters. Lower taxes and there is more money available to spend in the private sector and more to invest.

Yeah..that makes no economic sense.
Why not just take taxes to zero? Then would you still claim that revenue doesn't matter? That deficits just have to do with spending?
Please..revenue matters. And as pointed out..tax cuts have to create more growth than would have occurred otherwise to balance out the decrease in revenue from a tax cut.
And no its not a zero sum premise. It's reality.
By the way..its not like taxes go to a black hole and disappear from the economy.
For example..taxes paid for the dam projects around the us..causing hundreds of billions of dollars in economic growth. If not trillions.
Economic growth from hydroelectric power. Agriculture from irrigation..
Recreation dollars from the reservoir behind the dams..etc.
Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Yeah..that makes no economic sense.
Why not just take taxes to zero? Then would you still claim that revenue doesn't matter? That deficits just have to do with spending?
Please..revenue matters. And as pointed out..tax cuts have to create more growth than would have occurred otherwise to balance out the decrease in revenue from a tax cut.
And no its not a zero sum premise. It's reality.
By the way..its not like taxes go to a black hole and disappear from the economy.
For example..taxes paid for the dam projects around the us..causing hundreds of billions of dollars in economic growth. If not trillions.
Economic growth from hydroelectric power. Agriculture from irrigation..
Recreation dollars from the reservoir behind the dams..etc.
Sorry to burst your bubble.

It's your bubble that is being burst. Tax cut puts money into the hands of taxpayers, who then spend it. The increase in demand creates more business activity. The result is that companies hire more workers, who then spend their additional income. And I am not suggesting taking income taxes to zero. There is a point where if you cut taxes too low, you defeat the benefit to the economy. However you don't seem to be willing to accept that tax cuts increase economic activity, which means your mindset still looks at taxes as a zero sum game. You seem under the mistaken impression that there is only a given amount of taxpayer money available and that the government can only increase revenue with tax increases and they go broke with tax cuts. It does not work that way. Raising taxes, inhibits economic activity. People up off vacations, buying a new family car, big flat screen tv, etc. It's no rocket science. If people have less money to spend, the end result is less government tax revenue.

 

[jaeger19]

It's your bubble that is being burst. Tax cut puts money into the hands of taxpayers, who then spend it. The increase in demand creates more business activity. The result is that companies hire more workers, who then spend their additional income. And I am not suggesting taking income taxes to zero. There is a point where if you cut taxes too low, you defeat the benefit to the economy. However you don't seem to be willing to accept that tax cuts increase economic activity, which means your mindset still looks at taxes as a zero sum game. You seem under the mistaken impression that there is only a given amount of taxpayer money available and that the government can only increase revenue with tax increases and they go broke with tax cuts. It does not work that way. Raising taxes, inhibits economic activity. People up off vacations, buying a new family car, big flat screen tv, etc. It's no rocket science. If people have less money to spend, the end result is less government tax revenue.

Well one..tax cuts don't necessarily put money in the hands of people that spend it. The nature of tax cuts is the majority go to the wealthy since they pay the most taxes. And tge wealthy simy save that money.. which does little for the economy.
Which is in part why tax ccuts don't create enough economic growth to pay for themselves.
Oh tax cuts can increase economic activity..but not enough to counter the decrease in revenue they cause the government thus leading to increases in the deficit.
Raising taxes does not necessarily decrease economic activity either depending on who gets their taxes raised.
You are right.. its not rocket science.. a multimillionaire making 900k per year is not going to decide to not buy a flat screen TV because this year he pays 25000 in taxes vs the 20000 he paid last year.
Sorry dude but you are believing a myth..propaganda.

 

[Conservative]

I respectfully disagree. While I have not done the math for the period covered in the Trump Tax Cuts, historically tax cuts have resulted in a boom in the economy. Such occurred with the JFK tax cut, the Reagan tax cut, and the G.W. Bush tax cut. Your suggestion that tax cuts reduce the income of the federal government is misleading. In the long run, tax cuts end up growing government income. As a matter of fact, in the long run, the Reagan tax cut resulted in a nearly doubling of government tax revenue. You need to stop thinking about tax revenue as a zero sum game. When taxes are cut, the result is more economic activity. The wealthy invest more and the middle class and wealthy spend more. The result is businesses expand, small business increases, more jobs are created, hence more taxpayers. Even the wealthy end up paying more in taxes as they have more earnings to pay taxes on. When taxes are raised, middle class spending slows and the wealthy hide as much income as they can in tax shelters.

Yeah. Do research and you will see that increases in the economy from tax cuts have never outweighed the loss of revenue from the lower taxes and thus increase the deficit.

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

However yes..some tax cuts are a boost to the economy..just not enough to offset revenue loss
The fact is though that trumps tax cuts did little to boost the economy
[/QUOTE]

We will just have to disagree on that one.
[/QUOTE]
You keep telling us that you are a conservative, what conservative giving the choice between Trump and Biden would choose Biden? The problem you and others seem to have is totally ignoring state and local revenue. When you raise federal taxes you take spendable income from residents of the state therefore affecting sales, property and excise tax revenue. People are not printing presses so rather than focus on the federal gov't you better start focusing on your state and local governments including the taxes you pay to those governments

 

[Conservative]

Well one..tax cuts don't necessarily put money in the hands of people that spend it. The nature of tax cuts is the majority go to the wealthy since they pay the most taxes. And tge wealthy simy save that money.. which does little for the economy.
Which is in part why tax ccuts don't create enough economic growth to pay for themselves.
Oh tax cuts can increase economic activity..but not enough to counter the decrease in revenue they cause the government thus leading to increases in the deficit.
Raising taxes does not necessarily decrease economic activity either depending on who gets their taxes raised.
You are right.. its not rocket science.. a multimillionaire making 900k per year is not going to decide to not buy a flat screen TV because this year he pays 25000 in taxes vs the 20000 he paid last year.
Sorry dude but you are believing a myth..propaganda.

Really? so cutting FIT doesn't create more spendable income? Where does that tax cut show up? Why would any conservative promote tax cuts as an expense that has to be paid for? Can you show us the decrease in actual revenue from 2018 to 2019 in FIT?

 

[Conservative]

Well one..tax cuts don't necessarily put money in the hands of people that spend it. The nature of tax cuts is the majority go to the wealthy since they pay the most taxes. And tge wealthy simy save that money.. which does little for the economy.
Which is in part why tax ccuts don't create enough economic growth to pay for themselves.
Oh tax cuts can increase economic activity..but not enough to counter the decrease in revenue they cause the government thus leading to increases in the deficit.
Raising taxes does not necessarily decrease economic activity either depending on who gets their taxes raised.
You are right.. its not rocket science.. a multimillionaire making 900k per year is not going to decide to not buy a flat screen TV because this year he pays 25000 in taxes vs the 20000 he paid last year.
Sorry dude but you are believing a myth..propaganda.

You keep telling us that you are a conservative, what conservative giving the choice between Trump and Biden would choose Biden? The problem you and others seem to have is totally ignoring state and local revenue. When you raise federal taxes you take spendable income from residents of the state therefore affecting sales, property and excise tax revenue. People are not printing presses so rather than focus on the federal gov't you better start focusing on your state and local governments including the taxes you pay to those governments

 

[MAGAnificent]

Well one..tax cuts don't necessarily put money in the hands of people that spend it. The nature of tax cuts is the majority go to the wealthy since they pay the most taxes.

Complete bull. I am not one of the ultra wealthy that you speak of. And I certainly was not at the time the Regan tax cuts were passed. However I certainly noticed the extra spending money from a lower income tax bill, as well as the increased economic activity, which not only led to a near doubling of income tax revenue for the government, I doubled my own income in a few short years.

And tge wealthy simy save that money.. which does little for the economy.

You are assuming what you obviously do not know. Wealthy individuals spend money as well, not only on themselves and their family, but business as well. And even those that merely save the money, that spurs economic activity as well. Whether they out it in the bank or investment funs, that money is then available for small business loans.

Which is in part why tax ccuts don't create enough economic growth to pay for themselves.

They absolutely do create enough economic growth to pay for themselves. You are still hanging onto the zero sum game.

Oh tax cuts can increase economic activity..but not enough to counter the decrease in revenue they cause the government thus leading to increases in the deficit.

Complete bull. Deficits come when you overspend your budget. Once again the Reagan tax cuts led to a near doubling in revenue. The deficits actually shrunk by the time Reagan left office, however Congress still managed to intentionally spend $1.40 for every new dollar of tax revenue. That's on congress, nit the tax cuts. Had Regan been given the option of "line item veto", then he would have had more control on the deficit,

Raising taxes does not necessarily decrease economic activity either depending on who gets their taxes raised.

It absolutely does decrease economic activity as the wealthy rather then spending or investing their money, hide as much of it as they can in tax shelters.

You are right.. its not rocket science.. a multimillionaire making 900k per year is not going to decide to not buy a flat screen TV because this year he pays 25000 in taxes vs the 20000 he paid last year.

No, however he may hold off on buying a luxury boat of Cadillac Equinox, or a home remodel, expanding a small business, etc.

Sorry dude but you are believing a myth..propaganda.

No myth on my part I am speaking from real world experience, not some woke ivy league university economics professor. You just do not want to see tax cuts as a positive and you are adjusting your beliefs accordingly.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Really? so cutting FIT doesn't create more spendable income? Where does that tax cut show up? Why would any conservative promote tax cuts as an expense that has to be paid for? Can you show us the decrease in actual revenue from 2018 to 2019 in FIT?

He is living off the impression that our income actually belongs to the government and it's up to them to decide how much of our own money we can keep.

 

[Conservative]

He is living off the impression that our income actually belongs to the government and it's up to them to decide how much of our own money we can keep.

Right, and he calls himself a conservative, false advertising on his part

 

[Questerr]

Why don't they just fix the roads and bridges and see to the water and sewer?

Why invest in broadband and rail that will just need upgrades and maintenance?

Because roads, bridges, and water and sewer systems don’t need upgrades and maintenance?

 

[Conservative]

Because roads, bridges, and water and sewer systems don’t need upgrades and maintenance?

Been driving in TX lately? Seen any road construction specifically between Houston and San Antonio? You keep buying the liberal rhetoric, why? Do you know who is responsible for state highways and bridges? How about the taxes you pay?

 

[Questerr]

Been driving in TX lately? Seen any road construction specifically between Houston and San Antonio? You keep buying the liberal rhetoric, why? Do you know who is responsible for state highways and bridges? How about the taxes you pay?

I know Texas’s taxation system is pathetic when it comes to actually providing enough funding for state programs and infrastructure. But by all means keep voting Red.

The poster I quoted seemed opposed to funding broadband and rail because they require upgrading and maintenance, yet everything else they listed also requires upgrading and maintenance. Hence why I asked the question the way I did.

 

[Conservative]

I know Texas’s taxation system is pathetic when it comes to actually providing enough funding for state programs and infrastructure. But by all means keep voting Red.

Another individual who has no idea what taxes they pay or their use. Do you know what funds highways and bridges? Why do you buy the liberal rhetoric knowing that you will never generate enough funds to feed the liberal spending appetite?

The poster I quoted seemed opposed to funding broadband and rail because they require upgrading and maintenance, yet everything else they listed also requires upgrading and maintenance. Hence why I asked the question the way I did.

That doesn't have to be funded by taxes as most of that can be capital expense and funded by bonds.