APP - Trump Tax Plan

[Bill Fishlore]

Butduring periods of low unemployment, tax cuts can actually be damagingto the economy. If companies find it difficult to respond to theadditional demand for goods and services by hiring workers andincreasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices ratherthan faster economic growth.

There is no doubt that the cuts proposed will zoom the federal deficit as they always have, causing massive government borrowing.However, increased government borrowing could push up interest ratesand crowd out private investment, thereby offsetting some or all ofthe plan’s positive effects on private investment unless federalspending was sharply reduced to offset the effect of the tax cuts onthe deficit. Those cuts are supposed to be in welfare programs for the poor; however, the recent "Repeal and Replace" debacle suggests that Congress is in no mood for such libertarian fantasies.



Theresults of CBO analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 yearsin the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate donot appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the toptax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, andproductivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or norelation to the size of the economic pie.
However,the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with theincreasing concentration of income at the top of the incomedistribution. That has been the GOP vision since Reagan. It has never been broadly popular and now the voters are truly pissed off at Trump and his wavering congressional supporters. Trouble ahead?

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Butduring periods of low unemployment, tax cuts can actually be damagingto the economy.

????......what????....

 

[Bill Fishlore]

????......what????....

Here's the explanation from the OP:
If companies find it difficult to respond to the additional demand for goods and services by hiring workers and increasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices rather than faster economic growth.

The above is pretty much basic supply-and-demand. Unemployment levels today are at pretty much the low normal as baby boomers retire out of the workforce. Reducing immigration, which is dominated by healthy, young people seeking work, is exactly the wrong move. Cutting taxes on the rich does precisely nothing to increase the labor supply or consumer demand. It can be used to purchase back stock, raising corporate salaries but that is just a death spiral. America is awash in investment capital from around the world as well as our own richest 1%. But it there is nothing to invest in which can make a profit, investors look elsewhere. Our wages have not kept pace with growth so we are not only failing to increase consumer demand (customers), more and more workers are barely getting by, providing no market for expanded production and hence growth.

 

[Truth Detector]

But during periods of low unemployment, tax cuts can actually be damagingto the economy. If companies find it difficult to respond to theadditional demand for goods and services by hiring workers andincreasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices ratherthan faster economic growth.

Cutting taxes can NEVER harm or damage an economy. That's not merely absurd, but unhinged.

Once more; Businesses DO NOT PAY taxes. They COLLECT them on top of their goods and services. ALL costs to businesses are passed onto the consumers of those goods and services.

There is no doubt that the cuts proposed will zoom the federal deficit as they always have, causing massive government borrowing.

There is no historic support for such claims. After every tax cut, there has always been increasing revenue. We do not have a REVENUE problem in this country, but a SPENDING problem. The increased revenue has always been eclipsed by spending.

However, increased government borrowing could push up interest ratesand crowd out private investment, thereby offsetting some or all ofthe plan’s positive effects on private investment unless federalspending was sharply reduced to offset the effect of the tax cuts onthe deficit.

The last eight years prove this claim dead wrong. Obama's administration borrowed at the largest clip of any President in the nations history, to the tune of trillions, and interest rates have been at an all time low for the duration.

Those cuts are supposed to be in welfare programs for the poor; however, the recent "Repeal and Replace" debacle suggests that Congress is in no mood for such libertarian fantasies.

The Federal Government is violating it's Constitutional responsibility even having welfare programs. Please find within the Constitution where the duty of the Federal Government is to provide welfare payments to its citizens.

I find it the pinnacle of irresponsibility when the dishonest leftist politicians use these programs to buy votes and turn our citizens into wards of the state.

The results of CBO analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 yearsin the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate donot appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the toptax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, andproductivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or norelation to the size of the economic pie.

No one should be paying the CBO any attention; it's forecasts and predictions have been 100% wrong 100% of the time and have NEVER even come close to reality. The reduction of top marginal tax rates in the Reagan and Clinton years had a significant impact in growing the economy and wealth creation.

Arguments that suggest that we should willingly send more of our hard earned wealth to Washington in the foolhardy belief that this will lead us to economic prosperity is not merely specious, but an outrageous fraud.

However,the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.

This is an outright lie and I challenge you to find anything remotely credible to prove it.

That has been the GOP vision since Reagan. It has never been broadly popular and now the voters are truly pissed off at Trump and his wavering congressional supporters.

More lies; it's all the left has in the never ending support of more Government confiscation and Fascist control of our lives.

Trouble ahead?

Trouble ahead for Democrats and the Party of the Jackass for sure. Democrats have been losing terribly since BillyBob Clinton's philandering White House. I find it amusing that they still think they are winning.

 

[Truth Detector]

Here's the explanation from the OP:
If companies find it difficult to respond to the additional demand for goods and services by hiring workers and increasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices rather than faster economic growth.

This is the biggest pile of economic gobbledygook and bile I have ever seen. It is obvious the OP is economically clueless and uneducated in matters of the economy.

Demand creates higher prices. Competition causes lower prices. Demand creates faster economic growth. Taxation competes with economic production and distorts economic results.

 

[Truth Detector]

The OP is supposedly about a tax plan that doesn't exist and doesn't even speak to Trump's plan. Therefore, the OP is a fraud.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Here's the explanation from the OP:
If companies find it difficult to respond to the additional demand for goods and services by hiring workers and increasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices rather than faster economic growth.

The above is pretty much basic supply-and-demand. Unemployment levels today are at pretty much the low normal as baby boomers retire out of the workforce. Reducing immigration, which is dominated by healthy, young people seeking work, is exactly the wrong move. Cutting taxes on the rich does precisely nothing to increase the labor supply or consumer demand. It can be used to purchase back stock, raising corporate salaries but that is just a death spiral. America is awash in investment capital from around the world as well as our own richest 1%. But it there is nothing to invest in which can make a profit, investors look elsewhere. Our wages have not kept pace with growth so we are not only failing to increase consumer demand (customers), more and more workers are barely getting by, providing no market for expanded production and hence growth.

the claim is based on a false premise.....

There is no doubt that the cuts proposed will zoom the federal deficit as they always have, causing massive government borrowing

demmycrats aren't in control of Congress.......there is no reason to believe federal spending won't be cut......

 

[chink]

Butduring periods of low unemployment, tax cuts can actually be damagingto the economy. If companies find it difficult to respond to theadditional demand for goods and services by hiring workers andincreasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices ratherthan faster economic growth.

There is no doubt that the cuts proposed will zoom the federal deficit as they always have, causing massive government borrowing.However, increased government borrowing could push up interest ratesand crowd out private investment, thereby offsetting some or all ofthe plan’s positive effects on private investment unless federalspending was sharply reduced to offset the effect of the tax cuts onthe deficit. Those cuts are supposed to be in welfare programs for the poor; however, the recent "Repeal and Replace" debacle suggests that Congress is in no mood for such libertarian fantasies.



Theresults of CBO analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 yearsin the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate donot appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the toptax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, andproductivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or norelation to the size of the economic pie.
However,the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with theincreasing concentration of income at the top of the incomedistribution. That has been the GOP vision since Reagan. It has never been broadly popular and now the voters are truly pissed off at Trump and his wavering congressional supporters. Trouble ahead?

pissed at TRUMP no,pissed at both houses of congress yes.

 

[chink]

Here's the explanation from the OP:
If companies find it difficult to respond to the additional demand for goods and services by hiring workers and increasing output, the result is likely to be higher prices rather than faster economic growth.

The above is pretty much basic supply-and-demand. Unemployment levels today are at pretty much the low normal as baby boomers retire out of the workforce. Reducing immigration, which is dominated by healthy, young people seeking work, is exactly the wrong move. Cutting taxes on the rich does precisely nothing to increase the labor supply or consumer demand. It can be used to purchase back stock, raising corporate salaries but that is just a death spiral. America is awash in investment capital from around the world as well as our own richest 1%. But it there is nothing to invest in which can make a profit, investors look elsewhere. Our wages have not kept pace with growth so we are not only failing to increase consumer demand (customers), more and more workers are barely getting by, providing no market for expanded production and hence growth.

Reducing immigration, which is dominated by healthy, young people seeking work, is exactly the wrong move.

are you talking about legal immigration .

 

[Bill Fishlore]

Reducing immigration, which is dominated by healthy, young people seeking work, is exactly the wrong move.

are you talking about legal immigration .

From the point of labor economics, the legal status of the immigrant is not terribly important. Illegals have a very high employment rate because they are ineligible for benefits and need to stay away from government bureaucracy. They do pay taxes however. In any event, the legal status is a separate problem from the demographics of the workforce. We need more younger, better educated workers to replace aging Boomers.

 

[Truth Detector]

From the point of labor economics, the legal status of the immigrant is not terribly important.

Wrong again; it is VERY important and those who are here illegally are breaking our laws. Fascinating how the left has ZERO respect for the law these days.

Illegals have a very high employment rate because they are ineligible for benefits and need to stay away from government bureaucracy.

This is flat out false; do you have anything to support such nonsense, or is this just more of the same "because you say so?"

They do pay taxes however.

How in the hell can anyone pay taxes if they are here ILLEGALLY? More nonsense.

In any event, the legal status is a separate problem from the demographics of the workforce. We need more younger, better educated workers to replace aging Boomers.

Now you are just throwing darts blindly with zero coherence to the wacked out claims you are making.

 

[chink]

From the point of labor economics, the legal status of the immigrant is not terribly important. Illegals have a very high employment rate because they are ineligible for benefits and need to stay away from government bureaucracy. They do pay taxes however. In any event, the legal status is a separate problem from the demographics of the workforce. We need more younger, better educated workers to replace aging Boomers.

the legal status of the immigrant is terribly important,it is called breaking the law,you want daca it needs to go through congress,president obama tried to circumvent congress with another fiat .
as a matter of fact obama did circumvent congress and congress sat with it's collective thumbs up their posterior's.
it is the law and it applies to everyone ,except hilda beast and it's Orks.