50 years of tax cuts for the rich failed to trickle down, economics study says

Egg on my face ....

Recalculated and got it right this time.

Switching to the Forbes plan would raise my tax rate from 12.8% to 13%, with a tax increase of only $256.

But that aside (and my red face), everything else I wrote about the harm for the rich vs the lower income people holds true.

I think there should be a higher income floor for any taxes and that tax rates should start out low and gradually step up as income rises.

 

When one thinks about it, one sees that tax cuts never pay for themselves as promised. Rather the shortfall is made up with increased debt. As you have argued, there is no trickle down benefit. This all adds up to, in essence, the US has taken on massive debt so that the wealthiest among us can pay less in taxes and become more wealthy. Or more directly the US took out massive debt and gave that money to the wealthiest individuals.

 

That is not mathematically possible Debt is the result of spending, and tax cuts have never resulted in less revenue for the government.

 

Why? Why not reduce spending on government?

 

Well that takes care of a couple more days then what?

 

I’m all for it.

But even if we reduce spending, we still have to have tax policy. Obviously, we’re not going to reduce spending down to zero, so we are going to have taxation.

Government spending and tax policy are two different topics, Gary.

 

if the tip of the iceberg can cover the first 2 most important days then extrapolate that and we're looking really good with 0 pain.

 

To understand why presidents fare well economically and others don't is to see who was the Federal Chairman at the time and what was their monetary policies.

 

But ultimately they are interrelated. The less you have of government the less you need of taxes. The real question that is at the core is what things should government do?

 

Yeah. Huge topic unto itself.

 

Off topic.

 

Because cutting taxes is easy, but cutting spending is hard. That's why the GOP always cuts the taxes, and then they stop before cutting the spending.

If the GOP were really interested in fiscal conservatism, they'd cut spending first, and then cut taxes. On top of being much harder to cut the spending, there is another reason why the GOP never does this. Let's see if you can figure out the reason.

 

Made worse by the fact that the US has four, more or less independent, levels of government. Most other countries have only one or two.

 

Did you learn mathematics at the same school as Garyd?

I want to ask you this, if you reduce your income, do you make more money?

 

So everyone, regardless of income or circumstance should pay, say $5000 a year in taxes? Same with churches. They should pay the same property tax as everyone else.

 

Like Somalia. Reduce the government and taxes down to nothing and all you have left are neighborhood warlords.

It is almost funny, the things conservatives say. Like saying liberals just want free stuff. But is that not what conservatives are asking for? Y’all want a nice country but do not want to pay for it. Nice roads are expensive to build and maintain, as are clean water supplies. Police and fire departments cost money as do the emergency call centers. Who do you think pays for those shiny new fighter jets that keep us safe in our beds? Billions and billions of dollars of tax money. Who do you think pays for the cleanup after floods and wildfires? Then there are schools. I am not sure why Republicans would prefer that millionaires pay a little less in taxes rather than our children receive an adequate education.

 

I took the argument of fairness to the absurd. The democrats are claiming that the rich should pay more taxes merely because they can. They have no valid reason for making the rich pay any more than anyone else.

 

Thanks for the strawman.

Which shouldn't take six or seven trillion dollars.

 

Then tell me how federal tax receipts went 500 billion in Carter's last year to a trillion by the end of Reagan's last year. Would you rather have 1/2 of an 8 inch cake or a quarter of a 16 inch cake.

 

That they can is a valid reason.

 

Then you should donate a large portion of your income to help the poor in some third world nations. You are rich in comparison. And certainly you can and that is a valid reason.

 

"tax cuts for the rich" is a buzz phrase that democrat have been trying to float and make the truth for years. It is an out and out lie. Tax cuts under Trump went to EVERYONE paying taxes.

 

I will let the homeless and those living in poverty that their suffering under your parties economic policies are off topic.

 

The super rich got the bulk of the tax breaks.

 

The topic is Reaganomics/Trickle down econcomics tax policy at the national level.

If you want to start a bash CA Thread, please do so, and I"d be happy to contribute to it.

But CA policy is not the subject of this thread.