Hillary's $191 billion tax increase

[Little-Acorn]

Democrats keep pretending that if they increase taxes on the economy, it won't slow down the economy. Phrases like "We'll only increases taxes on the rich" are still believed by Democrat voters who aren't paying attention to what actually happens.

Unfortunately, the economy does pay attention. When liberals "tax the rich", the rest of us lose money too. And a few economic experts are actually starting to point it out.

-----------------------------------------

Hillary’s $191 Billion Tax Increase

Hillary’s $191 Billion Tax Increase

A new study projects slower growth under Clinton.
by James Freeman

Updated Jan. 26, 2016 8:10 a.m. ET

Hillary Clinton’s proposed tax hikes would increase federal revenue by $498 billion over a decade if one ignores the impact of her plan on economic growth—and $191 billion if the resulting decrease in economic output is taken into account. That’s according to a new study by the Tax Foundation that will be released later this morning.

Foundation economists project that the Clinton tax increases will result in U.S. GDP that is 1% below where it would otherwise be after 10 years. And although the Clinton tax hikes are ostensibly targeting the rich, with proposed changes such as a new surtax on high incomes and a Buffett Rule that sets a minimum tax rate on high earners, the Tax Foundation projects a decline of at least 0.9% in after-tax incomes for all taxpayers due to slower growth. So for everyone dissatisfied with the Obama economy, the Clinton agenda promises to make it just a bit worse.

 

[bendog]

Democrats keep pretending that if they increase taxes on the economy, it won't slow down the economy. Phrases like "We'll only increases taxes on the rich" are still believed by Democrat voters who aren't paying attention to what actually happens.

Unfortunately, the economy does pay attention. When liberals "tax the rich", the rest of us lose money too. And a few economic experts are actually starting to point it out.

-----------------------------------------

Hillary’s $191 Billion Tax Increase

Hillary’s $191 Billion Tax Increase

A new study projects slower growth under Clinton.
by James Freeman

Updated Jan. 26, 2016 8:10 a.m. ET

Hillary Clinton’s proposed tax hikes would increase federal revenue by $498 billion over a decade if one ignores the impact of her plan on economic growth—and $191 billion if the resulting decrease in economic output is taken into account. That’s according to a new study by the Tax Foundation that will be released later this morning.

Foundation economists project that the Clinton tax increases will result in U.S. GDP that is 1% below where it would otherwise be after 10 years. And although the Clinton tax hikes are ostensibly targeting the rich, with proposed changes such as a new surtax on high incomes and a Buffett Rule that sets a minimum tax rate on high earners, the Tax Foundation projects a decline of at least 0.9% in after-tax incomes for all taxpayers due to slower growth. So for everyone dissatisfied with the Obama economy, the Clinton agenda promises to make it just a bit worse.

could you maybe actually get a link to that. LOL

 

[Little-Acorn]

could you maybe actually get a link to that.

Keep reading.

 

[Care4all]

the tax foundation's link for their study? tax foundation is known to be biased conservative leaning, but I'd love to see how they figured it...?

i'll google it and see if i can find it....

 

[Care4all]

wonder if they've done a study on trumpty dumpty's plans, and their cost to the economy....? So we can compare....

 

[BluesLegend]

Meh its $49 billion a year that's like shooting a spit wad at $500 billion dollar a year deficits.

 

[Care4all]

here's the tax foundation link!

Details and Analysis of Hillary Clinton’s Tax Proposals

but i still could not find where it explains how it gets to its economic impact figures??

 

[thereisnospoon]

the tax foundation's link for their study? tax foundation is known to be biased conservative leaning, but I'd love to see how they figured it...?

i'll google it and see if i can find it....

Umm. EFVERY single time the federal government has increased taxes , the result was short term gains in revenue followed by long term decreases in revenue and a reduction is economic activity. These factors resulted in a smaller GDP......These are the facts.
The federal government does not have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem.
And the fact is, if the government is given more to spend, it will simply find things on which to waste that money.
It's time to tear up the blank check. It is also time for a federal law that bans the printing of currency for the purpose of covering deficit spending.
Of course those on hte left are not in the least nit interested in raising revenue. They view taxation as a form of punishment.

 

[thereisnospoon]

wonder if they've done a study on trumpty dumpty's plans, and their cost to the economy....? So we can compare....

What difference does that make?
The fact is you lefties have been begging the Obama admin to "soak the rich".....An act that will have an adverse affect on all of us.

 

[Little-Acorn]

wonder if they've done a study on trumpty dumpty's plans, and their cost to the economy....? So we can compare....

What difference does that make?
The fact is you lefties have been begging the Obama admin to "soak the rich".....An act that will have an adverse affect on all of us.

Democrats are hoping nobody remembers when Republicans were given majorities in the House and Senate in the 1990s, and passed a decrease in the Capital Gains tax. They had to pass it three times before then-President Clinton signed it (just before an election, natch).

The result? Revenue to the Federal govt INCREASED hugely, mostly in Capital Gains taxes, resulting in the first almost-balanced budget in decades. It happened because economic activity took off, increasing by leaps and bounds as government took a smaller proportion of each capital gains transaction.

It was a resounding repudiation of the Democrats' cherished belief that changing taxes doesn't change the economy. Dems are desperately hoping people have forgotten that lesson, so they can fool them into thinking raising taxes does no harm and "soaking the rich" only soaks the rich.

 

[Spinster]

Meh its $49 billion a year that's like shooting a spit wad at $500 billion dollar a year deficits.

Okay, since we're already in the red we may as well get further in debt. Good solid thinking to further bankrupt us. Remember over a year ago when the government shut down for awhile? So, let's just throw the whole country into an unescapable situation.

 

[BluesLegend]

Meh its $49 billion a year that's like shooting a spit wad at $500 billion dollar a year deficits.

Okay, since we're already in the red we may as well get further in debt. Good solid thinking to further bankrupt us. Remember over a year ago when the government shut down for awhile? So, let's just throw the whole country into an unescapable situation.

Hillary will raise $49 billion a year and spend it 4 times over, the country is already in a dire situation with idiots like Hillary and Bernie thinking we can tax our way out of the deep dark hole they spent us into. Our only hope is to grow our way out of debt, aggressive all in no holds barred growth.

 

[easyt65]

Hillary is an admitted Saul Alynski admirer. Socialists love spending other people's money, and Socialism is awesome until they run out of other people's money.

 

[Care4all]

wonder if they've done a study on trumpty dumpty's plans, and their cost to the economy....? So we can compare....

What difference does that make?
The fact is you lefties have been begging the Obama admin to "soak the rich".....An act that will have an adverse affect on all of us.

Democrats are hoping nobody remembers when Republicans were given majorities in the House and Senate in the 1990s, and passed a decrease in the Capital Gains tax. They had to pass it three times before then-President Clinton signed it (just before an election, natch).

The result? Revenue to the Federal govt INCREASED hugely, mostly in Capital Gains taxes, resulting in the first almost-balanced budget in decades. It happened because economic activity took off, increasing by leaps and bounds as government took a smaller proportion of each capital gains transaction.

It was a resounding repudiation of the Democrats' cherished belief that changing taxes doesn't change the economy. Dems are desperately hoping people have forgotten that lesson, so they can fool them into thinking raising taxes does no harm and "soaking the rich" only soaks the rich.

yeah,yeah yeah, and the repubs said Clinton's tax increase on the wealthy was going to hurt the economy and it didn't....

So even Steven.

 

[Care4all]

Also, the lower capital gains has turned the stock market in to a roller coaster of short term buying and selling, instead of steady, long term investments....