What exactly is your point, and why exactly do you keep quoting me to fail to address what I'm saying?

We get it, you like Biden, you hate Trump. You support high corporate taxes and deficit spending. That's perfectly fine.

What does ANY of that have to do with the fiscal irresponsibility of introducing bills that would be based entirely on deficit spending? How does it address the $500 Billion per year we waste on interest payments on the debt? You're super focused on legislation passed under Trump, but none of that is the focus of either this topic OR my posts.

Let's say, just for a moment, that Trump's tax cuts are reversed, and the corporate tax rate goes back from 21% to the prior 39.85%. The overall impact on Federal revenues? Corporate tax accounts once again for 11.5% of federal revenues, as opposed to 7% of federal revenues. For a while. Long term, it would cause businesses to leave the US for more friendly economies. Note that at 21% corporate tax rate, we're already above the European average. At 39%, we'd be back to having the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. I do get that from a German perspective, that'd be great, as your effective corporate tax rate is between 30-33%, and you'd become more attractive to businesses that currently cater to the US. But how exactly would this benefit the US, US jobs, or for that matter, US infrastructure, when the long term impact will be that companies leave the nation the same way they're currently leaving states like New York and California?

what exactly don't you get? i made the point that republicans supported a bill that predictably was a massive net loss and further ballooned the deficit to benefit their donors and corporations, but opposed a bill to benefit the people in a time of extraordinary crisis, citing alleged fiscal concerns (which they mysteriously didn't have for trump's pork-laden covid bill btw). i pointed out how obviously hypocritical and dishonest that is, how their fiscal concerns are merely an excuse to oppose democratic initiatives, and not a principled position.

you replied by lazily regurgitating some of the silly and wrong supply side economics talking points about businesses just leaving if you tax them adequately, about investment and job creation - to which i responded by providing you with facts and data to disprove that, showing how the tax breaks lead to decreased tax revenue because the money went overwhelmingly into stock buybacks.

you then tried to dismiss the refutation of your trickle down fairy tales by simplistically pretending my source wasn't reliable.

if you're genuinely unable to identify the point i'm making about the disingenuousness of republican fiscal responsibility, i don't know how to help you any further to be honest. i lack the patience, the crayons, and the special ed training to make it any clearer for you, sorry.

The bill was not a "massive net loss". The CBO prediction of "lost revenues" has so far been accurate, and the "loss" of federal revenues was estimated to total $1.7 trillion over 10 years. Meaning $170 Billion per year. And that prediction is pre-labor impact. So more businesses with more jobs, increasing the personal income tax pool, had the potential to not only offset that loss, but turn it into a gain. And as a point in fact, Federal Revenues increased in 2018, 2019, and 2020 at an almost identical rate that the GDP increased. In contrast, there was no notable change in federal revenues from 2016 to 2017. Note that the tax plan was not implemented until January 2018.

Also note that average earnings according to ssa.gov increased by $1800 from 2017 to 2018, and an additional $1900 from 2018 to 2019. $3700 increase in average earnings after two years. This is an unprecedented gain. Likewise, Median net compensation also saw an increase from 2017 to 2019 of $2700. Also unprecedented. Such an increase in either average or median compensation has not been seen in the last 30 years. And the corresponding increase in personal tax revenue gained by the Federal Government is precisely why they still generated more revenue than they did with the higher corporate tax rate.

Once again, your talking points are just stupid. All I see is a random German trying to promote policies that will lead to economic ruin for America.

your countless times debunked fairy tales about supply side economics, your ignoring of the FACT that the taxbreaks overwhelmingly went into stock buybacks, and NOT into job creation, aside - it's hilarious that you pretended to not get my point, and when i spend a whole post explaining to you in detail how it's that the republican concern with fiscal responsibility is disingenuous and not principled, that they love spending on their donors but not on the people, you now CHOOSE to completely ignore that, just to double down on your trickle down fantasies, lol.

According to [USPRIV] data, 5 million additional jobs were created between January 2018 and December 2019. These are real numbers, not your nonsensical bullshit.

Federal tax revenue increased, number of jobs increased, and both average and mean wages increased. You're now trying to talk about how tax breaks were used, but the actual economic impact was simple, "Growth". Once again, the fact that some random nobody German is trying to advocate for US increasing it's Corporate Tax Rate to once again be the second highest in the world simply shows that the random German wants the US to economically fail, and lose it's businesses.

Once again, the average Corporate Income Tax rate in Europe is 19.88%. At 21%, the US corporate tax rate is HIGHER than the European average. I'd say we're doing just fine.

what does your data say about the deficit? how did that develop? oh right... but hey,

- ignoring my point about republicans' unprincipled stance regarding fiscal responsibility
- simplistically, and against actual evidence attributing job growth exclusively to corporate tax breaks (ignoring methodology, job types, and the undisputed and never addressed FACT that the overwhelming majority of the tax breaks actually went into STOCK BUYBACKS)
- again wildly mixing top and effective tax rates, desperately trying to make a 'point' that a highschool student taking their first economics class would be ashamed to make

not bad for one post, lol... it's amazing how that trickle down propaganda became so effective with republican voters - you just love to lick any authority's boot, huh?

Have you bothered to read ANY of my posts? I criticized EVERY President's spending habits from Bush through Biden. The US Federal Debt is not a result of "Republican" unprincipled stance. It's a result of complete fiscal irresponsibility by every President over the last 21 years. You're wanting to talk about Republicans... Why? The House, Senate, and Whitehouse are all currently led by DEMOCRATS. DEMOCRATS have already spent more this year than Federal Revenues will total. Attempting to spend an extra $2 Trillion that they don't have is a guaranteed, fiscally irresponsible DIRECT INCREASE of the Federal Debt.

Nobody is mixing up anything. I provided you the literal data. Federal Tax Revenues INCREASED after the "tax breaks", average and mean wages INCREASED after the "tax breaks", 5 MILLION new jobs were ADDED after the "tax breaks". And our Corporate tax rates are still HIGHER than the European average.

I have provided you with the FACTS and the SOURCES. All you've done is try to quote some opinion blog. FFS, your "points" are so laughable it's impossible to take you seriously.

again, it's not an opinion blog, it's an article on a highly regarded platform (even though i'm not surprised that an economic illiterate like yourself isn't familiar with it) that summarises some widely accepted conclusions and provides multiple direct links to the reports and studies it's based on - while YOU just typed some numbers, many of which entirely irrelevant to my point, without linking ANY source, trying to deflect from the FACT that trump's tax cuts DECREASED corporate tax revenue and most of it went into stock buybacks, rather than investments or job creation.

regarding the debt, you're strawmanning hard. i did at no point suggest that it's exclusively the fault of republicans, don't be silly. what i'm saying is that THEIR ALLEGED CONCERN ABOUT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IS DISINGENUOUS - they don't actually care, they just use that as an excuse to 'justify' opposing democrat spending. they had NO concern about the deficit when it served their donors, when they were in charge of spending.

if you're not just being a partisan hack, and indeed critical of "every president over the last 21 yeard", you wouldn't twist yourself into a pretzel trying to avoid that simple observation, lol.

LOL. ssa.gov, the CBO, [USPRIV] data (private sector job tracking), and Federal Tax Revenue numbers gained from TheBalance is not citing sources?

Again, you linked a blog post that doesn't look at any data it doesn't like. It wants to cite numbers like "Corporate tax revenue is down 40%". So? Overall federal tax revenue ROSE over both years.

Much like that blog, you simply ignore any numbers you don't like. The basic idea behind reducing the corporate tax is to stimulate self investment and job growth, providing a greater personal income tax gain than the corporate tax loss. This was accomplished completely successfully.

Numbers for 2020 aren't finalized, but based on the data, even WITH covid, tax revenues still went up. However, jobs went way down due to lockdowns. 2021 has some pretty dire predictions in both tax revenues and jobs (again due to lockdowns), but for now, I'll leave speculating on unknown numbers to you. You seem allergic to facts.

Oh, and nice try at trying once again to point the finger at Republicans. I'll quote myself since you're having a hard time reading:







This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 2 2021 06:23am

just because YOU prefer to look exclusively at numbers that fit your narrative, but have little to do with the point i made about the corporate tax breaks, and absolutely nothing to do with my initial point about the disingenuousness of republicans' concern about fiscal responsibility, just because YOU fly off on tangents in order to avoid widely accepted findings, just because YOU have to rationalise your cult-like belief in long debunked economic narratives, doesn't mean the relevant data that PROVES my point just doesn't exist.

simplistically attributing any economic or job growth to lowered corporate tax rates, while ignoring the data that is DIRECTLY related to it and proved that the result was a decrease in tax revenue ,while the tax breaks were overwhelmingly spent on stock buybacks, and also avoiding to address the original point about the deficit, which in fact kept ballooning, is textbook economic illiteracy and hackery. you couldn't identify a serious and reliable source if it kicked you in the ass, lol.

what i'm allergic to is partisan hackery, dishonesty, and boot-licking - all of which you embody to perfection here. you pretend to be critical of "every" president, hoping that gives your biased deflection attempts some kind of weight or credibility, but can't even admit to the most obvious and easy observation about republicans' selective concern about fiscal spending, depending on if they are in charge or not. it's pathetic really...

This post was edited by fender on Apr 2 2021 06:41am