Actually, the bill does include work requirements and fraud prevention measures, but those are just a small part of it. The Congressional Budget Office and independent analyses say that the majority of the $1 trillion in cuts come from slashing actual Medicaid funding, not just fraud. Millions of low-income Americans including elderly, disabled, and working families rely on this. Fraud exists, but it’s a tiny percentage of Medicaid spending. You don’t cut $1 trillion by chasing just fraud you do it by taking an axe to the budget.
8.7 T (current Medicaid budget over 10 years)
medicaid accounted for 283B of 1.5T in spending for hospitals. 283B minus 11.5% = 250.45B. A 32.55B reduction. 32.24B divided by 1.5T is a 2.17% reduction in spending.
No tax on tips up to 25k
I searched for cap gains changes related to the bill. I couldn't find anything saying the rates had changed.
Almost ⅔ Americans own stock.
On paper, 11.5% over a decade might not sound massive, but in healthcare where margins are tight and the needs keep growing it is. Medicaid isn’t a static program. It grows because more people need it, costs of care rise, and the population ages. So even a 10–12% cut means millions lose coverage or services get slashed. A 2.17% cut across the total might look small from a bird’s eye view, but it’s not evenly spread. That $33B gets pulled from places where Medicaid is a primary source of funding, like children’s hospitals, nursing homes, rural ERs. For them, it’s not 2%, it’s often 10% or more of their actual operating budget. Even with the tax breaks you mentioned the bill still overwhelmingly favors the rich and the top 20%. To your last point, It’s true a majority of Americans technically own some stock through retirement accounts or mutual funds, but the amount they own varies drastically. The top 10% of households own about 90% of all stocks by value, while the bottom 50% own almost none, So when companies do stock buybacks or dividends, most of the gains go to wealthy investors with large portfolios not the average worker with a small retirement account. Plus, even for those who do own stock, the benefits are indirect and often take years to accumulate, while cuts to Medicaid and social programs have immediate effects on daily life for millions of people.
You’re right that the marginal tax rates haven’t changed. But rates alone don’t tell the whole story. What matters more is how the actual tax code functions through deductions, loopholes, and where income comes from. 1, They make most of their money from capital gains, dividends, and pass-through income all of which are taxed at lower rates than regular wages and weren’t touched by the bill. 2, The 2017 TCJA cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, which mainly helps high earners and shareholders. The richest 10% own over 90% of U.S. stocks. And 3, While the SALT cap limited deductions for some rich folks in blue states, the overall structure of TCJA and this new bill keeping parts of it still heavily benefits the top 20%, especially the 1%. The top 1% got about 23% of the total tax cut. The bottom 60% got about 14% combined. So yes, working people got something. But the wealthy got way more, both in raw dollars and long-term gains. That’s the imbalance I am talking about.
Both. Some of the provisions I mentioned are from the 2017 TCJA and stay in place under the OBBB, and some are new or extended. But the key issue isn’t whether the OBBB adds new tax breaks for the rich it’s that it extends and preserves a structure that already favors them.
head knows to say about anything? He lies more than Jamie Raskin Schumer Schiff all in one person everyday 24/7 when he's in front of a TV camera.