Trump tax plan pads his own wallet and screws you

M

Micawber

Verified User
GOP tax plan would provide major gains for richest 1%, uneven benefits for the middle class, report says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dle-class-report-says/?utm_term=.4fa751e67b9a


Despite repeated promises from Republican lawmakers that the plan is designed to provide relief to the middle class, nearly 30 percent of taxpayers with incomes between $50,000 and $150,000 would see a tax increase, according to the study by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The majority of households that made between $150,000 and $300,000 would see a tax increase.

Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
Sign up
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
 
anchovies said:
Or if you can afford an army of accountants and attorneys you can pay next to no taxes, use the services, and still get yourself elected President
Click to expand...

That's right, anchovies, and it's perfectly legal under our existing tax code. Say, isn't that the one you don't want Trump to change?
 
Micawber said:
GOP tax plan would provide major gains for richest 1%, uneven benefits for the middle class, report says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dle-class-report-says/?utm_term=.4fa751e67b9a


Despite repeated promises from Republican lawmakers that the plan is designed to provide relief to the middle class, nearly 30 percent of taxpayers with incomes between $50,000 and $150,000 would see a tax increase, according to the study by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The majority of households that made between $150,000 and $300,000 would see a tax increase.

Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
Sign up
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
Click to expand...

Why should we subsidize high tax states?

BTW how doe you give a federal income tax cut to people who don’t pay federal income taxes?
 
anchovies said:
You shouldn't, don't, just the opposite[/url]

And the people who don't pay Federal Income Tax aren't the middle class taxpayer
Click to expand...

According to a left-leaning political website?

I'm trying to understand why you and your pet Politifact seem to think that taxpayer dollars should not be expended where true need exists, anchovies.
 
Micawber said:
GOP tax plan would provide major gains for richest 1%, uneven benefits for the middle class, report says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dle-class-report-says/?utm_term=.4fa751e67b9a


Despite repeated promises from Republican lawmakers that the plan is designed to provide relief to the middle class, nearly 30 percent of taxpayers with incomes between $50,000 and $150,000 would see a tax increase, according to the study by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The majority of households that made between $150,000 and $300,000 would see a tax increase.

Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
Sign up
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
Click to expand...
You don't even have to read the tax plan. Whenever trump says 'believe me', you know he's lying.
 
Yaya said:
A basically debunked chart from 2005 is the best you can do?
Click to expand...

I suspect that liberals just Google shit that looks like it might help their "argument" and post links without reading the text, or understanding it if they do.

Anchovies didn't know (or he didn't want us to know) that his pet Politifact said this:

" we see two reasons for caution when using this chart.

How do you define red and blue states?

The graphic defines Republican states as those "that have voted Republican in a previous presidential election." Because the data is from 2005, that means states that voted for George W. Bush in 2004, which is a larger number than voted Republican in 2008.

But the definition of states as Republican or Democratic isn't immutable. Just four years later, in the 2008 election, six states in the right-hand chart and three states in the left-hand chart switched from Republican to Democratic, making both charts more heavily blue.

We should also note that some of the margins of victory were quite narrow. In fact, a dozen or more states can be characterized in most elections as swing states, which might be more appropriately shaded in purple.

The data is seven years old

As we noted, the data is for 2005. To the author’s credit, this is disclosed prominently, and because it’s the most recent data of its type available, we can hardly fault the creator of the graphic for using it. Still, since the data has almost certainly shifted in the interim, particularly with the 2009 stimulus and the general increase in deficit spending, those patterns could have shifted as well.

"Because of the high deficit spending we’re seeing at the federal level, it’s likely that every state is currently receiving more in federal spending than its population paid in federal income taxes," the Tax Foundation's Morrison said.

We tracked down the creator of the graphic, Jesse Erlbaum. Erlbaum said he was inspired to create the graphic after watching a presidential debate scene from the television show The West Wing, in which fictional Democratic President Jed Bartlet needles his Republican opponent, the governor of Florida, for seeming to diminish the importance of federal funds that his state receives.

Erlbaum said he created the graphic "for fun" in October 2008, just before Barack Obama won the presidency. "Based on that, I selected the most recent previous presidential election cycle, namely 2004." That explains the chart’s use of older electoral data; it simply hasn’t been updated by subsequent posters. Erlbaum conceded the concerns we laid out."

:rofl2:


Yes, liberals are THAT lazy, stupid, and repugnant.
 
Althea said:
You don't even have to read the tax plan. Whenever trump says 'believe me', you know he's lying.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true disciple of Nancy Pelosi.

You didn't read the Obamacare plan before it was passed, and I suspect you never did and never will

You admit that you won't read Trump's tax plan either.

You make decisions based on nothing more than partisan politics and hatred.
 
MicSlawber said:
GOP tax plan would provide major gains for richest 1%, uneven benefits for the middle class, report says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...dle-class-report-says/?utm_term=.4fa751e67b9a


Despite repeated promises from Republican lawmakers that the plan is designed to provide relief to the middle class, nearly 30 percent of taxpayers with incomes between $50,000 and $150,000 would see a tax increase, according to the study by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The majority of households that made between $150,000 and $300,000 would see a tax increase.

Economy & Business Alerts
Breaking news about economic and business issues.
Sign up
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
Click to expand...

:bullshit:
 
anchovies said:
Abortion is perfectly legal under the existing legal system, so then using your logic, it too must be copacetic
Click to expand...

False analogy.

If I'd said that I don't want the current tax code to change, you'd have a point, anchovies.

Since I didn't, you don't.

God, you suck at this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top