Shovelhead dave
1) the 1% are paying more in taxes if they live in places like New York, California and Massachusetts, but not if you live in Florida or Texas or even New Hampshire
2) Stock buy backs were illegal up to 1982 when the SEC made them legal, I bet you didn't know that?
3)There is no such thing as "trickle down economics" no economist worth its weight in ( insert whatever) will tell it exists, your term is a pejorative term for Supply side economics
Supply side economics has its pros and cons, pros if you're in the financial sector, cons if you are paid a salary/hourly that isnt high paying.
The truth is in every administration since Reagan, certain industries and people have done well, and some people and industries have done poorly.
It depends on what one is doing for a living.
that is the truth.
1] EVERYBODY is paying more in taxes if they live in places like new york,or california,because they have a higher tax rate than a lot of the country.
A LOT of the superwealthy people that do business in these places claim that their home offices are in DIFFERENT states,though,so that they can claim a lower tax rate,or even ship their money off to foriegn countries,because they have shell offices in these countries,and dont have to pay taxes at all on it,and get reimbursed on their taxes by OUR government for the money that they are allegedly paying in taxes in those foriegn countries,while the middle class are stuck shouldering the WHOLE tax bill in those states.
[that is one of the reasons why the taxes are so high in those states in the first place!]
2]so,stock buybacks were illegal up until during ronald reagan's presidency,[the man who first introduced the theory of 'trickle down economics' to this country],when they were made legal?
[gee.....i wonder why they were made illegal in the first place???]
3]what you call them is just a matter of semantics!
'trickle down economics' are the exact same thing,whether you call them 'trickle down economics','supply side economics',or 'VOODOO economics',and they fail to work the same way,no matter what you call them,and to try to pretend that calling them by a different name matters.
OF COURSE it mattters what you do for a living when it comes to how much money you make....
the white collar financial sector ALWAYS does better than the jobs that people in the blue collar middle class have!
that is why people in the white collar financial sector DONT NEED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in tax breaks,while the blue collar middle class DESPERATELY needs them just to survive,not for MORE money to pay for their yachts,and mansions,or to put in the bank so that they can get EVEN RICHER,instead of letting the wealth 'trickle down' to the middle class,like we were all lied to,and told that it would!
THAT is why the fact that trumps tax breaks that only benefit the superwealthy 1%,when he SWORE that they would help EVERYBODY is such a dispicable lie!
if that is the only argument you can come up with to defend trump's tax cuts that raise the national deficit by BILLIONS/TTRILLIONS of dollars,and only benfit the super wealthy,and make sure that they dont have to pay their fair share of the taxes necessary to keep this country solvent,and leave the middle class stuck out,and paying EVEN MORE of their meager salaries to keep the country running,AND raise the national deficit,i think that you have lost the debate,because you wrote a LOT of stuff in your post,but NONE of it was meaningful,and was basically just white noise to try to distract people's attention from the REAL facts of how trump's tax breaks all benfit the superwealthy,and dont do ANYTHING for the middle class,because you CANT come up with a RATIONAL argument to defend them.
and,adding ANOTHER $100 BILLION DOLLARS of tax breaks for the super wealthy 1% that isnt going to benefit the middle class isnt going to benefit them either!
Edited by
shovelheaddave
on Wed 08/01/18 09:57 AM