hog88
Your ray of sunshine
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2008
- Messages
- 108,694
- Likes
- 146,863
Youre the one acting like a little ***** over it, why dont you explain whats bad about it?
Liberals are in the death throes. If trump is successful in lowering taxes and stimulating the economy its the end of the Democratic Party as we know it. There is no lie they won't tell and no action they won't take to stop it from happening. In the peoples best interest, right! Media is behind them but its too late.
What's this IF ****.? This is the entire Republican economic theory in practice. The kicker is they don't care if it fails. By time it does they already have the money.
You think this will stimulate the economy...Poor snowflakeLiberals are in the death throes. If trump is successful in lowering taxes and stimulating the economy its the end of the Democratic Party as we know it. There is no lie they won't tell and no action they won't take to stop it from happening. In the peoples best interest, right! Media is behind them but its too late.
If I am not mistaken, and admittedly I could be, certain assumptions have been made wrt the 'cost' of the tax plan. If... and it is again only a possibility... the economy gets stronger, that "cost" number could be much smaller. Zerocare on the other hand was a harder cost to the American taxpayer. It regulated and restricted commerce and innovation. I'll take my chances with the possibility of free enterprise any day over government regulation and heavy handedness..Cbo estimates $1.36t cost to Obamacare over a decade. Cbo estimates the tax reform will result in a $1.4t addition to the deficit over a decade.
Lmao?
Nope. Only a fool would think that. What will more than likely happen is that companies will be able to take the extra profits and plow them back to grow the business and employ more people who then pay more taxes. Your take on it is EXACTLY what the liberals think this is about. Corporations pay less taxes, therefore they must lower prices. IdioticAnd you think if you lower the corporate tax they are going to pass that on down to you in lower prices? Big LOL
They could be wrong... either intentionally or unintentionally. Unintentionally wrong suggests that their models were correct but situations beyond their control occurred. Or, they could be intentionally wrong (boldfaced liars).
What figures did you come up when you graded it?
Whats your point?
The CBO scoring is based on assumptions given to it by the party responsible for the legislation.
Obamacares rosy predictions were based on 5% economic growth rates and, like you said, 50 state participation. Neither happened, but Obamacare supporters still trot out the CBO scoring as if its supposed to mean something.
The same can be said for this tax reform bill.
You do understand what Garbage In, Garbage Out means, dont you?
They basically punted back to the house whom are trying to pass a bill to extend funding for two more weeks before the government shutdown.
The government needs money that we do not have so naturally we should give the very rich tax breaks and add a trillion to the debt.
Tax Bill Offers Last-Minute Breaks for Developers, Banks and Oil Industry - The New York Times
I don't see how any of these tax breaks would create jobs. Isn't that the premise of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,
It would take cutting the income tax to 0% of the super rich (600ish billion) and the corporate taxes by 30% (~400ish billion) to equal the trillion number. that is not what is happening. the deficit, as always, is due to too much spending.
The fact is that lowering taxes to the wealthy and corporations has had very little to do with increasing the number of jobs or higher wages, but it is still discussed as some kind of economic absolute that everyone should accept.
"Even though corporations and people like George Will complain about the corporate tax rate, history shows that effective corporate tax rate has been steadily declining for decades. Corporations paid more than 49% of their profits in federal taxes in the 1950s, 38% in the 1960s, 33% in the 1970s and 25% in the 1980s. All the while, U.S. wages have been stagnant for years even as productivity has risen. Between 1989 and 2010, U.S. productivity grew by 62.5% far outpacing wages, which grew by only 12% during the same period, according to a March 2011 study by the Economic Policy Institute."