• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

538: The GOP Tax Cuts Are Even More Unpopular Than Past Tax Hikes

ludin said:
They kicked and howled over the Reagan tax reforms but the end result is that everyone was better off.
Median income rose 4K dollars. People from lower quintiles jumped two or three.

Amazing what happens when more people have more money in their pockets. Not to mention the government brought in more money because of it.
Click to expand...

Tax cuts reduce revenues. If you're playing word games, fine, but we don't need to pretend there is a Tax Santa Clause out there to support lower tax rates. That's delusion, a lie. You can just support spending cuts if you want to be intellectually honest.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yes the GOP leadership and budget wonks really wanted that magic 20% but compromised. So I suspect the final version will be something close to what you are describing here.

I should have mentioned that about 15% of the public approved of Reagan's tax bill before it was voted on and put into effect. But that did change. He won 49 of the 50 states in the next election and almost got Mondale's Minnesota too. :) A hostile opposition and media can't fool folks into thinking things are terrible when they just aren't.
Click to expand...

Can you cite a source for that bolded claim? This one says the Reagan tax cuts (1981) had a net approval rating of +25, or 51% for, 26% against. Doesn't get much better than that with major legislation like a tax bill.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gop-tax-cuts-are-even-more-unpopular-than-past-tax-hikes/

Gallup's polling at the time put approval of TRA 86 at 28-15, with most undecided (16%) or believed it would not make much difference (41%).

From the link: "Gallup's final measure of public support for the bill in September 1986 found 39% of Americans approving, 33% disapproving and 29% unsure." That's net positive.

Bottom line is I just don't believe that any tax bill passed in the Reagan era polled that low, and the reason is they were all bipartisan deals, requiring a Democratically controlled House to pass those bills, and there is no reason for Democrats to fall on their sword for a tax bill that polled like the popularity of rats.
 
AlbqOwl said:
The growth production of any kind of change in tax policy generally levels off after awhile and it is no guarantee that there won't be an inevitable recession from time to time. The leveling off point, however, is almost always going to be significantly higher than where it started. And there was still the longest sustained period of growth in the nation's history up to that point. After 8 years of declining incomes, unhealthy increase in the idle work force, President Trump's policies have regenerated consumer and business confidence, but we still really need a jump start of the economy to get us booming again.
Click to expand...

You're must making up statistics.

Or, if you're not, cite some data to support those claims. Thanks!
 
RAMOSS said:
And the cost of living went up 5 times faster than the medium income. It shift the wealth from them middle class to the ultra rich.
Click to expand...

why are so many of the ultra-rich big fans of more government and more taxation>
 
JasperL said:
Tax cuts reduce revenues. If you're playing word games, fine, but we don't need to pretend there is a Tax Santa Clause out there to support lower tax rates. That's delusion, a lie. You can just support spending cuts if you want to be intellectually honest.
Click to expand...

tax cuts always increase the money available to the people who make it. tax cuts don't always decrease government revenues.
 
AlbqOwl said:
There has been complete consultation with the Democrats and they could offer any amendments they wanted to offer. Partisanship wasn't a blood sport in the 1980's as it is now though it was the drubbing the Democrats took in the 1980's that I think was the beginning of the extreme partisan contentiousness that we have now. And the Tax Reform Act of 1986 is the one most people are using to compare with the current one. In fact it was Reagan's 1981 and 1983 efforts that were the first phases of the overall overhaul of the tax policy during the Reagan years. It was those that earned him overwhelming support in the 1984 election. The 1986 tax bill was in his second term.

And no, Reagan had at most about 15% public approval rating for his proposed tax policy in his first term.
Click to expand...

There has been virtually no consultation with Democrats. They're passing it under reconciliation, with no hearings, and a very limited amount of time for Democrats to propose amendments in rapid fire and get them voted down rapid fire. There are no democrats in the rooms now where tax reform is being debated. This is a GOP effort 100%, as designed. So that's false.

And you're just misstating the Reagan tax bills. Here's a summary: https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/tax-analysis/Documents/WP-81.pdf

ERTA - 1981 was a big tax cut - $111B/year average over 4 years. But TEFRA 1982 was a big tax increase - $38B average first 4 years. The changes in 1983 were increases in SS taxes, and reductions in SS benefits, so doubtful those drive public SUPPORT for Reagan....

And the tax cuts in 1981 had 2-1 public support....
 
TurtleDude said:
tax cuts always increase the money available to the people who make it. tax cuts don't always decrease government revenues.
Click to expand...

If you want to cite credible evidence that we can GROW government by cutting tax rates, be my guest. I've never seen it, and you can't even find conservative economists who will back up the existence of a Tax Santa Clause.
 
JasperL said:
If you want to cite credible evidence that we can GROW government by cutting tax rates, be my guest. I've never seen it, and you can't even find conservative economists who will back up the existence of a Tax Santa Clause.
Click to expand...
From an economic standpoint, the conservative argument is that 'taxes are making people/businesses go Galt. If we just lower taxes, people will work more and produce more.' The overall argument is that the current tax-rates are above the marginal utility curve and lowering rates would draw more revenue. Unfortunately, for this argument, rates are no where near the rate that discourages economic activity.
 
JasperL said:
If you want to cite credible evidence that we can GROW government by cutting tax rates, be my guest. I've never seen it, and you can't even find conservative economists who will back up the existence of a Tax Santa Clause.
Click to expand...

who in God's name wants to GROW government.
 
GDViking said:
Welfare socialist state are you ****ing kidding? My state just gave three billion dollars to a foreign company. You could give ever citizen of the state 600,000.00 for that.

That is socialist welfare!
Oh did I mention they also made all building costs tax exempt?
Click to expand...

You live in a state with 5,000 residents?

$3B / $600,000 = 5,000

Maybe you could give them each six hunnit bucks, but not six hunnit thousand bucks.
 
RAMOSS said:
Well, ask Mr Soros and Warren Buffet.
Click to expand...

I know the answer, I was seeing if some of our big government fans know why they want to "pay more taxes"
 
JasperL said:
Tax cuts reduce revenues. If you're playing word games, fine, but we don't need to pretend there is a Tax Santa Clause out there to support lower tax rates. That's delusion, a lie. You can just support spending cuts if you want to be intellectually honest.
Click to expand...

If you only knew how things worked.

No word games at all. Tax revenue increased.

Tax revenues are generated by economic activity. By promoting more economic activity more tax revenue is generated.
Letting people keep more of their money generates economic activity. Same with businesses.

We know you are not being honest.
 
TurtleDude said:
I know the answer, I was seeing if some of our big government fans know why they want to "pay more taxes"
Click to expand...

Those guys are the biggest users of the tax system ever.
Until they reject itemiZing and take the standard deduction only
They have 0 leg to stand on.
 
MTAtech said:
From an economic standpoint, the conservative argument is that 'taxes are making people/businesses go Galt. If we just lower taxes, people will work more and produce more.' The overall argument is that the current tax-rates are above the marginal utility curve and lowering rates would draw more revenue. Unfortunately, for this argument, rates are no where near the rate that discourages economic activity.
Click to expand...

No, the conservative argument is that its your money and you know how to spend it better than the govt does. Which results in a better economic impact. Capitalism is a proven concept.
 
MTAtech said:
There were double digit interest rates because the Fed intentionally raised interest rates to combat inflation. The economy was weak as a result of raising rates. The point is that it was self-inflicted.

Moreover, Reagan cut taxes in 1981 not 1983. The economy stayed down for the next two years. 1983 is when the economy turned around, precisely when the Fed took its foot off the brakes.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I remember the history differently. Reagan signed the largest or at least one of the largest tax increases in history in 1981 or at least that is when was debated. I'm not sure exactly which month it was finalized. It kicked in in 1982 with disastrous results. The tax cut didn't not come until 1983.

ACA_Tax_Constant_Dollars1.png
 
JasperL said:
Can you cite a source for that bolded claim? This one says the Reagan tax cuts (1981) had a net approval rating of +25, or 51% for, 26% against. Doesn't get much better than that with major legislation like a tax bill.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gop-tax-cuts-are-even-more-unpopular-than-past-tax-hikes/

Gallup's polling at the time put approval of TRA 86 at 28-15, with most undecided (16%) or believed it would not make much difference (41%).

From the link: "Gallup's final measure of public support for the bill in September 1986 found 39% of Americans approving, 33% disapproving and 29% unsure." That's net positive.

Bottom line is I just don't believe that any tax bill passed in the Reagan era polled that low, and the reason is they were all bipartisan deals, requiring a Democratically controlled House to pass those bills, and there is no reason for Democrats to fall on their sword for a tax bill that polled like the popularity of rats.
Click to expand...

No, I don't have a source. I am drawing from memory--I was a Democrat at the time as were most of my group and we all thought it was nuts--and also that was cited in a recent discussion I saw television, but cannot remember what channel or who was discussing it.
 
ludin said:
Those guys are the biggest users of the tax system ever.
Until they reject itemiZing and take the standard deduction only
They have 0 leg to stand on.
Click to expand...

big government liberals want higher taxes to grow a government they do or plan on running. Higher tax rates also make it harder for those who are merely rich to get to the uber rich plateau. Same with the death taxes. Death taxes are pushed by the nouveau rich tech barons as a weapon against old established wealth
 
AlbqOwl said:
The tax cuts was what made it possible to mediate those things.
Click to expand...

And could just as easily correlate the reduction of interest rates starting in '82 (wholly within control of the Fed) allowed credit to be more readily available. Followed by showing that at about that time, consumer credit debts started to increase. Now, the tax reductions may have increased consumer confidence somewhat, making the assumption of consumer credit more palpable, but a couple hundred extra bucks a year in Joe Average's pocket isn't what kick started the economy.

Tax cuts didn't do anything to mitigate the double digit interest rates or double digit inflation. And mitigating the interest rates and inflation could have very well gotten rid of the stagnant growth and high unemployment without tax cuts.
 
Last edited:
jonny5 said:
No, the conservative argument is that its your money and you know how to spend it better than the govt does. Which results in a better economic impact. Capitalism is a proven concept.
Click to expand...

modern leftist thought is skeptical if not downright cynical of people in general. it holds that an enlightened government of the "best and the brightest" should run the lives of everyone because individuals won't "do the right thing". Its control freak nonsense but it explains why they think the government should have more and more of your money
 
TurtleDude said:
who in God's name wants to GROW government.
Click to expand...

That's what YOU are arguing tax cuts allow - bigger government, more spending.

I agree it's a dumb argument, totally contradicted by the overwhelming evidence that tax cuts REDUCE revenues, but I'm not the one making it.
 
ludin said:
If you only knew how things worked.

No word games at all. Tax revenue increased.

Tax revenues are generated by economic activity. By promoting more economic activity more tax revenue is generated.
Letting people keep more of their money generates economic activity. Same with businesses.

We know you are not being honest.
Click to expand...

I've debated this point many times with you. I know how things work, and I know there is no such thing as a Tax Santa Clause, a free lunch, Tax Fairy, Tax Tree that sprouts more dollars as rates come down, etc...... And so, tax rate cuts lower revenue.

And Tax Revenue = Tax Rate X Tax Base, so both economic activity and the rate matter. It's math.
 
AlbqOwl said:
No, I don't have a source. I am drawing from memory--I was a Democrat at the time as were most of my group and we all thought it was nuts--and also that was cited in a recent discussion I saw television, but cannot remember what channel or who was discussing it.
Click to expand...

OK, so you were part of the 26%. That's fine but you were outnumbered 2-1 by people who supported the tax cuts. That's what the record shows anyway, and it makes sense because, again, there is no reason for Democrats in the House who were required to pass that big 1981 tax cut to support a Reagan initiative that polled so badly, and they didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom