I believe you forgot to add a ‘IMHO’ somewhere in there, given that you’re not the Voice of Yahweh. 
And big corporations. Can’t overlook them.
Middle class? You might, for a couple of years. But the millionaires cuts go on and On. And then when it comes time to pay back all that debt, your taxes will increase- a lot.
That’s the plan, though.
With the sunsetting provisions on the tax cuts for HD, they get to campaign on keeping those tax cuts in place.
“Don’t vote for the dems, they won’t keep the tax cuts. Vote for us, we’ll extend them until the next election cycle, so we can hold them over your heads then too.”
The rank-and-file voters can’t think that far ahead. They’re all about instant gratification. All they hear is ‘My tribe is cutting my taxes!’ They don’t hear the bit about raising them to higher than what they were before. And when that happens, they’ll blame the opposition because they are not capable of remembering what happened.
Yep. The rank-and-file voters won’t be able to connect the dots, and blame the Democrats for what their tribe did.
Bolding mine.
This is patently absurd. Anyone who makes more than $10,400 pays taxes. In order to make $10,399 you would have to be earning just under $200 per week, before Social Security, Medicare, and FICA are taken out. For a typical 40-hour work-week that would amount to $5/hr - $2.15 below the minimum wage.
The only people who make less than $10,400 would be those working 28 hours or less per week at minimum wage, $7.15/hr. The median income in the U.S., what we could reasonably call middle-class, is $59,039 as of 2016.Between $10k and $60k in income represents about 30% of Americans, or about 100 million people, who are taxed between 10% and 25% depending on which bracket they fall into.
(Technically speaking, those making less than $10,400 would be taxed 10% for 2017 as well, but their income is covered by the standard deduction + one exemption, which is why they aren’t required to file a tax return. But would want to if their employer was withholding, to get a refund.)
In any case, 100 million people being taxed 10-25% of their income can’t, by any stretch of the imagination, be characterized as “not paying much in federal taxes in quite some time.”
You are either misunderstanding me or deliberately misquoting me. My point was about “Federal income taxes” (you know, the ones affected by the tax bill under consideration). In support of my point, I offer this cite:
You go ahead and keep quoting that 25% marginal rate though. :rolleyes:
It’s a bill in which the majority of people will get a tax cut. Some people seem to misinterpret “the rich will get a bigger tax cut than the poor” as “money will be taken from the poor and given to the rich.”
Say Macy’s gives a discount of 50% to one Category A of shoppers and a 25% discount to a Category B of shoppers. Both are benefiting, but some are benefiting more.
Thank you for this excellent, succinct summary.
My taxes will certainly be going up, and I won’t benefit from those with million dollar incomes.
Honestly, I am fine with my taxes going up to improve education, universal healthcare, infrastructure, but I am sure as shit not fine with my taxes going to the 1% and corporations. And BTW, I worked at a Global 100 corporation for 14 years whose goal was to increase their return to investors based partly on how well they can avoid US taxes. They certainly are not going to suddenly invest more.
Supply side economics has been thoroughly debunked cough cough Reagan, Kansas cough cough in real world examples, and infrastructure spend has been generally validated. Basic economics has serious multiplier effects from infrastructure spending, especially in economic downturns, versus jack squat imperial evidence of national tax cutting/deficit spending. BTW, our infrastructure spending needs help. It was dreaded “deficit spending” in the Obama years, and now it’s “cut taxes and ignore infrastructure to boost the deficit” thats a good thing.
Works for me. The marginal rate is what they quote with their “highest corporate tax rate in the world” rhetoric which is used as the justification for Trickle Down 2.0, even though we’re all well aware that after deductions and subsidies most of our corporations have a tax rate less than any individual rate and for a not-insignificant number of Fortune 500 companies, a negative effective tax rate.
I’m sorry but no. When you give enormous tax breaks to the rich, and pay for it by cutting or damaging programs that benefit the poor, this is upward redistribution. Torpedoing the Obamacare mandate harms the poor, because this program helps them afford medical insurance overall. Scrapping student interest loan deductions harms the poor, because they rely more on loans for higher education. Scrapping SALT taxes erodes the local tax base that pays for public schools, in order to pay for 529 plans (mainly used by the rich) to attend private schools (also mainly used by the rich). Meanwhile the middle/lower class get a trifling tax rate deduction that doesn’t begin to put a dent in the cost of health and education.
That is straight-up income redistribution toward the wealthiest, any way you slice it. The tiny tax cut for the middle class is just political bait to distract them from the gut punch this bill delivers.
I have a question for you, on a slightly different topic. Which number do you think is larger?
A) The total amount of corporate taxes paid in 2015 by United Airlines, American Airlines, GM, Hewlett-Packard, E-Trade, Lowes, Xerox, News Corp (aka Fox News et al), Legg Mason, and Weyerhauser, with a total of about $18 billion in pre-tax profits, or…
B) The total amount of income taxes paid by the poorest 66 million Americans, generally earning less than $30,000 per household?
When Velocity makes up a straw man, it’s pretty silly to say that it is an excellent summary. If you would actually read the words of people who have responded to your question about the “transfer of wealth” question, you can see what people are actually criticizing. And it has nothing to do with whatever nonsense Velocity has decided the criticism is.
I suspect you’ve hand-picked a list of corporations that paid no corporate taxes in 2015 so the answer is B. Am I right?
I read them. I didn’t find them very convincing. I’m like Paranoid Randroid: “Maybe if you squint”.
Take HMS Irruncible’s point about the individual mandate. It “harms the poor”? Not charging them a tax penalty for choosing to forego purchasing health insurance? Again, “maybe if you squint”.
That’s not a very helpful comparison when choice B has about a hundred times more pre-tax income.
You are right. Do you think it is fair that corporations with $18 billion in profits pay no taxes, but households that may be generally flirting with the poverty line should be subject to taxes?
And on a related note, given that one of the tax bill’s central features is cutting corporate tax rates in hopes of luring more businesses away from foreign investments, do you think that is going to work?
Because in the same year HP paid zero in corporate taxes, it appears to have increased moving jobs overseas: HP Will Offshore 60% of a Unit's Jobs - Business Insider
So if the Senate proposal passes, you think that having 13 million fewer insured people is a net benefit, because they won’t be subject to the penalties? How much are those penalties, again, if you don’t mind looking it up for me?
Ok, then let me ask you this question. Who do you think pays more in taxes:
A) the corporations I listed, with their $18 billion in profits in 2015? or…
B) one American grad student of my choosing studying a STEM field at a top US university under the House bill’s proposal to tax tuition waivers as income?
You’re already squinting pretty hard if you think most people are champing at the bit to avoid being covered. And you must have squinted pretty hard to ignore the damage of selling out public education and higher education out to upper-bracket private education deductions. If you’re going to squint that hard, you may as well read the fine print.
How does that work, a business can reduce it’s rates if it pays less taxes?