Why don’t republicans seem to understand the consequences of tax cuts?

[BWK]

You don't
You spend wrecklessly and blame others.

I'll give you specifics, then you can counter with your own reckless spending, since you never gave specifics. Let's start with the $2 trillion dollar tax cut that went to the welfare wealthy that I got nothing from. Now it's your turn?

 

[BWK]

Don't need to Google it...I know and you don't know, even with Google.

Non-argument. You lose.

 

[BWK]

So that's why 100% taxation Communist and Socialist nations are the world's most prosperous!

Who is suggesting that here? Exactly! That's your invention, so you can run like a coward from the real argument.

 

[BWK]

Are you capable of reading a graph?

Because it is unambiguous

He's retarded. Forget graphs.

 

[Flash]

Lets see, Tax Cut.

I get more spendable money and the stupid wasteful bloated government gets less.

That sounds good to me.

 

[BWK]

Oblige your correspondent to define "inflation"...

I don't know? Asking someone about "inflation", with an avatar name of Oddball.

 

[BWK]

Lets see, Tax Cut.

I get more spendable money and the stupid wasteful bloated government gets less.

That sounds good to me.

 

[Nostra]

I'll give you specifics, then you can counter with your own reckless spending, since you never gave specifics. Let's start with the $2 trillion dollar tax cut that went to the welfare wealthy that I got nothing from. Now it's your turn?

You must not pay taxes cuz Trump’s tax cuts were across the board. Everyone who pays income taxes got a cut.

Stop being a deadbeat, Loser.

 

[Billiejeens]

I'll give you specifics, then you can counter with your own reckless spending, since you never gave specifics. Let's start with the $2 trillion dollar tax cut that went to the welfare wealthy that I got nothing from. Now it's your turn?

Never happened.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Ronald Reagan stated it very well, when he stated that the problem is not that we don't pay enough in taxes, but that government wastes too much of our money.

And Reagan was right, because he was one of the biggest, if not the biggest, culprits.
Until Trump came a long and took his title.

Reagan tried, making several compromise deals with the Democrooks that were in solid control of both houses of Congress. He upheld his end of every deal, while the Democraps welshed on theirs.

It was Reagan who ordered the Grace Commission, to look into waste and fraud at the federal level. The results of that audit were damning, but the criminal Demeocraps in Congress refused to take any action to correct the issues that the report brought up.

It is absurd and dishonest to blame Reagan for the criminality of the Democraps in Congress.

 

[Billiejeens]

Bull shit. "

" The U.S. deficit hit $984 billion in 2019, soaring during Trump era"​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ing-nearly-percent-increase-during-trump-era/​

And?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Does a POTUS control the spending?

It's called "Fiscal Policy", which is the jurisdiction of the Executive Branch.

Civics 101.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.​

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

·
·
·​

​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's only because it's a LIE.
That's what republicans have claimed since Reagan, who lied.

April 4 2019
Companies in the S&P 500 spent $806 billion on stock buybacks in 2018, blowing away the previous record of nearly $590 billion set in 2007. The information technology and financial service sectors were the biggest spenders, with Apple leading the pack. When share prices plunged in the fourth quarter it only encouraged companies to spend more, setting a fourth consecutive quarterly record for buybacks.

On February 10, 2016, Carrier Air Conditioner, a division of United Technologies, announced that it was moving its manufacturing operations to Mexico.
The practice has come under scrutiny by members of Congress, who criticized companies for using their extra tax benefits to boost the value of their own shares instead of investing in outside growth or their workers.

Shortly after becoming President-elect, Trump and Vice-President elect Mike Pence announced a deal with Carrier to keep some of the manufacturing jobs in Indiana, while others would still move to Mexico, in exchange for large tax credits granted to the corporation.

May 23 2019

Recent evidence suggests that workers aren't getting much benefit from 2017's corporate tax cuts, and Harley-Davidson (HOG) looks like a prime example of employees getting left out in the cold.

The Republican tax law slashed the corporate rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, leading proponents to contend companies would use the windfall to increase their investments in labor or business expansions. That playbook isn't panning out so far.

After getting its taxes lowered, Harley-Davidson has announced a plant closing with the loss of 800 jobs, and it's buying back hundreds of millions of dollars worth of its outstanding shares.

The Wisconsin motorcycle manufacturer illustrates a pattern across Corporate America since tax cuts were enacted: Companies and shareholders profit, but workers see little gain.

Companies in the S&P 500 spent $806 billion on stock buybacks in 2018, blowing away the previous record of nearly $590 billion set in 2007.

Stock buybacks are awesome!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by numerous scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any president in American history.

Savings and loan crisis in which 747 institutions failed and had to be rescued with $160 billion in taxpayer dollars.
Reagan's "elimination of loopholes" in the tax code included the elimination of the "passive loss" provisions that subsidized rental housing.
Because this was removed retroactively, it bankrupted many real estate developments which used this tax break as a premise, which in turn bankrupted 747 Savings and Loans, many of whom were operating more or less as banks, thus requiring the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to cover their debts and losses with taxpayer money.
This with some other "deregulation" policies, ultimately led to the largest political and financial scandal in U.S. history to that date, the savings and loan crisis.
The ultimate cost of the crisis is estimated to have totaled around $150 billion, about $125 billion of which was directly subsidized by the U.S. government, which further increased the large budget deficits of the early 1990s.

Reagan's "elimination of loopholes" in the tax code included the elimination of the "passive loss" provisions that subsidized rental housing.

He removed a loophole? That's awful!!!

Wait, don't liberals want to remove the loopholes that the rich use to avoid taxes?

 

[The5thHorseman]

Yep.

What happens to revenues directly following the two most recent Supply Side tax cuts?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Decades of lies, about an economic theory.
Republicans clinging to that thinking one day it will lower the deficit or even the debt.

October 27 2008
Several months before the 2016 election, Trump pledged he would be able to eliminate the national debt – then around $19 trillion – “over a period of eight years.”

On Trump's first day in office (Jan. 20, 2017), the total U.S. debt stood at $19.95 trillion, up from the 11.9 trillion when Barack Obama was sworn in eight years earlier. As of Oct. 14, the debt under Trump had mushroomed to $27.1 trillion.

On Trump's first day in office (Jan. 20, 2017), the total U.S. debt stood at $19.95 trillion, up from the 11.9 trillion when Barack Obama was sworn in eight years earlier.

Ummmmm....$10.6 trillion when Obama was sworn in.
And about $400 billion of that was TARP loans that were soon repaid. So call it $10.2 trillion.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Not being enigmatic, nor duplicitous, unlike you.

You are such a fucking sock puppet....Haven't figured out whose yet, though that'll come.

You won't...you don't have the peas for it, capon.

 

[The5thHorseman]

He's retarded. Forget graphs.

And he tosses around "simp", entirely oblivious to the irony..

 

[bripat9643]

It’s a pretty basic concept. If spending is not adequately cut and taxes are cut (something republicans do), this means that there is less revenue to pay for spending. If bewilders me how republicans think you can cut taxes and think it doesn’t have consequences. We know it has consequences because the deficit blew up under Trump.

Donald Trump Built a National Debt So Big (Even Before the Pandemic) That It’ll Weigh Down the Economy for Years

Oh and news flash: trickle down economics is not a real thing. Why would corporations bother investing in labor when it is easier for them to just keep the huge amount of money they save from tax cuts? After all their profits are already at an all time high.

United States Corporate Profits

Corporate Profits in the United States decreased to 2726.80 USD Billion in the first quarter of 2024 from 2803.20 USD Billion in the fourth quarter of 2023. This page provides the latest reported value for - United States Corporate Profits - plus previous releases, historical high and low...

tradingeconomics.com

When are Dims going to understand the consequences of massive spending increases?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It is democrats who are clueless as the results of tax cuts.
Economists also generally agree that large tax changes can move the economy. For example, tax cuts can temporarily stimulate economic activity by boosting demand. In the longer run, a tax system with low rates and a broad base is more likely to promote prosperity than one with high rates and a narrow base.

Tax Policy Center › briefing-book › what-d...

The only reason why enemy democrats like tax increases is because they think that the wealthy are being punished. Even if the poor see no benefit and the middle class is hurt, democrats will cling to the idea that it takes from the rich and that's enough.