The Trump Tax Cut: Even Worse Than You’ve Heard

Conservative said:

Look, know now that you are a partisan left wing radical who wants to prop up the Obama Administration and its failures. This thread is about Trump and his results none of which you have ever acknowledged. Keep revising history and spouting the same lies over and over again all in hopes that the more you spout the lie the more likely it is to be true

Click to expand...

The idea that anyone here is a "left wing radical" is preposterous. Nobody, especially me, is supporting policies to the left of Denmark. The thread isn't about "Trump and his results." That's why the title is: " The Trump Tax Cut: Even Worse Than You’ve Heard."

MTAtech said:

The idea that anyone here is a "left wing radical" is preposterous. Nobody, especially me, is supporting policies to the left of Denmark. The thread isn't about "Trump and his results." That's why the title is: " The Trump Tax Cut: Even Worse Than You’ve Heard."

Click to expand...

And you have offered no data to support your position nor have you refuted the data I have posted. How can the results be worse than heard when the results are being ignored by you and the left? You want to base your statement on Trump "THINKING" that the GDP growth would be 4-5% and now refuse to celebrate the 2 trillion dollar addition to GDP, 1.2 trillion of which was in 2018 making it the best second year of any President in history

MTAtech said:

Meanwhile, the GOP controlled Congress never put the constraints on Trump's spending in good times that they put on Obama in sour times.

Click to expand...

When pressed on this point, he will claim Trump deficits provide a better ROI. I'm not making this stuff up.

Conservative said:

Yep, that fat toddler has generated the best economic results in the history of this country for the first two years of any Administration. Hatred has blinded you to reality

Click to expand...

No matter how much you repeat that falsehood it still won't make it true. Trump is doing his best to reverse improving economic trends since the recession. He may well succeed.

EnigmaO01 said:

No matter how much you repeat that falsehood it still won't make it true. Trump is doing his best to reverse improving economic trends since the recession. He may well succeed.

Click to expand...

Yep, noticed how you have supported your claims by posting actual data. 304,000 jobs created in January is a continuation of that downward trend, right?

EnigmaO01 said:

No matter how much you repeat that falsehood it still won't make it true. Trump is doing his best to reverse improving economic trends since the recession. He may well succeed.

Click to expand...

Your Freudian slip is notable. "Doing his best to reverse improving economic trends" means doing his best to make things worse.

Conservative said:

Yep, that fat toddler has generated the best economic results in the history of this country for the first two years of any Administration. Hatred has blinded you to reality

Click to expand...

Actually, it wasn't the best economic results in the history of this country. Both Reagan and Clinton had better results but don't let facts stand in your way.

Moreover, he had nothing to do with it. Any gains were circumstantial, he just happened to be there -- not actually do anything. Economic growth has been occurring for years and there have been 100 months of positive job growth.

MTAtech said:

Actually, it wasn't the best economic results in the history of this country. Both Reagan and Clinton had better results but don't let facts stand in your way.

Moreover, he had nothing to do with it. Any gains were circumstantial, he just happened to be there -- not actually do anything. Economic growth has been occurring for years and there have been 100 months of positive job growth.

Click to expand...

As much as I loved Reagan you are wrong and haven't posted any data to support your claims. Reagan did double GDP but that was 2.6 trillion over 8 years, not 2 trillion over 2 years and certainly not 1.2 trillion in one year. Reagan generated almost 17 million jobs in 8 years but not 4.7 million in his first two years. Clinton didn't even come close. You seem to have a problem with actual verifiable data and prefer passing on what you are told. Treasury says you are wrong as does BLS but don't let the official data get in the way of your partisan re-write of history

You are a partisan that simply hates the private sector and Trump so you aren't going to give him credit for anything. Hatred has blinded you to reality as it is more important that you like someone vs. the results generated. Economic growth will always continue which is why the pie continues to grow giving everyone the opportunity to participate. You are your own worst enemy with that entitlement mentality

Conservative said:

Reagan did double GDP but that was 2.6 trillion over 8 years, not 2 trillion over 2 years and certainly not 1.2 trillion in one year.

Click to expand...

Comparing nominal GDP figures with a span as far back as 37 years is like comparing your great grandmother to the playmate of the year. Sure she's a sweet old lady, not even in the same stratosphere. In other words it doesn't make sense and is an invalid way of thinking. Do you understand why?

Bullseye said:

It's NOT an "article" which would imply some measure of balance; it's a OPINION ( it even says that in the URL!) PIECE from one of the most extreme left wing economist being published today.

Click to expand...

Yes, an opinion can be contained in an article. It's called an opinion article. Dear lord this country is doomed.

Kushinator said:

Comparing nominal GDP figures with a span as far back as 37 years is like comparing your great grandmother to the playmate of the year. Sure she's a sweet old lady, not even in the same stratosphere. In other words it doesn't make sense and is an invalid way of thinking. Do you understand why?

Click to expand...

The results I have posted are the official results thus stand. You continue to show how poorly informed you are and partisan.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Lakryte said:

Yes, an opinion can be contained in an article. It's called an opinion article. Dear lord this country is doomed.

Click to expand...

But the OP didn't call his quote "an OPINION ARTICLE", he called it an "article". That was my point.

Bullseye said:

But the OP didn't call his quote "an OPINION ARTICLE", he called it an "article". That was my point.

Click to expand...

Then it was a completely irrelevant point. The vast majority of articles deal with opinions, so that is implied just by saying "article." But you know that.

Lakryte said:

Then it was a completely irrelevant point. The vast majority of articles deal with opinions, so that is implied just by saying "article." But you know that.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'm not going to play word games with you.

Conservative said:

The results I have posted are the official results thus stand.

Click to expand...

It is invalid to compare non-inflation adjusted GDP and it's growth to that of other eras. You've been warned about this before and still you fail to learn from your mistakes. Try to do a better job formulating and supporting your arguments... you continue to provide nothing of value and there really isn't any excuse (people correct you constantly).

Kushinator said:

It is invalid to compare non-inflation adjusted GDP and it's growth to that of other eras. You've been warned about this before and still you fail to learn from your mistakes. Try to do a better job formulating and supporting your arguments... you continue to provide nothing of value and there really isn't any excuse (people correct you constantly).

Click to expand...

The results posted are accurate and came from bea.gov, bls.gov, and Treasury. You don't like the results, tough and quite frankly don't give a damn about your warning and have no desire to have your respect. You are in no position to correct anyone else and love how inflation in your world relates to employment and the 304,000 jobs created in January on top of the 4.7 million Trump has created in 2 years

Kushinator said:

It is invalid to compare non-inflation adjusted GDP and it's growth to that of other eras. You've been warned about this before and still you fail to learn from your mistakes. Try to do a better job formulating and supporting your arguments... you continue to provide nothing of value and there really isn't any excuse (people correct you constantly).

Click to expand...

One of many articles on the Trump vs. Obama economy and what you want to ignore. what is stunningly ignorant is the left's opinion on the economy for after calling this the worst recession since the Great Depression they ignore the worst recovery in U.S. history for when a recession is as bad as the left claimed why was the recovery so slow and poor?

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/368904-economists-agree-trump-not-obama-gets-credit-for-economy

Krugman's analysis is rather flawed. Let's focus on the first claim for now. Here we see Krugman either doesn't understand the underlying detail or is intentionally misleading the reader.

1 - The 2017 tax cuts would result in higher investment and higher wages.
Krugman was an ardent critic of the tax cuts before they were ever enacted so we don't expect him to be intellectually honest when evaluating the impact of the tax cuts after enactment. And of course he does not disappoint on this score. Krugman concedes funds were repatriated to the United States. However, he tries to convince us none of those funds have been deployed into the economy because balance on financial account did not change. Here Krugman exhibits a lack of understanding about where those funds really were before the tax cuts of 2017 and what tax restrictions existed in relation to what could be done with those funds prior to the 2017 tax reform.

Prior to the 2017 tax act, US companies had vast amounts of cash owned by foreign subsidiaries that could not be repatriated due to the tax cost of doing so. However, much of this cash was already in the United States because it was either deposited with US banks or invested in US Treasuries or similar assets. The tax code has a provision, section 956, which was enacted decades ago and which provides that if a foreign subsidiary of a US company loans its cash to that US company or invests its cash in US business assets then that cash will be treated as deemed distributed to the US company and the US company will be taxed on that deemed distribution. There were exceptions to this deemed distribution treatment for cash placed on deposit with US banks as well as other exceptions such as holding US Treasuries. Thus, US companies directed their foreign subsidiaries to deposit that cash with US banks and/or invest it in US Treasuries so that cash would be safe and earn a sensible risk-free rate of return. However, what that meant is much of that cash was already reflected in the US current account balance. Thus, when much of this cash was distributed back to the US after the 2017 tax reform was enacted it didn't impact the current account balance significantly because it was already reflected in the current account balance.

You might ask "Fine, Krugman was wrong but if the cash is just where it already was then what did the 2018 tax reform accomplish?" Well, now US companies don't have the restrictions as to the uses of the cash that they were dealing with when that cash was owned by their foreign subsidiaries. That cash is now in the US and can be used for a wide range of opportunities ranging from dividends, buybacks (which just put the cash in the hands of other investors who can put it to good use), business expansions, M&A, etc. Here we see Krugman is just plain wrong.

Conservative said:

One of many articles on the Trump vs. Obama economy and what you want to ignore. what is stunningly ignorant is the left's opinion on the economy for after calling this the worst recession since the Great Depression they ignore the worst recovery in U.S. history for when a recession is as bad as the left claimed why was the recovery so slow and poor?

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/368904-economists-agree-trump-not-obama-gets-credit-for-economy

Click to expand...

It's not an article, it's an opinion piece.

If one is inclined to give Trump credit for the economy, what specific policies were causal? We already know that the general consensus of the tax-cuts was that they were a bust for the economy -- they didn't increase investment, as promised and they had no effect on wages or hiring. We also know that the tax-cuts materialized in January 2018 and we know that 2018's job performance was worse than both 2014 and 2015, after taxes were increased.

Are there any other policies that we can think of? What is that you say -- regulation cuts? Yes, Trump began cutting regulations by executive order on day one. His first was to allow coal mines to pollute more. What was the effect on coal employment? In January 2016, coal mining employed 55,400 employees total. In January 2018, the industry employed 52,700 employees -- fewer employees while having a more poisonous environment.

MTAtech said:

It's not an article, it's an opinion piece.

If one is inclined to give Trump credit for the economy, what specific policies were causal? We already know that the general consensus of the tax-cuts was that they were a bust for the economy -- they didn't increase investment, as promised and they had no effect on wages or hiring. We also know that the tax-cuts materialized in January 2018 and we know that 2018's job performance was worse than both 2014 and 2015, after taxes were increased.

Are there any other policies that we can think of? What is that you say -- regulation cuts? Yes, Trump began cutting regulations by executive order on day one. His first was to allow coal mines to pollute more. What was the effect on coal employment? In January 2016, coal mining employed 55,400 employees total. In January 2018, the industry employed 52,700 employees -- fewer employees while having a more poisonous environment.

Click to expand...

If you bothered to read any of the articles I posted specific information is provided there as to what Trump has done but your hatred for him and desire for a massive central gov't blinds you to reality. Why don't you tell us what economic policies Obama left Trump with that generated better results than anything he had during his entire 8 years?

Kushinator said:

I forgot you aren't used to graphical analysis. This should be easier to observe the current trend:

Just so you can't claim innocence, this graph depicts the annual change from each data set. The last available set was QIII 2018, which saw a $47 billion decline YoY.

Click to expand...

I like the way you proved him wrong, and then he changed the topic.

Media_Truth said:

I like the way you proved him wrong, and then he changed the topic.

Click to expand...

I like the way you people stick up for each other even in the face of data out of context which just goes to show how partisan and biased you are. Here are the Trump results again in 2 years and 2018 Separately, refute the results doing something you have never done

Trump's results in 2 years, 2 trillion added to GDP, 4.7 million NEW jobs created, both being records set by this President for any President's first two years in office, record state and local tax revenue due to consumer spending, record charitable giving, record stock dividends to S&P shareholders, and the following actually giving Credit to Trump NOT Obama for the economy. Refute the data in the article not the messenger

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/368904-economists-agree-trump-not-obama-gets-credit-for-economy

This one is for MTA

More than two million workers have now received bonuses and or raises, with their bosses telling them the benefits are flowing from the GOP tax bill. That number will continue to grow as other companies are pressured into sharing the proceeds from lower taxes. This is a powerful and persuasive movement that is gaining momentum every day, which is probably why Democrats are so foolishly belittling the payouts.

Click to expand...

MTAtech said:

Your Freudian slip is notable. "Doing his best to reverse improving economic trends" means doing his best to make things worse.

Click to expand...

Trump is completely obstructing long enjoyed hand-in-the-till democrat treasury robbing schemes, which is why they want him dead or gone.

marke said:

Trump is completely obstructing long enjoyed hand-in-the-till democrat treasury robbing schemes, which is why they want him dead or gone.

Click to expand...

His administration is the epitome of hand-in-the-till treasury robbing schemes.

• His cabinet members make decisions based upon how they help themselves.
• His cabinet members trade stocks that benefit from their actions.
• Foreign powers specifically use his properties to bestow favor on their country.
• His own daughter made deals in China and got licensing just as her father was making decisions regarding China.

You fiction that Trump is a white knight looking after the common American, instead of the ultimate corrupt politician looking after himself, is laughable.

MTAtech said:

His administration is the epitome of hand-in-the-till treasury robbing schemes.

• His cabinet members make decisions based upon how they help themselves.
• His cabinet members trade stocks that benefit from their actions.
• Foreign powers specifically use his properties to bestow favor on their country.
• His own daughter made deals in China and got licensing just as her father was making decisions regarding China.

You fiction that Trump is a white knight looking after the common American, instead of the ultimate corrupt politician looking after himself, is laughable.

Click to expand...

I don't know who told you this crap but whoever it was left out the majority of the untold pure truth with their mixture of twisted propagandist half-truth/bloody lie junk food crappytales.