Guaranteed to Increase the Debt: Jeb's and The Donald's Tax Plans

jpn · Sep 28, 2015

When Chris Wallace of Fox "News" asked Jeb! about his tax plan that will slash taxes for the already rich, Jeb just shrugged his shoulders:

The simple fact is 1 percent of people pay 40 percent of all the taxes. And so, of course, tax cuts for everybody is going to generate more for people that are paying a lot more. I mean that’s just the way it is.

Ha! Yeah, nothing you can do when you slash the top tax rate from 39.6% to 28%!. That's just the way it is :shrug: Jeb and all his rich buddies will just get a ****-load richer and the nation will get screwed again. What can you do? :shrug:

Meanwhile, over at The Donald's clown act, here's what he proposes:

Cut the top marginal rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent

Eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax

Eliminate the estate tax

Cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent

But he claims that he'll pay more tax under this proposal mostly because of undisclosed, undefined loopholes that he's going to close. :lamo

Funny how all these Republicans are extremely exact on what and where they will cut taxes and by how much, but when it comes to paying for these huge revenue-losing changes, they get all mysterious and vague.

David_N · Sep 28, 2015

"itll trickle down eventually!"

Chomsky · Sep 28, 2015

Always the same crap from these guys: unpaid tax cuts for corps & their rich buddies!

"Whisky, Tango, Foxtrot"!

Chocolate · Sep 29, 2015

Can someone who agrees with his tax plan explain it to me? if the USA is in debt how is cutting taxes going to help? Are the american loop holes that massive? Is there any data that suggests this is true? is it kind of like the tax evasion problem in Greece?

Thanks for any answers it really makes no sense to me. Though even for the rich 40% seems high maybe 5% less would be good but 25% is too low.

Chomsky · Sep 29, 2015

jpn said:
When Chris Wallace of Fox "News" asked Jeb! about his tax plan that will slash taxes for the already rich, Jeb just shrugged his shoulders:

Ha! Yeah, nothing you can do when you slash the top tax rate from 39.6% to 28%!. That's just the way it is :shrug: Jeb and all his rich buddies will just get a ****-load richer and the nation will get screwed again. What can you do? :shrug:

Meanwhile, over at The Donald's clown act, here's what he proposes:

Cut the top marginal rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent
Eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax
Eliminate the estate tax
Cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent

But he claims that he'll pay more tax under this proposal mostly because of undisclosed, undefined loopholes that he's going to close. :lamo

Funny how all these Republicans are extremely exact on what and where they will cut taxes and by how much, but when it comes to paying for these huge revenue-losing changes, they get all mysterious and vague.

*bolded for relevance

It's called fiscal irresponsibility. IOW, spending money you don't have.

And GW was the last in a long line.

They fought tooth-and-nail to keep spending on them too, threatening to shut-down the government - until President Obama stared-them-down & put the kabash on them in 2013; but only on those for the top tiers.

They're sneaky, too. They use "The Byrd Rule", which means they can use the reconciliation process to avoid filibuster, but then they have to figure out a way to not allow the cuts to sunset after a decade (that's when they ran into an Obama problem).

Chomsky · Sep 29, 2015

Chocolate said:
Can someone who agrees with his tax plan explain it to me? if the USA is in debt how is cutting taxes going to help? Are the american loop holes that massive? Is there any data that suggests this is true? is it kind of like the tax evasion problem in Greece?

Thanks for any answers it really makes no sense to me. Though even for the rich 40% seems high maybe 5% less would be good but 25% is too low.

Just remember:

When analyzing tax structures, it's the 'effective' rates that count - not the 'marginal'.

American marginal tax rates are often used in arguments as a smoke screen.

For example: our marginal corporate rates are often argued by the 'reduce taxes' crowd as higher than that of other countries (true), but if you examine the effective corporate tax rates you'll see we're actually just on the lower end of the bell of the OECD countries (meaning slightly lower corporate taxes paid than most countries).

Kal'Stang · Sep 29, 2015

Guaranteed to Increase the Debt: Jeb's and The Donald's Tax Plans

Wait wait wait wait.....not to long ago, before all this campaigning started, liberals loved to dismiss the debt saying that having a debt doesn't mean a thing. What happened to that mantra?

Beaudreaux · Sep 29, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Wait wait wait wait.....not to long ago, before all this campaigning started, liberals loved to dismiss the debt saying that having a debt doesn't mean a thing. What happened to that mantra?

You're interrupting a perfectly good rant. Shhhh...

iguanaman · Sep 29, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Wait wait wait wait.....not to long ago, before all this campaigning started, liberals loved to dismiss the debt saying that having a debt doesn't mean a thing. What happened to that mantra?

Wait.... So Republicans really don't care about the debt when they are the ones running it up? That is nothing new. Remember "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter"?

Kal'Stang · Sep 29, 2015

iguanaman said:
Wait.... So Republicans really don't care about the debt when they are the ones running it up? That is nothing new. Remember "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter"?

Apparently. Just shows how much our politicians actually care about the debt. Just enough to use it as a political card and that's it. Neither side actually cares about the debt one way or another. They just want to score political points.

MTAtech · Sep 29, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Wait wait wait wait.....not to long ago, before all this campaigning started, liberals loved to dismiss the debt saying that having a debt doesn't mean a thing. What happened to that mantra?

That isn't what anyone on the left said. What was said was when the economy is depressed, it's ok to run a short-term debt to boost consumption. Running a deficit under the rate of economic growth is ok too. But that's not what Jeb! or Trump are proposing. They are proposing the same tax-plan that Republicans always propose. Then, when it creates huge deficits, they'll offer to balance it by cutting Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.

We've seen this movie before.

SlevinKelevra · Sep 29, 2015

revenue neutrality- who cares about that?

QuadpolarNutjob · Sep 29, 2015

you fear trump because he threatens the establishment agenda, which is supported by both mainstream republicans and democrats.

TRUMP 2016

YES WE CAN!

ttwtt78640 · Sep 29, 2015

Kal'Stang said:
Apparently. Just shows how much our politicians actually care about the debt. Just enough to use it as a political card and that's it. Neither side actually cares about the debt one way or another. They just want to score political points.

That is the sad fact in a nutshell. It is far less politically painful to borrow and spend (to buy votes) than it is to tax and spend (to buy those votes). Deficits are not hard to understand at all - they are the result of spending more than one dares to take out of circulation (divert/redistrinute) via taxation.

The real problem is what that borrowing is beiing spent on - the govenrnent now pretends that spendiing to cover basic consumption (funding entitlements) is an "investment". The return on that "investment" is simply a high re-election rate for congress critters in exchage for an ever increasing national debt. Even at the current record low interest rates, the interest expense on our national debt is now 7% of total federal spending - more than we spend on infrastructure maintenance and improvements combined which are real investments.

QuadpolarNutjob · Sep 29, 2015

MTAtech said:
That isn't what anyone on the left said. What was said was when the economy is depressed, it's ok to run a short-term debt to boost consumption. Running a deficit under the rate of economic growth is ok too. But that's not what Jeb! or Trump are proposing. They are proposing the same tax-plan that Republicans always propose. Then, when it creates huge deficits, they'll offer to balance it by cutting Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.

We've seen this movie before.

keep desperately defending the democratic party, it doesn't matter, we're taking back America.

Singe · Sep 29, 2015

Guaranteed to Increase the Debt: Jeb's and The Donald's Tax Plans

The debt hasn't decreased since the 1950s. Why would the next 60 years be any different?

KLATTU · Sep 29, 2015

Every Republican tax-reform plan should be rooted in this reality: If you are going to have federal spending that is 21 percent of GDP, then you can have a.) taxes that are 21 percent of GDP; b.) deficits. There is no c. If, on the other hand, you have a credible program for reducing spending to 17 or 18 percent of GDP, which is where taxes have been coming in, please do share it. The problem with the Growth Fairy model of balancing budgets is that while economic growth would certainly reduce federal spending as a share of GDP if spending were kept constant, there is zero evidence that the government of these United States has the will or the inclination to enact serious spending controls when times are good (Uncork the champagne!) or when times are bad (Wicked austerity! We must have stimulus!). So even if we buy Jeb Bush’s happy talk about growth, or Donald Trump’s, the idea that spending is just going to magically sit there, inert, while the economy zips forward and the tax coffers fill up, is delusional. There are no tax cuts when the government is running deficits, only tax deferrals.

Read more at: National Review Wine Club Special Offer: Get 4 Exceptional Wines for Just $30 Plus 1¢ Shipping - Save $93! | National Review Online

So there you have it. Neither party has a fiscal plan that is within a light year of reality.

MTAtech · Sep 29, 2015

MTAtech said:
That isn't what anyone on the left said. What was said was when the economy is depressed, it's ok to run a short-term debt to boost consumption. Running a deficit under the rate of economic growth is ok too. But that's not what Jeb! or Trump are proposing. They are proposing the same tax-plan that Republicans always propose. Then, when it creates huge deficits, they'll offer to balance it by cutting Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.

We've seen this movie before.

QuadpolarNutjob said:

keep desperately defending the democratic party, it doesn't matter, we're taking back America.

Click to expand...

Odd, I don't see anywhere in my post where I mentioned the Democratic Party. What I was defending was something called macroeconomics. Sorry if the concept is foreign to you.

eohrnberger · Sep 29, 2015

Singe said:
The debt hasn't decreased since the 1950s. Why would the next 60 years be any different?

Yeah, this is where I am on the federal government debt.

Until the political leaders in DC, so executive and legislative, can control their spending, to say 'No' to those who insist they deserve spending for some reason, until they stop believing that government is a cure for all ills from everyone, it'll never go down.

I also believe that this is a ticking time bomb, one that's going to explode at some point unless dealt with and reduced, a threat to future fiscal and economic stability.

MTAtech · Sep 29, 2015

KLATTU said:
Every Republican tax-reform plan should be rooted in this reality: If you are going to have federal spending that is 21 percent of GDP, then you can have a.) taxes that are 21 percent of GDP; b.) deficits. There is no c. If, on the other hand, you have a credible program for reducing spending to 17 or 18 percent of GDP, which is where taxes have been coming in, please do share it. The problem with the Growth Fairy model of balancing budgets is that while economic growth would certainly reduce federal spending as a share of GDP if spending were kept constant, there is zero evidence that the government of these United States has the will or the inclination to enact serious spending controls when times are good (Uncork the champagne!) or when times are bad (Wicked austerity! We must have stimulus!). So even if we buy Jeb Bush’s happy talk about growth, or Donald Trump’s, the idea that spending is just going to magically sit there, inert, while the economy zips forward and the tax coffers fill up, is delusional. There are no tax cuts when the government is running deficits, only tax deferrals.

Read more at: National Review Wine Club Special Offer: Get 4 Exceptional Wines for Just $30 Plus 1¢ Shipping - Save $93! | National Review Online

So there you have it. Neither party has a fiscal plan that is within a light year of reality.

I think you posted the wrong link. The one you posted was an ad for wine.

There is nothing wrong with having a growth program to have economic growth outstrip budget deficits. The problem is that Jeb! hasn't outline a plan, besides the tired tax-cuts will create wealth meme, that will actually produce growth.

MTAtech · Sep 29, 2015

eohrnberger said:
Yeah, this is where I am on the federal government debt.

Until the political leaders in DC, so executive and legislative, can control their spending, to say 'No' to those who insist they deserve spending for some reason, until they stop believing that government is a cure for all ills from everyone, it'll never go down.

I also believe that this is a ticking time bomb, one that's going to explode at some point unless dealt with and reduced, a threat to future fiscal and economic stability.

Debt doesn't have to go to zero. Deficits just need to be below growth as a p% of GDP.

KLATTU · Sep 29, 2015

MTAtech said:
I think you posted the wrong link. The one you posted was an ad for wine.

There is nothing wrong with having a growth program to have economic growth outstrip budget deficits. The problem is that Jeb! hasn't outline a plan, besides the tired tax-cuts will create wealth meme, that will actually produce growth.

the link directs one to the nro website where that article can be found.

eohrnberger · Sep 29, 2015

MTAtech said:
Debt doesn't have to go to zero. Deficits just need to be below growth as a p% of GDP.

Depends if you see debt interest payment as lost money or not. Wouldn't those payments be better spent in the general fund rather than on interest?

ludin · Sep 29, 2015

David_N said:
"itll trickle down eventually!"

let me know when the government gets you rich. I haven't seen anyone become rich yet that lives on a government social program.

GunFora · Sep 29, 2015

jpn said:
When Chris Wallace of Fox "News" asked Jeb! about his tax plan that will slash taxes for the already rich, Jeb just shrugged his shoulders:

Ha! Yeah, nothing you can do when you slash the top tax rate from 39.6% to 28%!. That's just the way it is :shrug: Jeb and all his rich buddies will just get a ****-load richer and the nation will get screwed again. What can you do? :shrug:

Meanwhile, over at The Donald's clown act, here's what he proposes:

Cut the top marginal rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent
Eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax
Eliminate the estate tax
Cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent

But he claims that he'll pay more tax under this proposal mostly because of undisclosed, undefined loopholes that he's going to close. :lamo

Funny how all these Republicans are extremely exact on what and where they will cut taxes and by how much, but when it comes to paying for these huge revenue-losing changes, they get all mysterious and vague.

$.40 out of every dollar they earn goes to the govt. How can you or anyone think that exorbitant confiscatory taxes are acceptable?

Guaranteed to Increase the Debt: Jeb's and The Donald's Tax Plans

jpn

Retired Navy Commander

David_N

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Chocolate

Well-known member

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Kal'Stang

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend

iguanaman

Kal'Stang

MTAtech

SlevinKelevra

Sage

QuadpolarNutjob

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong

QuadpolarNutjob

Singe

Member

KLATTU

MTAtech

eohrnberger

MTAtech

MTAtech

KLATTU

eohrnberger

ludin

GunFora