Getin the ring
Verified User
you do know that the tax cuts won't affect us until 2019? right?
Trump promised pay increases of $4,000 - $9,000 if Russia Tax Cut was passed
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
you do know that the tax cuts won't affect us until 2019? right?
Actually, wages rose faster during Obama than they have during Trump.
So growth is good because it's increasing inflation which is keeping wages flat at best.
That's positive, how?
This tax cut was nothing more than Trump making good on his promise to the rich.
So the rich get to have more money still, then it is up to them to decide what to do with it.
Will they save? Will they make purchases in ways that benefit people lower down the food chain?
And mind that all spending is first going to go into the hands of wealthy people before it sees a poor worker.
So a tax cut to wealthy is not an efficient mechanism for anything other than greater reggressivity and wealth
disparity. Better to hand money out to the poor and middle, because very little will be put on the sidelines.
Why should the filthy rich have the luxury of choice while the poor wait and see how much the rich might decide
to tip, or buy, or put into the stock market. It's not a question of whose money it is, it is a question of how much
of each percentile of taxpayers will contribute to running the government.
The rich are behind on their dues!
So the rich get to have more money still, then it is up to them to decide what to do with it.
Will they save? Will they make purchases in ways that benefit people lower down the food chain?
And mind that all spending is first going to go into the hands of wealthy people before it sees a poor worker.
So a tax cut to wealthy is not an efficient mechanism for anything other than greater reggressivity and wealth
disparity. Better to hand money out to the poor and middle, because very little will be put on the sidelines.
Why should the filthy rich have the luxury of choice while the poor wait and see how much the rich might decide
to tip, or buy, or put into the stock market. It's not a question of whose money it is, it is a question of how much
of each percentile of taxpayers will contribute to running the government.
The rich are behind on their dues!
Getin the ring
Verified User
ok so now you're stupid ^^^
why didn't you let me know that before I held conversation with you.
Now I'm embarrassed
1. Slowest pace of job growth since 2017, which was the slowest since 2011
2. Wages aren't higher. They're flat, if not declining for most workers
3. The deficit is back to $1T which is weird, because screeching about the size of the deficit was something you did for 8 years during Obama
Moron, Paul Ryan said you'd see it in your paychecks by February at the latest.
You're running away from the debate because you're a weakling and a coward.
Delete your account; kill yourself
Getin the ring
Verified User
and you are seeing more money already, assuming you have a job that is.
the real money will be in the form of your deduction in 2019,
why am I even still talking to stupid
What was promised: $4,000 - $9,000 pay increases
Was was delivered: $351 pay increases, which is outpaced or flat w/ inflation
So is $4,000 = $351 in Conservatardia today?
LOL!
Paul Ryan said we'd see it in our paychecks as soon as February.
"It" referring to the $4,000-$9,000 wage increases they promised in 2017.
Instead, "it" was a whopping $351 that is wiped out by inflation.
delete your account; kill yourself
You're the ones who promised wage gains of $4K-$9K if we cut corporate taxes from 35% down to 21%.
$351 is how much workers got after-tax from this tax cut.
That's wholly different than saying incomes will grow by $4,000 - $8,000
Face it; this tax cut was a flop.
Is this English?
This is the stupidest thing ever written.
If corporations were lowering their prices because income taxes were cut, then we wouldn't see inflation at all.
But you screeched before that inflation was indicative of the tax cut somehow working.
So your argument eats itself.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I didn't even know Russia cut their taxes.....
countryboy
Verified User
They didn't, Trump cut Russia's taxes.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
lol.....and they pretend Putin is running the US......
Here is the problem with this article. It is disingenuous. It only refers to large, publicly traded companies (i.e., those that buy back shares). Large publicly traded companies employ the least amount of people in this country. Small businesses employ the most and always have. They are generally owned by a family or a single stock holder. Nothing to buy back. Guess how those employees are doing? Getting raises. Getting better benefits. Smaller businesses value their employees. Big businesses that garner all the news? Not so much.
PayScale data isn't relegated to just big corporations.
Here's the methodology explaining just that: https://www.payscale.com/payscale-index/compensation-trends-methodology:
You're trying to gaslight something that makes your position look like shit. And what makes it even more hilarious is that PayScale does track earnings for workers in companies with less than 99 workers. And guess what? Wage declines for those workers are even worse than workers as a whole.
According to PayScale, businesses with 99 or fewer employees saw wages decline by 1.4% from last quarter and have grown a meager 0.3% year-over-year. That ranks below Medium and Large companies, according to PayScale's index.
Delete your account; kill yourself because you're a disingenuous scumbag who lies. You utterly lied. You lied about PayScale. You're a liar. A complete and total fucking fraud and liar.
Last edited:
Well. Just to shove up your dumb ass even further, this is from your own link: "Where Did the Gains Go?
Two words: stock buybacks. According to the research firm TrimTabs, U.S. companies have invested in a record-setting $436.6 billion worth of stock buybacks in Q2 2018. That’s nearly double the previous record … which was set in Q1 of this year.
“When a company buys back some of its outstanding shares, the effect is usually to boost the value of the rest of its stock, sometimes making the company appear more valuable on paper,” explains Irina Ivanova at CBS News. “Because many senior executives are paid in company shares, buybacks temporarily boost their pay (as well as other shareholders’ portfolios), sometimes at the expense of investments in infrastructure or workers.”
You might also want to look at your last link. It goes completely against what you are saying. I am surprised what is getting shoved up your ass is not coming out your throat.