Republican tax cut will not trickle down

[The Derp]

That wasn’t the question. The answer is the middle DOES benefit from higher stock prices. Do you have proof it doesn’t?

No it doesn't. Only half of Americans have a 401k, and the average amount held in a 401k for Americans aged 55-64 is just $72,000. A change of 1/10 of 1% in the share price isn't going to make any sort of difference for the vast majority of 401k holders.

 

[The Derp]

So it's your contention that taxpayers who earn high incomes would rather send their tax refunds offshore where they can't possibly benefit from it financially here, just to spite the rest of us?

The rich aren't increasing their consumption after getting a tax cut. So the idea that cutting taxes will generate increased revenue is a fallacy.

 

[The Derp]

The Republican tax cuts won't trickle down, CEO writes in scathing op-ed

It's not a surprise to Todd Carmichael, co-founder and CEO of La Colombe Coffee Roasters in Philadelphia.

"I can tell you what no other CEO wants to tell you," Carmichael writes in an op-ed in The Philadelphia Inquirer: "A half-trillion dollars of corporate tax giveaways proposed by the GOP aren't going to do a thing for the middle class, or create a single job. Because what every CEO knows but won't tell you is this: A tax break for their company simply means a fatter bottom line. Not jobs. Not investment." CEOs have "a powerful fiduciary duty to return all profits to shareholders — not to the employees, or the suppliers, or the community and certainly not to the unemployed or left behind," he explained. "Profit goes to shareholders (and the CEO) and not to the employees."


Just like when we cut taxes before. Cut taxes on the wealthy........and they just keep it

Anyone who's ever worked in a business, ran a business, or knows the very basics of business know that a company expands and "reinvests" pre-tax. So lowering the corporate profit tax isn't going to create any new investment or expansion, since that happens before a single cent of profit is taxed.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So it's your contention that taxpayers who earn high incomes would rather send their tax refunds offshore where they can't possibly benefit from it financially here, just to spite the rest of us?

The rich aren't increasing their consumption after getting a tax cut. So the idea that cutting taxes will generate increased revenue is a fallacy.

Last time they got a tax cut, there was a major recession.

 

[The Derp]

Last time they got a tax cut, there was a major recession.

Yep. That's because they increased their savings rate, not their spending rate. The savings rate for the wealthy increased from -2.0% in Q2 2001 (meaning the wealthy were spending more than they were saving) to 7.6% by 2004.

Which means the tax cuts didn't pay for themselves.

 

[The Derp]

I’m not convinced..

Not surprising because you're a dogmatic zealot who refuses to accept facts when presented to you. Instead, you seek to preserve your fragile ego so you don't have to admit to being wrong on an anonymous message board.

If there is demand in a market, a corporation will expand there and it will expand there pre-tax, before a single cent of profit is taxed.

That's how business works. You still seem like you're trying to figure it out. It's no coincidence that Conservative economics always end up in recession.

 

[The Derp]

There is no unemployment, only underpayment.

The data shows that wages rose faster in Seattle than the rest of the country. In fact, Seattle's wage growth since the hike in the MW is one of the fastest in the country, even as its unemployment falls to below 3.0%.

 

[The Derp]

The middle class doesn't benefit from higher stock prices?

The stock market went from 7,500 to 20,000 during Obama, yet the right-wing said that the recovery didn't help the middle class.

So there's your answer.

 

[The Derp]

Cut taxes, less incentive to hold money off shore.Stupid fucking twat.

Corporations aren't holding back investment because of the tax rate (investment happens pre-tax), they're holding back investment because there's no demand to justify it.

Lowering the corporate profit tax rate isn't going to magically create demand to justify expansion.

 

[danielpalos]

Companies will ether save the cash, make acquisitions which will lead to fewer jobs or use it for stock buybacks. None of these activities help the middle class.

The middle class doesn't benefit from higher stock prices?

The rich get the lion's share of the benefits from higher stock prices.

The middle class doesn't benefit from higher stock prices?

My investments do better with the higher stock prices and I’m not rich.

Better capital management can do the same, and you provide input to the economy.

That wasn’t the question. The answer is the middle DOES benefit from higher stock prices. Do you have proof it doesn’t?

We have higher stock prices without lower taxes.

Adding to the debt is merely income redistribution.

 

[The Derp]

We have higher stock prices without lower taxes.
Adding to the debt is merely income redistribution.

Exactly. The stock market went from 7,500 to over 20,000 during Obama...yet Conservatives complain the middle class was left behind during the recovery. So I guess a strong market doesn't benefit the middle class after all.

 

[danielpalos]

We have higher stock prices without lower taxes.
Adding to the debt is merely income redistribution.

Exactly. The stock market went from 7,500 to over 20,000 during Obama...yet Conservatives complain the middle class was left behind during the recovery. So I guess a strong market doesn't benefit the middle class after all.

Just like the right wing alleges to be against income redistribution. But only when the poor may benefit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The middle class doesn't benefit from higher stock prices?

The stock market went from 7,500 to 20,000 during Obama, yet the right-wing said that the recovery didn't help the middle class.

So there's your answer.

Excellent. Rising stock prices help the middle class.
Not to mention all the underfunded pensions for government unions.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cut taxes, less incentive to hold money off shore.Stupid fucking twat.

Corporations aren't holding back investment because of the tax rate (investment happens pre-tax), they're holding back investment because there's no demand to justify it.

Lowering the corporate profit tax rate isn't going to magically create demand to justify expansion.

Corporations aren't holding back investment because of the tax rate

I know, they were holding back after 8 years of Obama attacks and expected attacks from Hillary, not that she was gonna last 4 years.......

 

[The Derp]

Excellent. Rising stock prices help the middle class.

But that's not what you've been arguing the past 8 years; that Obama's recovery did nothing to help the middle class.

Not to mention all the underfunded pensions for government unions.

Which has nothing to do with the market growth, and which is a non-sequitur from you because you just realized the rhetoric you've been pushing for the last 8 years runs right into your fabled talking point of the market helping middle class people today.

 

[The Derp]

I know, they were holding back after 8 years of Obama attacks and expected attacks from Hillary, not that she was gonna last 4 years.......

That's also a load of horseshit because corporate profits reached record levels during Obama.

So once again, we have an instance of your rhetoric running in direct contradiction to reality.

 

[danielpalos]

The middle class doesn't benefit from higher stock prices?

The stock market went from 7,500 to 20,000 during Obama, yet the right-wing said that the recovery didn't help the middle class.

So there's your answer.

Excellent. Rising stock prices help the middle class.
Not to mention all the underfunded pensions for government unions.

We don't need to add to the debt, for that.

 

[DrLove]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Excellent. Rising stock prices help the middle class.

But that's not what you've been arguing the past 8 years; that Obama's recovery did nothing to help the middle class.

Not to mention all the underfunded pensions for government unions.

Which has nothing to do with the market growth, and which is a non-sequitur from you because you just realized the rhetoric you've been pushing for the last 8 years runs right into your fabled talking point of the market helping middle class people today.

But that's not what you've been arguing the past 8 years;

I didn't argue that rising stocks help the middle class? Link?

that Obama's recovery did nothing to help the middle class.

Well, it was the slowest recovery since WWII. Despite adding $9.3 trillion to the debt.

 

[The Derp]

I didn't argue that rising stocks help the middle class? Link?

You argued Obama's recovery didn't help the middle class. So either it did by way of the stock market, or it didn't. You're trying to have it both ways.

Well, it was the slowest recovery since WWII. Despite adding $9.3 trillion to the debt.

It was also the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression. But Obama recovered from it, except he didn't, except he did, but he didn't, except that he did...it's hard to pin your actual position down because you jump between two conflicting opinions.