"The GOP Tax Cuts Didn’t Work"

Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
You want to focus on Trump. Rubio would have passed this legislation if he won. Congressional Republicans have been chomping at the bit to reform the tax code and this was their opportunity. And yes, politicians over promise and under deliver. But that doesn’t change that it is good policy and reform that was needed.
Click to expand...

No, that kind of reform was not needed at all.

A give-away to the richest.

That's all it was.

The people who needed the least economic boost got one, and the people who needed it most got nothing.

Stupid.

And the worst part is it NEVER ONCE reduced the deficit. The debt has only gone up up up.

And this after Trump said he would eliminate the debt.

What a lie.

I fail to understand how Republicans can stand for such lies.

Not only stand for them, defend them.

They are getting neck aches looking the other way.
 
cawacko said:
You want to focus on Trump. Rubio would have passed this legislation if he won. Congressional Republicans have been chomping at the bit to reform the tax code and this was their opportunity. And yes, politicians over promise and under deliver. But that doesn’t change that it is good policy and reform that was needed.
Click to expand...

2018 GDP growth: 2.5%
Q3 2019 GDP growth: 1.9%

Were they what was needed?
 
Hello dukkha,

dukkha said:
disagree with you there. Long term the tariffs are needed to bring China to the table - if the Dems would pass NAFTA 2 it would shorten the negotiations ( and stop impeachment)
But the tariffs are a necessary evil. Mexico put troop on the border because of them
Click to expand...

No, the tariffs were not needed.

Diplomacy was never even TRIED.

The Chinese aren't STUPID.

They understand what is good for the US economy also helps China.

The better we do the better they do. WE buy their products. If we stop doing that they fall flat.

There is room to negotiate. But Trump never even tried. He has had the loathing hatred of China for decades. It is well documented. He has wanted to hurt China for a long time.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



True. It was the fact that insufficient revenue was generated to support the budget. That's what indicates the tax cuts didn't work.

The economy was fine before the tax cuts, there was a little bump in revenue following the cuts as some income was repatriated, then revenue dropped off, and has not been enough to cover expenses.

That's why the deficit is a trillion.

What a budget disaster.
Click to expand...

No. Because the government chose to spend too much does mean the tax reform was a failure. You're trying to conflate separate items.
 
Hello dukkha,

dukkha said:
Tax cuts helped -expecially the corporate taxes that bring US taxes in line with other nations
( IOW high taxes lead to outsourcing)

I still think (can't document) the deregulation was much more important -
it changes the entire business climate to one much more friendly to business
Click to expand...

If you want to bring US companies in line with other countries then we neeed universal government health care so they don't have to foot the bill at the company level.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



No, that kind of reform was not needed at all.

A give-away to the richest.

That's all it was.

The people who needed the least economic boost got one, and the people who needed it most got nothing.

Stupid.

And the worst part is it NEVER ONCE reduced the deficit. The debt has only gone up up up.

And this after Trump said he would eliminate the debt.

What a lie.

I fail to understand how Republicans can stand for such lies.

Not only stand for them, defend them.

They are getting neck aches looking the other way.
Click to expand...

Many Democrats spoke about the need for corporate tax reform. You can argue against the legislation passed but there was bi-partisan agreement that reform to the tax code was needed.

Stop conflating two separate items, over spending and tax cuts.
 
cawacko said:
No. Because the government chose to spend too much does mean the tax reform was a failure. You're trying to conflate separate items.
Click to expand...

No, Conservatives chose to suppress revenues.

Who would have ever thought an extra $35 a paycheck wouldn't move the economic needle?
 
cawacko said:
Many Democrats spoke about the need for corporate tax reform.
Click to expand...

Yeah, by raising their taxes and closing their loopholes; your shitty tax cut did neither.


You can argue against the legislation passed but there was bi-partisan agreement that reform to the tax code was needed.
Click to expand...

No.

No, no, no.

This is cawacko doing the BoThSiDeS thing to make it sound like the goals were aligned. They weren't aligned. Democrats want to raise corporate taxes and eliminate loopholes, while Conservatives cut corporate taxes and added loopholes. Both want to reform the tax code, but both want to do opposite things. To cawacko, this means they're the same and he can lump them all in together, ostensibly because it is too complicated to make the distinction that what each wants to do to the code are polar opposites.


Stop conflating two separate items, over spending and tax cuts.
Click to expand...

While you literally conflate "bi-partisan" efforts to reform the tax code.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello dukkha,



If you want to bring US companies in line with other countries then we neeed universal government health care so they don't have to foot the bill at the company level.
Click to expand...
Good point.

And...notwithstanding marginal rates, before the corporate tax giveaway, most corporations paid an effective rate of 16%. Those who actually paid taxes, that is.
 
LV426 said:
Yeah, by raising their taxes and closing their loopholes; your shitty tax cut did neither.




No.

No, no, no.

This is cawacko doing the BoThSiDeS thing to make it sound like the goals were aligned. They weren't aligned. Democrats want to raise corporate taxes and eliminate loopholes, while Conservatives cut corporate taxes and added loopholes. Both want to reform the tax code, but both want to do opposite things. To cawacko, this means they're the same and he can lump them all in together, ostensibly because it is too complicated to make the distinction that what each wants to do to the code are polar opposites.




While you literally conflate "bi-partisan" efforts to reform the tax code.
Click to expand...

It gave money to corporations who spent in in stock buy backs. It was the plan after all. The stocks were given to execs . They do not hire people or expand when they fall into cash. That is done in response to demand they cannot keep up with. Trump just handed the poor over burdened wealthy with more money. Trump knew it too. He walked into MiraLago and announced" I just made all of you richer".Rightys love that. They have been voting for that for decades. 2 Trillion more on the debt? Who cares? It only matters when a Dem is in office.
 
Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
No. Because the government chose to spend too much does mean the tax reform was a failure. You're trying to conflate separate items.
Click to expand...

Those two items need to be considered together as they are the main two items of a budget. Income and expenses. Neither can be ignored when trying to make a budget work.

The President signs off on all of it. President Trump signed off on an irresponsible budget.

It's easy to make the economy look good for a while if you don't collect enough taxes to pay for government.

That's just not sustainable because you're basically running the economy on borrowed money.

Totally irresponsible. Trump actually cut a lot of spending, too. He just did not collect enough taxes.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



Those two items need to be considered together as they are the main two items of a budget. Income and expenses. Neither can be ignored when trying to make a budget work.

The President signs off on all of it. President Trump signed off on an irresponsible budget.

It's easy to make the economy look good for a while if you don't collect enough taxes to pay for government.

That's just not sustainable because you're basically running the economy on borrowed money.

Totally irresponsible. Trump actually cut a lot of spending, too. He just did not collect enough taxes.
Click to expand...

The topic isn’t the budget. And the latest budget cut no spending, it was massive increases all around. But the thread is about the tax reform bill, not the last budget
 
Hello cawacko,

cawacko said:
The topic isn’t the budget. And the latest budget cut no spending, it was massive increases all around. But the thread is about the tax reform bill, not the last budget
Click to expand...

Taxing, spending and the budget are inseparable issues. If spending goes up then taxing must also go up or the budget is out of balance.

The President signed off on all of it. He bears responsibility. How can he not be implicated after he signed off on the tax plan and then signed off on the budget, too. It's got his name on it. The tax plan has his name on it.

His irresponsible approval produced the trillion dollar deficit. And no, there is no way to separate the tax plan out and only look at the tax plan and the economy and call the tax plan a success. That disingenuous. You have to also consider the deficit if you want to properly judge the tax plan. And it was a bad tax plan. It did not generate enough revenue. They said the economy would take off, Trump even mentioned 6% at times. That's how he expected the tax plan to be a success. This is not success. This is a mess. Generating a trillion dollar deficit during a strong economy is irresponsible. There's no other way to categorize it. An irresponsible mess has been created and it didn't have to be.

President Bill Clinton never would have done that!

The economy was doing just fine before the tax plan. Better than it is now.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello cawacko,



Taxing, spending and the budget are inseparable issues. If spending goes up then taxing must also go up or the budget is out of balance.

The President signed off on all of it. He bears responsibility. How can he not be implicated after he signed off on the tax plan and then signed off on the budget, too. It's got his name on it. The tax plan has his name on it.

His irresponsible approval produced the trillion dollar deficit. And no, there is no way to separate the tax plan out and only look at the tax plan and the economy and call the tax plan a success. That disingenuous. You have to also consider the deficit if you want to properly judge the tax plan. And it was a bad tax plan. It did not generate enough revenue. They said the economy would take off, Trump even mentioned 6% at times. That's how he expected the tax plan to be a success. This is not success. This is a mess. Generating a trillion dollar deficit during a strong economy is irresponsible. There's no other way to categorize it. An irresponsible mess has been created and it didn't have to be.

President Bill Clinton never would have done that!

The economy was doing just fine before the tax plan. Better than it is now.
Click to expand...

Explain why Obama, Schumer and Pelosi have all supported a reduced corporate tax rate in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top