GOP TAX PLAN

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I have yet to see a single credible analysis (You should have stopped here. Economic forecasts are notoriously unreliable.)

that shows long-term growth. Everything is based on faith.

It's based on historical evidence. Cutting taxes, especially on the private business sector, has led to economic growth, which created a rise in jobs and income.

Yes, let's borrow even more money to fund the elite. Feed the sparrows by feeding the horses right?

It's not about sparrows and horses. They don't have the ability to generate wealth. They don't have individual entrepreneurs. They don't have a distributive tax system, nor a government which spends more than it has. They operate under a herd instinct in which individual freedom does not exist. They don't borrow money nor have an elaborate welfare system in which half the herd can exist without expending labor and so be fed and cared for by the other half.

It's about either expending labor to feed a dominating over-structure with more than half of the money created by the entrepreneurs which can then be redistributed in ways that ensure its domination. Or about reducing the feed of the over-structure, and limiting its ability to dominate a much freer society of individuals.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

It's based on historical evidence. Cutting taxes, especially on the private business sector, has led to economic growth, which created a rise in jobs and income..

Bingo.

Spence, you work in finance in some capacity, yes? I know I struggle to come to terms with that, but I believe it's true?

What happened to the economy, after Clinton/Gingrich slashed taxes? Please remind us?

Cutting taxes doesn't always work (didn't work in Kansas). Increasing taxes doesn't always work (CT is on the brink of insolvency).

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bingo.

Spence, you work in finance in some capacity, yes? I know I struggle to come to terms with that, but I believe it's true?

What happened to the economy, after Clinton/Gingrich slashed taxes? Please remind us?

Cutting taxes doesn't always work (didn't work in Kansas). Increasing taxes doesn't always work (CT is on the brink of insolvency).

I believe he is a snake oil salesman of sorts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, you work in finance in some capacity, yes? I know I struggle to come to terms with that, but I believe it's true?

I work primarily with Fortune 500 manufacturing executives to help them understand how capital investments in technology can best drive innovation and operational excellence.

Front row seat.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I work primarily with Fortune 500 manufacturing executives to help them understand how capital investments in technology can best drive innovation and operational excellence.

Front row seat.

So what do you tell them, to turn over operations to the masses and to raise minimum wage? Everything you must tell them, spurs in the face if everything you profess to believe here.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

It's based on historical evidence. Cutting taxes, especially on the private business sector, has led to economic growth, which created a rise in jobs and income.

There is no explicit correlation between cutting taxes and growth. It is a myth.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by spence

There is no explicit correlation between cutting taxes and growth. It is a myth.





Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.politico.com/interactive...e-cut-wealthy/


The Congressional Research Service published a paper in 2012 that found no correlation between top tax rates and economic growth. Congressional Republicans protested the findings, and the service briefly withdrew the paper.

Republicans argued that the CRS paper had methodological errors, namely that it didn't account for the long-term benefits of tax rate cuts. The paper looked only at effects on growth within the first year of the cuts.

POLITICO looked at each time the country changed the top income tax rate and the following five years of GDP per capita growth rate. The results are similar to the CRS findings: changing the top income tax rate does not have a predictable effect on economic growth.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

https://www.politico.com/interactive...e-cut-wealthy/


The Congressional Research Service published a paper in 2012 that found no correlation between top tax rates and economic growth. Congressional Republicans protested the findings, and the service briefly withdrew the paper.

Republicans argued that the CRS paper had methodological errors, namely that it didn't account for the long-term benefits of tax rate cuts. The paper looked only at effects on growth within the first year of the cuts.

POLITICO looked at each time the country changed the top income tax rate and the following five years of GDP per capita growth rate. The results are similar to the CRS findings: changing the top income tax rate does not have a predictable effect on economic growth.

Obama referred to published federal studies, which said that Obamacare would save each family $2,500. Maybe tomorrow, they'll publish a paper saying the earth is flat. I'm not impressed.

If Hilary had won, and she was proposing tax cuts, Spence would be all for it.

As long as the feds have enough to do the things they are supposed to do, it cannot be a bad thing to take no more.

Tax cuts can be followed by a recession (or growth), it doesn't mean the cuts caused the recession (or growth). There's too any moving pieces. But who here, chooses to pay more taxes than we have to?

Being slightly above middle class here in CT, I presume I'll be paying more since I can no longer deduct my asinine CT taxes. If poorer people are helped by doubling the standard deduction, and businesses are helped by slashing the corporate tax rate, I'll take it.

I'd like to see businesses keep more of their income (and this become instantly more valuable), I'd like to see some of the money parked overseas come back here, and for sure I'd like to see people below the middle, (1) keep more of their income, and (2) have better potential for wage increases. I don't know if this plan does that, neither does anyone else.