I personally do not believe this and think it is more of the I'll gladly repay you Tuesday for a hamburger today BS we are accustomed to and many actually believe. I do think that business tax cuts, that are revenue neutral, would help employment. Without this turning into a discussion about minorities I'd like to know if we could set business tax rates using a ratio that uses gross revenue and number of American jobs to produce that revenue. My thinking is this would directly tie job creation to a tax cut. Any thoughts

The "trickle down" canard has been proven false since Reagan started it. The really rich 20% own 85% of the wealth in this nation while the rest of us fight over the leftover 15%. They stick their money in overseas tax shelters, and it does NOT trickle down. Yet Republicans still try to shove this lie down our throats. Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia

Originally Posted by Guest

I personally do not believe this and think it is more of the I'll gladly repay you Tuesday for a hamburger today BS we are accustomed to and many actually believe. I do think that business tax cuts, that are revenue neutral, would help employment. Without this turning into a discussion about minorities I'd like to know if we could set business tax rates using a ratio that uses gross revenue and number of American jobs to produce that revenue. My thinking is this would directly tie job creation to a tax cut. Any thoughts

Oh paper...so naive...

It's...give me more money and I'll give you a cut...and if you won't play ball...I'll take down the whole financial system and you'll be left with nothing.

Do you think "nukes" only come in two flavors? We control the financial "nukes" too. That's what the other nukes were built for...to allow us to control the financial markets too.

Originally Posted by Guest

The "trickle down" cad has been proven false since Reagan started it. The really rich 20% own 85% of the wealth in this nation while the rest of us fight over the leftover 15%. They stick their money in overseas tax shelters, and it does NOT trickle down. Yet Republicans still try to shove this lie down our throats. Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia

Yes. And the people who benefit most from the trickle down theory are the ones who want us all to believe this is the only way our economy can work. In reality, the middle class drives the economy. A thriving middle class is consumer rich - they have the money which gives the businesses more customers. Rich business people already feed the economy. Giving them additional riches by way of tax breaks doesn't accomplish anything. But raising the minimum wage, giving middle class workers more buying power is what capitalism is all about, will help businesses thrive and will be a jobs creator.

The way the new tax code will be written will actually cause the wealthy to pay more by taking away all their tax breaks.

Originally Posted by Guest

The way the new tax code will be written will actually cause the wealthy to pay more by taking away all their tax breaks.

Ha ha ha...that'll never happen. IF they take one away...they create another. The ultra wealthy OWN the government. They put the people there who run it.

Originally Posted by Guest

Ha ha ha...that'll never happen. IF they take one away...they create another. The ultra wealthy OWN the government. They put the people there who run it.

Yes, who would want successful people leading our country? After all, everyone wants to be led by losers.

If you are an unsuccessful lawyer in real life, become a politician. Kind of like the paraphrased saying: those that can, do. Those that can't, teach.

Originally Posted by Guest

Yes, who would want successful people leading our country? After all, everyone wants to be led by losers.

If you are an unsuccessful lawyer in real life, become a politician. Kind of like the paraphrased saying: those that can, do. Those that can't, teach.

But that's NOT how it works.

Originally Posted by Guest

The way the new tax code will be written will actually cause the wealthy to pay more by taking away all their tax breaks.

The standard by which the Trump tax plan should be judged is the standard that the Trump administration itself has set.
“There will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said shortly after the election. “My plan is for the working people,” President Trump said yesterday. “I don’t benefit.”
None of that is true. It’s the latest disturbing example of politicians telling falsehoods about a proposed policy. Trump has done so repeatedly, and now members of Congress are doing it more often, too. These aren’t mere exaggerations or truth shadings; they are often just lies. -NYT

Originally Posted by Guest

The standard by which the Trump tax plan should be judged is the standard that the Trump administration itself has set.
“There will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said shortly after the election. “My plan is for the working people,” President Trump said yesterday. “I don’t benefit.”
None of that is true. It’s the latest disturbing example of politicians telling falsehoods about a proposed policy. Trump has done so repeatedly, and now members of Congress are doing it more often, too. These aren’t mere exaggerations or truth shadings; they are often just lies. -NYT

It's pretty easy to accuse one of lying if your audience does not have all the facts. The president has often been accused of lying and then later found to be telling the truth. No matter what the President does, there will be those that say he is doing it only for himself. In most cases, that is because politicians frequently enter politics broke and leave rich. This president has no need to make money by playing in politics and has even given up a lot. Some of his cabinet have taken their positions and refused salaries. It makes one wonder why the opposition dwells on cutting down on these points, rather than examining and discussing policies and issues. An adult can be on opposing sports league team and still find views that they both agree upon. Why can't a two party system find common ground?

Originally Posted by Paper1

I personally do not believe this and think it is more of the I'll gladly repay you Tuesday for a hamburger today BS we are accustomed to and many actually believe. I do think that business tax cuts, that are revenue neutral, would help employment. Without this turning into a discussion about minorities I'd like to know if we could set business tax rates using a ratio that uses gross revenue and number of American jobs to produce that revenue. My thinking is this would directly tie job creation to a tax cut. Any thoughts

Hooray for tax cuts.

Originally Posted by Guest

The way the new tax code will be written will actually cause the wealthy to pay more by taking away all their tax breaks.

Evidently you don't read

Originally Posted by Guest

It's pretty easy to accuse one of lying if your audience does not have all the facts. The president has often been accused of lying and then later found to be telling the truth.

Ok, just when has Trump been shown to tell the truth after he has lied.....over 1000 so far....

Originally Posted by Guest

No matter what the President does, there will be those that say he is doing it only for himself. In most cases, that is because politicians frequently enter politics broke and leave rich. This president has no need to make money by playing in politics and has even given up a lot.

Analysts have shown that the "new" tax plan will benefit Trump, his businesses, and his family in the $billions. So what if he does not "enter broke and leave rich", he is already rich, and will leave richer

Originally Posted by Guest

Some of his cabinet have taken their positions and refused salaries. It makes one wonder why the opposition dwells on cutting down on these points, rather than examining and discussing policies and issues. An adult can be on opposing sports league team and still find views that they both agree upon. Why can't a two party system find common ground?

It has been an obstructionist Republican party for the past 5 years that has not leant itself to "bipartisan" involvement. Perfect example is this new "tax" plan, which was driven through Congress without hearings, debate, or any involvement by the political opposition. And, by the way, over 70% of the American population OPPOSE this bill. Other examples include the obstruction of a Supreme Court nominee by Obama, the rendering of a government shutdown by Republican inactivity to pass a budget, just to name a few . True adults actually discuss things before a decision is made....

If the tax cut will pay for itself why don't we increase the cuts 10X so we all become rich. Trickle down is fake news. Last year I paid 66k federal tax on 300k of income. I didn't vote for the president but I guess I can thank those who did for thinking I need a 6% increase in income. Look at federal spending. When half of you budget expense is SS and Medicare and you need to cut spending it doesn't help to cut something that is 3% you need to cut where you biggest expense is. Future for spending on seniors doesn't look good. So if you want to support the presidents feeling that I need more money I will be happy to put that money in my account.

Originally Posted by Guest

If the tax cut will pay for itself why don't we increase the cuts 10X so we all become rich. Trickle down is fake news. Last year I paid 66k federal tax on 300k of income. I didn't vote for the president but I guess I can thank those who did for thinking I need a 6% increase in income. Look at federal spending. When half of you budget expense is SS and Medicare and you need to cut spending it doesn't help to cut something that is 3% you need to cut where you biggest expense is. Future for spending on seniors doesn't look good. So if you want to support the presidents feeling that I need more money I will be happy to put that money in my account.

SS and Medicare ARE NOT part of the Federal Budget. Learn the facts.

Half the budget is MILITARY