We Don't Need a Middle Class Tax Cut

[jmotivator]

Tell your story to the Ukrainians and the Kurdish people.

LOL. So because not everyone is free you discount the hundreds of millions who are free because of the US military protection? Good job trivializing your own opinions...

But then how'd that "Hillary will win" guarantee work out? :lamo

 

[Jack Hays]

Tell your story to the Ukrainians and the Kurdish people.

The US has stood back in Ukraine largely at the behest of the Europeans. Nevertheless, US support has been essential to the Ukrainians. As for the Kurds, I've been there. They are among the most pro-US people on Earth.

 

[shrubnose]

LOL. So because not everyone is free you discount the hundreds of millions who are free because of the US military protection? Good job trivializing your own opinions...

But then how'd that "Hillary will win" guarantee work out? :lamo

Ask me about it in 2020.Trump doesn't have a lifetime lease on the White House.

 

[jmotivator]

Ask me about it in 2020.Trump doesn't have a lifetime lease on the White House.

LOL. Why would I ask you about it at all? What is that opinion worth?

 

[jet57]

It has been obvious for some time that tax revenue has been inadequate, given the demonstrated impossibility of radical spending cuts. Therefore, the last thing we need right now is another middle class tax cut. In fact, the middle class (and the wealthy, of course) should be paying more. Tax reform? Sure, but we need more revenue.


We don’t need tax cuts for the middle class


We need more tax revenue from the middle class, not less.

• Kirk J. Stark, Eric M. Zolt

Amid the partisan rancor surrounding the framework for tax reform developed by GOP congressional leaders, there is one area of remarkable consensus: lower taxes for the middle class. The political logic is not hard to understand. The middle class continues to struggle, and, with midterm elections just around the corner, both parties need the support of middle-class voters.
But missing from the tax debate is an appreciation that lawmakers have already crafted a tax-friendly regime for middle-income taxpayers. The result is a more progressive tax system that raises less revenue. Unless Congress is willing to dramatically cut major entitlement programs and eschew new social programs to address poverty and declining economic mobility, we need more tax revenue from the middle class, not less. . . .

Do people pay you to write this stuff, or do you have these kinds of epiphanies all the time?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic either.

Do you read - anything!! at all? Anytime? Do you have some sort of understanding of cultural dynamics and what the working class really does?

Have ever been to the pyramids perhaps.

They're a metaphor: without the "middle class" - nothing gets done.

How about that takers stop taking fort a while?

 

[Jack Hays]

Do people pay you to write this stuff, or do you have these kinds of epiphanies all the time?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic either.

Do you read - anything!! at all? Anytime? Do you have some sort of understanding of cultural dynamics and what the working class really does?

Have ever been to the pyramids perhaps.

They're a metaphor: without the "middle class" - nothing gets done.

How about that takers stop taking fort a while?

Do you equate working class and middle class?

 

[shrubnose]

LOL. Why would I ask you about it at all?

What is that opinion worth?

What is any opinion from anyone worth?

 

[Conservative]

Well in that case, you better go back to the 40's before the WW2 debt gave birth to an unprecedented economic boom, because that data makes your bogus assessment trivially easy to shoot down.



We do pay for them. You simply don't understand how an economy works, perhaps you seek to oversimplify it so it can fit within your politics.

Really? I don't understand how the economy works? Tell us exactly how the taxpayers fund private business failures? Seems you are the one with the problem that seems to be an epidemic among liberals. Going back to the 40's worked in the 40's this isn't the 40's in case you missed it

 

[Conservative]

The USA wastes more money on its military than other countries.Maybe some of that cash could be spent on saving people in the USA instead of killing them in other countries.

Live people in the USA pay more to the IRS than dead people in other countries do.

Just sayin'.

Wastes? yes, I agree in defending people like you who don't appreciate it. Socialism is something that spends other people's money which in our case is in your defense so you can waste it on social programs and expanding your GDP through govt. spending on everything else other than defense

 

[Conservative]

We can argue the past all we want. Fast forward to today, and the current administrate is poised to blow up the debt and deficits be damned. Their budget framework calls for a trillion dollar deficit each year -- and the flim-flam man PAul Ryan, is ok with it.

Trump has a long way to blow up the debt worse than Obama's and the last 8 months of fiscal year 2017 don't support your contention

 

[Absentglare]

Really? I don't understand how the economy works? Tell us exactly how the taxpayers fund private business failures? Seems you are the one with the problem that seems to be an epidemic among liberals. Going back to the 40's worked in the 40's this isn't the 40's in case you missed it

The public ultimately bears the costs of private domestic industry.

 

[Conservative]

The public ultimately bears the costs of private domestic industry.

through their own personal choice whether to support that industry or not, seems choice only matters to the left when it comes to murdering a baby!

 

[Absentglare]

through their own personal choice whether to support that industry or not, seems choice only matters to the left when it comes to murdering a baby!

No, there is no choice.

Didn't you read what i wrote before? If there were choices, there would be competition, and competition would maintain downward pressure on profits.

 

[Conservative]

No, there is no choice.

Didn't you read what i wrote before? If there were choices, there would be competition, and competition would maintain downward pressure on profits.

Really,, no choice? You think that raise taxes, raises wages is going to create competition? You continue to show just how little you know about business and basic economics

 

[iguanaman]

We need both tax hikes and spending cuts, long term. Instead of targeted tax cuts for wealthy families, we need to stop the capital gains discount, reduce defense spending, trim the federal bureaucracy, and implement universal health care. As usual, Republican policy is short-sighted and counter-productive.

It depends on what you want to produce. If you want an oligarchy the GOP is giving that a huge boost.

 

[iguanaman]

Really,, no choice? You think that raise taxes, raises wages is going to create competition? You continue to show just how little you know about business and basic economics

Raising taxes on exorbitant incomes discourages that destructive behavior. Taxes are a way of discouraging things we don't want and we dont' want CEO's making 300 times what their employees get.

In between 1978 and 2014, inflation-adjusted CEO pay increased by almost 1,000%, according to a report released on Sunday by the Economic Policy Institute. Meanwhile, typical workers in the U.S. saw a pay raise of just 11% during that same period.

With these increases in mind, it should come as no surprise that the ratio between average American CEO pay and worker pay is now 303-to-1. This ratio is lower than its peak in 2000, when it was 376-to-1, but it’s in excess of the 1965 ratio of 20-to 1.

Top CEOs make more than 300 times the average worker

 

[Conservative]

Raising taxes on exorbitant incomes discourages that destructive behavior. Taxes are a way of discouraging things we don't want and we dont' want CEO's making 300 times what their employees get.



Top CEOs make more than 300 times the average worker

Keep showing just how jealous you are over what someone else earns. CEO's are responsible to shareholders, many of which are seniors who require more income than SS but that fact escapes you. How does any rich person affect you and your family and prevents the govt. from printing or spending more money?

Raising taxes is destructive behavior but that is something that doesn't even cross your mind or is of any concern as it promotes bigger Federal Govt.

 

[iguanaman]

Keep showing just how jealous you are over what someone else earns. CEO's are responsible to shareholders, many of which are seniors who require more income than SS but that fact escapes you. How does any rich person affect you and your family and prevents the govt. from printing or spending more money?

Raising taxes is destructive behavior but that is something that doesn't even cross your mind or is of any concern as it promotes bigger Federal Govt.

Taxing what we want less of is a fine tradition. Your problem is overwhelming greed which cannot abide any contribution to the greater good. That is also why Trumps own charity is full of other peoples money.

 

[Absentglare]

Really,, no choice? You think that raise taxes, raises wages is going to create competition? You continue to show just how little you know about business and basic economics

The irony of this post cannot be overstated.

First of all, you do not understand how the problems presented by monopolies and oligopolies must be solved. It is not directly through raising taxes and wages. It is through keeping giant corporations in check. Part of that is empowering small businesses, so partially yes, actually, having higher wages helps more individuals afford the freedom to start a business. Higher taxes for big corporations is another idea, tax breaks for small ones. Hell, i'd be happy if small businesses paid a rate between 15% and 0%. So partially no, in that i don't think we should raise taxes on small businesses.

But, really, the crux of the issue is all about incentives. How are the incentives that our system creates, are they healthy? The answer is obviously no.

You know what else we need to do? Take health insurance out of employment. That would be another big advantage for small companies that cannot get the same group discounts for health insurance.

 

[Conservative]

Taxing what we want less of is a fine tradition. Your problem is overwhelming greed which cannot abide any contribution to the greater good. That is also why Trumps own charity is full of other peoples money.

LOL, what you want to ignore is that taxing creates dependence and that isn't good for anyone. Overwhelming greed to me means taking care of my family and my own personal responsibility which to you means someone else's responsibility. Amazing how giving to someone else's charity is a problem for you but giving it to the federal govt. isn't as they waste more, sending it wherever they want but apparently it makes you feel better by believing you are helping others when the reality is you aren't

 

[Conservative]

The irony of this post cannot be overstated.

First of all, you do not understand how the problems presented by monopolies and oligopolies must be solved. It is not directly through raising taxes and wages. It is through keeping giant corporations in check. Part of that is empowering small businesses, so partially yes, actually, having higher wages helps more individuals afford the freedom to start a business. Higher taxes for big corporations is another idea, tax breaks for small ones. Hell, i'd be happy if small businesses paid a rate between 15% and 0%. So partially no, in that i don't think we should raise taxes on small businesses.

But, really, the crux of the issue is all about incentives. How are the incentives that our system creates, are they healthy? The answer is obviously no.

You know what else we need to do? Take health insurance out of employment. That would be another big advantage for small companies that cannot get the same group discounts for health insurance.

Define for us all what monopolies exist outside the Federal Govt.? Higher wages drive up prices and cause businesses to cut expenses and probably payroll. where do you think corporations put their money? Do you understand what and who shareholders are?

Absolutely stunning how poorly informed you really are when it comes to business, their social and community responsibility and how and what they do with their profits.

 

[iguanaman]

LOL, what you want to ignore is that taxing creates dependence and that isn't good for anyone. Overwhelming greed to me means taking care of my family and my own personal responsibility which to you means someone else's responsibility. Amazing how giving to someone else's charity is a problem for you but giving it to the federal govt. isn't as they waste more, sending it wherever they want but apparently it makes you feel better by believing you are helping others when the reality is you aren't

Is that how you justify being a scrooge by believing the Govt. just wastes all your taxes? Taxes can also be use to influence behavior so that all of us benefit more equally in profits and we all enjoy better growth and a better life. Seeing them as always negative only breeds selfishness. Notice how this chart shows how wage growth became unequal as soon as the tax rates for the wealthy got slashed.

 

[iguanaman]

Define for us all what monopolies exist outside the Federal Govt.? Higher wages drive up prices and cause businesses to cut expenses and probably payroll. where do you think corporations put their money? Do you understand what and who shareholders are?

Absolutely stunning how poorly informed you really are when it comes to business, their social and community responsibility and how and what they do with their profits.

But it is clear that in the 1950's to 1970's wages grew more or less equally in all wage groups. t was not until tax rates on the top were slashed that CEO's began to take multimillion $ salaries while their workers wages stagnated. This is because corporations would rather pay their workers than the Govt. and salaries are tax deductible. As soon as they could keep the money for themselves they decided not to share profit growth with their employees. Look how wages tracked productivity until Reagan changed the game.

 

[Jack Hays]

But it is clear that in the 1950's to 1970's wages grew more or less equally in all wage groups. t was not until tax rates on the top were slashed that CEO's began to take multimillion $ salaries while their workers wages stagnated. This is because corporations would rather pay their workers than the Govt. and salaries are tax deductible. As soon as they could keep the money for themselves they decided not to share profit growth with their employees. Look how wages tracked productivity until Reagan changed the game.

From 1945 to 1975 (roughly) US firms could pay lush wages because the rest of the world was out of business from WW2. By about 1975 international competition resumed, and the US holiday from economics ended. Your problem is economics.

 

[Cordelier]

But it is clear that in the 1950's to 1970's wages grew more or less equally in all wage groups. t was not until tax rates on the top were slashed that CEO's began to take multimillion $ salaries while their workers wages stagnated. This is because corporations would rather pay their workers than the Govt. and salaries are tax deductible. As soon as they could keep the money for themselves they decided not to share profit growth with their employees. Look how wages tracked productivity until Reagan changed the game.

Interesting chart... I'm curious, though - why do you feel the divergence between real wages and productivity seems to occur around 1970, over a decade before Reagan's supply-side tax cuts? Doesn't this seem to indicate that the divergence has more to growing foreign competition than from any supply-side changes to the Tax Code?