‘Trickle-down’ tax cuts make the rich richer but are of no value to overall economy, study finds

[martybegan]

If we can afford to give billions upon billions to foreigners then we are taxing Americans too much.

Period, full stop.

I don't agree with giving more aid to non-Americans than to Americans.

Are you sure? This foreign aid is to benefit our war machinery. Are you saying you don't support this? You support bringing all of our military home?

Most American foreign aid comes with a requirement that the money is used to buy military equipment from American suppliers. It is in fact, a subsidy to the military industrial complex, and helps create jobs in the "defense industry".

So it's better for them to use our money to buy T-72 cast-offs from the Russians?

Using the money we give them mean they are not actually buying the jets. We are using trick of hand to give them away.

And keeping a high tech industry producing products, and having those people pay taxes, and those businesses pay taxes, and excise taxes, and so on.

 

[martybegan]

They use the windfall to increase profits and enrich investors,

Enriched investors make more investments and/or pay more taxes.

No they pay lower rates of taxes on investment income than workers would pay on their wages. Remember Warren Buffet saying his secretary paid a higher rate of tax that he does. So raising the minimum wage also raises government revenues.

Remember Biden's oft-quoted phrase "valuing work over wealth". Less than 40% of wealthy Americans work, while 80% of the people who received government assistance in 2019, had full-time jobs. No one who has a full time job should require government assistance just to keep a roof over their head.

It's easy to use a broad brush. Hopefully we all find in reprehensible that a Wal-Mart worker would qualify for TANF or Medicaid, while the Wal-Mart heirs avoid taxes. But I've yet to hear any objection, that is not based on emotion and no facts, why there's some great economic argument against taxing - Wal-Mart profits (or Amazon or … name the corporate behemoth) or placing a miniscule penny tax on short term, large stock trades or even taxing healthcare providers - to pay for people to get healthcare whose employers don't provide it as a benefit, which the vast maj of employers offered 40-50 years ago.

Or why is it so much more expensive as measured by a % of income to go to college as it was 40-50 years ago.

I have no idea where your statistics about how many people get aid come from, and I'm not complaining, but generally these figures don't exclude "aid" like medical and education assistance. Placing taxes directly on small biz or even franchisees like Subway, can hurt employment. But even Wal-Mart said it was ok with Obamacare so long as it's competitors had to pay the same taxes.

Only the lowest entry level Wal Mart workers qualify for things like that, and it's better than having people either not work and get all benefits and work at a minimum wage ish job and get some benefits.

Government made it harder for companies to provide health care by creating minimums of coverage, and you blame the companies?

College became more expensive when loans to attend became easy to acquire, increasing the overall $$ availible. Colleges raised prices to match the increase in availible money.

It would be better if the workers received a living wage. Think of the costs of administering the income support programs - application, means testing, collection of taxes, distribution of benefits. Every $1 of benefits costs the taxpayers $1.50 in taxes. Wouldn't it be cheaper on the economy and the taxpayers, to increase the minimum wage to the same levels the workers get in benefits and have Walmart or McDonalds reduce their profits accordingly?

After all, corporations can deduct wages from their taxable income. If they give a worker a $1 per hour increase, that only costs a profitable company 78 cents, since 22 cents out of that dollar would be paid in taxes. Better for the taxpayers, the workers, and the economy, since workers will have more cash to buy consumer goods, and taxpayers will pay lower taxes,, and fewer government workers will be required to administer the programs.

Lower taxes, smaller government, increases to local economies.

You can't force companies to pay people more than they are worth. If a person adds only $8 worth of value to a product or a service, and you are forced to pay them $15 either the prices of the product or service will go up, the product or the service will go away, or the producer will find some way to get something or someone to provide that $8 worth of labor for $8.

Of course you are not concerned about a 50% markup via government bloat.

And progressives NEVER reduce the size of government unless it involves the military.

 

[Blackrook]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/23/tax-cuts-rich-trickle-down/

Creating more debt and giving more to the uber rich

Then I suppose the boom that followed Trump's tax cut didn't really happen.

 

[healthmyths]

If we can afford to give billions upon billions to foreigners then we are taxing Americans too much.

Period, full stop.

Taxing what group?
Those filthy rich need to pay more right?

Who Pays Taxes in America in 2019?

For years, Americans have been told that the rich are paying a highly disproportionate share of the nation’s taxes. Claims to that effect often focus on just one tax, the federal personal income tax, which is indeed progressive overall. But when the nation’s tax system is viewed in its entirety...

itep.org

 

[healthmyths]

They use the windfall to increase profits and enrich investors,

Enriched investors make more investments and/or pay more taxes.

No they pay lower rates of taxes on investment income than workers would pay on their wages. Remember Warren Buffet saying his secretary paid a higher rate of tax that he does. So raising the minimum wage also raises government revenues.

Remember Biden's oft-quoted phrase "valuing work over wealth". Less than 40% of wealthy Americans work, while 80% of the people who received government assistance in 2019, had full-time jobs. No one who has a full time job should require government assistance just to keep a roof over their head.

It's easy to use a broad brush. Hopefully we all find in reprehensible that a Wal-Mart worker would qualify for TANF or Medicaid, while the Wal-Mart heirs avoid taxes. But I've yet to hear any objection, that is not based on emotion and no facts, why there's some great economic argument against taxing - Wal-Mart profits (or Amazon or … name the corporate behemoth) or placing a miniscule penny tax on short term, large stock trades or even taxing healthcare providers - to pay for people to get healthcare whose employers don't provide it as a benefit, which the vast maj of employers offered 40-50 years ago.

Or why is it so much more expensive as measured by a % of income to go to college as it was 40-50 years ago.

I have no idea where your statistics about how many people get aid come from, and I'm not complaining, but generally these figures don't exclude "aid" like medical and education assistance. Placing taxes directly on small biz or even franchisees like Subway, can hurt employment. But even Wal-Mart said it was ok with Obamacare so long as it's competitors had to pay the same taxes.

Only the lowest entry level Wal Mart workers qualify for things like that, and it's better than having people either not work and get all benefits and work at a minimum wage ish job and get some benefits.

Government made it harder for companies to provide health care by creating minimums of coverage, and you blame the companies?

College became more expensive when loans to attend became easy to acquire, increasing the overall $$ availible. Colleges raised prices to match the increase in availible money.

It would be better if the workers received a living wage. Think of the costs of administering the income support programs - application, means testing, collection of taxes, distribution of benefits. Every $1 of benefits costs the taxpayers $1.50 in taxes. Wouldn't it be cheaper on the economy and the taxpayers, to increase the minimum wage to the same levels the workers get in benefits and have Walmart or McDonalds reduce their profits accordingly?

After all, corporations can deduct wages from their taxable income. If they give a worker a $1 per hour increase, that only costs a profitable company 78 cents, since 22 cents out of that dollar would be paid in taxes. Better for the taxpayers, the workers, and the economy, since workers will have more cash to buy consumer goods, and taxpayers will pay lower taxes,, and fewer government workers will be required to administer the programs.

Lower taxes, smaller government, increases to local economies.

You can't force companies to pay people more than they are worth. If a person adds only $8 worth of value to a product or a service, and you are forced to pay them $15 either the prices of the product or service will go up, the product or the service will go away, or the producer will find some way to get something or someone to provide that $8 worth of labor for $8.

Of course you are not concerned about a 50% markup via government bloat.

And progressives NEVER reduce the size of government unless it involves the military.

To support your contention about government rules and regulations,Federal Regulations Now Cost Almost $1.9 Trillion, Study Finds
Federal Regulations Now Cost Almost $1.9 Trillion, Study Finds

 

[Uncensored2008]

My positions have NOTHING to do with the Democrats but that is where you have to go to defend what you can't otherwise defend.

We are $28 trillion in debt.

Another straw man as you desperately seek to escape your ignorance.

You claimed that "need" drives production. This is a demonstrable fallacy. I have demonstrated that "need" is irrelevant to production, At best "need" will drive demand among those with need. Demand though is only for that which is produced, need is generally fantasy. I need a million dollars - yet no one rushes to produce a million dollars for me? Why not? You ignorantly claimed "need" drives production? I need to live to 120, yet no one is producing a way for me to do so.

Demand is for what is, what exists. Losing weight increases longevity, so marketing people offer various diet plans and surgeries. Need did not create these, the intellect of people looking to make a buck created these, The supply of these created a demand. This is how markets work - regardless of what governments and looters do, this is how markets work. That which exists is desired by people who are willing to trade their time and talent to acquire it.

If you really want to know how the market works, you watch a yard sale.

 

[Flash]

I love these moron Moon Bats that think it is better for some stupid bureaucrat to spend the money that you earn rather than yourself.

Of course these are the same shitheads that want to tax you to use the money to do a gender study in Pakistan and to provide welfare and stimulus checks for Illegal aliens.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Democrats aren't the ones who engineered the tax codes to favour mega corporations, or the economies of size. Republicans are the guys who engineered the destruction of the American small business.

Now you know that isn't true.

democrats cater to massive corporations like Walmart and Amazon, which is why Walmart, Amazon, Goldman Sachs, et al so HEAVILY support democrats.

democrats are an investment for the mega-corps, bought and paid for.

And equitable tax code is everyone pays 15%

No deductions, no exemptions, no write offs, no carry forwards. Who is it that refuses to allow fair and honest taxation? Well, both parties really. But democrats are the most fierce enemies of fair taxation.

Democrats tried to get the PPE programs, and government assistance packages to assist small businesses, and Trump and Mnuchin would have none of it, writing their own rules to benefit large corporations, the airline and hotel industries, and other industries which will be hard pressed to survive this mess, rather than small independently owned businesses which are in the greatest peril.

Utter fucking bullshit. Remember, the Communist party exempted the ENTIRE energy production sector from being able to utilize the paycheck protection program. The democrats told energy sector workers "fucking starve, peasants" while Nancy Pigshit ate $30 a quart ice cream.

Xi's man Quid Pro is also Walmart's man, and Amazon's man - because the goods they sell come from China and they didn't like the Usurper placing America ahead of China.

All of Trump's economic policies in the pandemic have favoured large corporations, and drive small businesses under. Hence the massive transfer of wealth to large corporations and billionaires in the pandemic.

In Canada, we went the other way. Corporations and even medium sized buinesses got NOTHING. Not one dime. Conversely, businesses with less than 10 employees got nothing as well, although their workers got CERB - $2000 a month, plus $500 per child. I gather the smallest businesses are getting something in this lockdown, but I haven't seen the small print on the recent lockdown monies yet.

Local residents are making a real effort to patronize small local business throughout the lockdowns. Many are offering curbside service.

Utter bullshit,

The only real help there is for small and medium businesses to allow them to conduct business. The shutdowns in Communist ruled states have destroyed the small business sector. In California where Kim Jong Nutsack rules with an iron fist, 3 out of 5 small businesses have been destroyed by the insane lock downs.

Who does it benefit for small business to fail? Walmart, Amazon. Who funds the democrats? Walmart, Amazon.. Such a wild coincidence, don't you think?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It would be better if the workers received a living wage. Think of the costs of administering the income support programs - application, means testing, collection of taxes, distribution of benefits. Every $1 of benefits costs the taxpayers $1.50 in taxes. Wouldn't it be cheaper on the economy and the taxpayers, to increase the minimum wage to the same levels the workers get in benefits and have Walmart or McDonalds reduce their profits accordingly?

After all, corporations can deduct wages from their taxable income. If they give a worker a $1 per hour increase, that only costs a profitable company 78 cents, since 22 cents out of that dollar would be paid in taxes. Better for the taxpayers, the workers, and the economy, since workers will have more cash to buy consumer goods, and taxpayers will pay lower taxes,, and fewer government workers will be required to administer the programs.

Lower taxes, smaller government, increases to local economies.

Well, that would sure keep small neighborhood stores from hiring neighborhood kids part time and infringing on the sales of Walmart and Amazon.

You Commies are always sure to protect the big guys from encroachment by entrepreneurs. Protecting Oligarchs is job #1 for the left.

And no, businesses can't deduct wages from their taxes. You Communists have not a hint of a clue about finance or economics. Labor is an operating expense, part of cost of goods sold.

Income Statement: How to Read and Use It

An income statement is one of the three major financial statements that report a company’s financial performance over a specific accounting period. It focuses on revenue, expenses, gains, and losses.

www.investopedia.com

 

[Orangecat]

Creating more debt and giving more to the uber rich

Tax cuts don't cause debt, spending above revenue levels does.

 

[Uncensored2008]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

 

[dudmuck]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

 

[Uncensored2008]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

You have zero grasp of economics or markets and spew ignorant slogans.

Typical Communist drone.

 

[dudmuck]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

You have zero grasp of economics or markets and spew ignorant slogans.

Typical Communist drone.

Trickle-down economics is dead. Itâs time to tax the rich harder

The revenue the Treasury sorely needs must be sought from the ever-increasing wealth in Britain’s boardrooms

www.theguardian.com

the reason we have this problem is that our political system favors those with money.

You can see visualizations here showing how much money different corporations spend on lobbying and how much they receive from government spending.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

The poor already have a negative tax rate. Is that why the rich are so rich?

 

[Uncensored2008]

so then where is your study which shows that tax cuts on the wealthy grow the economy?

And that's why you're a DUCK, you duck the subject every time...

You have zero grasp of economics or markets and spew ignorant slogans.

Typical Communist drone.

Trickle-down economics is dead. Itâs time to tax the rich harder

The revenue the Treasury sorely needs must be sought from the ever-increasing wealth in Britain’s boardrooms

www.theguardian.com

the reason we have this problem is that our political system favors those with money.

You can see visualizations here showing how much money different corporations spend on lobbying and how much they receive from government spending.

What does cronyism have to do with this fantasy economics of "trickle down" that Communists created to defame Capitalism?

Tell me, why does Maoist governor Kim Jong Newsom wage war against small and medium businesses? Particularly retailers? Walmart can be opened, but the corner store is shut down by the state?

And at the same time Amazon and Walmart are his major donors.

With leftism - with the Maoist brand of Communism that democrats practice, as they are directed by their ruler Xi Jinping, the mega-corps and the government blend - merge into one entity. Nutsack in California and Psycho killer Cuomo in New York wage war on small business to ensure ONLY the mega-corps and the party Oligarchs exist.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/23/tax-cuts-rich-trickle-down/

Creating more debt and giving more to the uber rich

The trickle down economic theory was the biggest scam ever run against the American people.

I know!!

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=zsWV

DURR.