Two Million People (and counting) Receiving Tax Reform Bonuses

$960 is less than $1200 even if you factor in a one time $1000 bonus then $1060 is still less than a $1200. Your most statement is still not correct AND if you are trying to create economic growth the distribution of the cut is inverse to what you would want.

By the way if you do dynamic scoring the stimulus could be even bigger which I haven't even factored in.

 

The individual tax cuts are longer than five years.

 

10 years. I converted everything to households for simplicity which would make the stimulus $12k each.

 

Now you are just making stuff up .

This is false. despite your dishonest 'conversion' that you are now claiming.

 

I originally said $6k per adult because there are roughly 250M adults. Since most of the information available about the tax cuts is per household I converted it to household. I know that math must be difficult for you so since there are roughly 125M US households holds...

1.5 trillion estimated deficit over 10 years divided by 125 millions households = $12000 per household over 10 years or $1200 per year.

Even if you want to use $960 for households making exactly the median that means everyone under that number gets far less. So no, most people will not see a tax cut greater then my fictional stimulus.

It's the same false trickle down supply side bs. If you want businesses to hire more people there needs to be a demand for their product. Giving them a tax break does not create demand.

 

Or alternatively, if you want to give businesses incentives to hire people, using tax reform, then you could allow businesses to deduct salary expenses at 2-3x the rate of actual cost, while making executive salaries non deductible.

This would be a HUGE incentive to hire workers, because they would become cheap cheap cheap.

But this was never about the worker, this was always about getting more money into rich people's hands.

 

But you didn't. Thus this statementL

you are making up said conversion after the fact.

 

Excuse me 43% (households making less than 50k) will see <$600. The next 7% will see between 600 and 960. That's still most Americans getting less than they would if it was just a 1.5 trillion stimulus.

You're trying to latch onto an error that when corrected still shows you are lying when you say most people will get more. They wont.

Those most Americans are also the same Americans that would spend every penny of that money and put it back in circulation.

 

Demand creates jobs, not tax cuts. Why do you keep peddling lies?

 

Sssshh. Don’t ruin their fun.

 

U.S. Growth Slows To 2.6 Percent Pace In The Fourth Quarter

On noes. What will Trump do? Blame Obama? Blame Hilary? Blame Mueller? Blame the FBI which is 100% controlled by the Democratic Party?

 

I guess it is a good thing for american people?

If Trump can keep this trend going, he will be a lock for 2020.

FedEx commits $3.2 billion to raise pay, expand hubs after U.S. tax overhaul

 

He's already wildly unpopular to begin with.

 

Companies have lay-offs all the time, unions or not. If you looked at the link I provided, union benefits are far higher than non-union benefits and actually the disparity between benefits is much higher than the one between wages.

It's actually not nonsense. You're simply taken anecdotal examples and extrapolated an entire opinion based on them not present in actual data like the link I presented you.

 

That certainly looks like it could be a manipulated chart. There is different y axis on the left and right yet they overlay the graphs. Please post the link where you copied the chart.

 

Because he's the kind of guy who thinks a 1000 dollars is a lot of money and has a low base level of knowledge of this area.

 

I think had we had a tax bill that didn't give all the breaks to the rich, and had tied the corporate tax rate relative to the ratio of profits to non-executive pay, we'd have actually done something to really encourage investment in our country. But that wasn't what was done - it was just a giveaway.

And yes a small percentage will trickle down to the workers (perhaps in the form of a $1,000 bonus check) representing less than 5% of the savings - oh how generous!

The idea that Fedex would invest $3.2 Billion all of a sudden after a few weeks of the passage of a bill is ludicrous. Businesses don't make massive decisions like that in weeks - they do it in months and months - if not a year. I don't think liberals are against cutting corporate taxes - at least I am not, I just don't like the WAY it was done.