• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

If Trump wins again

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
That makes very little sense - the same Congress passed the Tax cuts and reduced as well as increased spending?
Are you really surprised that Congress does something that makes no sense? The same Congress reduced taxes, increased revenue and increased spending and debt.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
"It's also a theory which has been widely discredited, both on a theoretical level and in practice. Because with the Laffer curve – perhaps unusually for economics – we have a historical instance of it being implemented by a direct proponent. Laffer was an associate of the Reagan administration, which had a staged cut in the marginal higher rate of personal income tax from 70% to 28%. The effect on the budget deficit was also striking. Reagan doubled it to $155 billion and tripled government debt to more than $2trillion. His successor, Bush senior, was forced to raise taxes as the deficit doubled again."

Done and done - it espouses similar principles to "trickle down economics" - doesn't work
And yet the numbers don’t lie. The recent tax cuts reduced individual taxes and increased revenue simultaneously. Again, the fault of the ballooning deficits and spending aren’t the fault of the Langer curve. The Laffer curve enabled spendthrift Congresses. The tax cuts increased government revenue, but Congress spent money even faster.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
You keep emphasizing that - can you provide any evidence to support it?

On one side is the argument that if you cut taxes government revenue will fall and the debt will expand. Others contend that cutting taxes stimulates the economy which, in turn, leads to an increase in government revenue.

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#aoh=15529725905014&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/

Tax cuts are like eggs and anything else. One year they are good and the next year they are bad, then good again, then bad again, repeat.
 
Last edited:

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
You keep emphasizing that - can you provide any evidence to support it?

Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Government annual revenue is estimated to have increased from $3.33 trillion in FY 2018 (the fiscal year before the tax cuts and jobs act) was enacted to $3.44 trillion in FY 2019 (the fiscal year after the tax cuts and jobs act) was enacted; that's approximately an estimated 3 percent increase of tax revenue collected by the government during the first year after tax reform has taken place.
 

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Government annual revenue is estimated to have increased from $3.33 trillion in FY 2018 (the fiscal year before the tax cuts and jobs act) was enacted to $3.44 trillion in FY 2019 (the fiscal year after the tax cuts and jobs act) was enacted; that's approximately an estimated 3 percent increase of tax revenue collected by the government during the first year after tax reform has taken place.
The first "real" year post the TCJA is the 2018 year for which filing is underway - I would submit that the conclusions in the article you posted are a tad premature
 

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
Others contend that cutting taxes stimulates the economy which, in turn, leads to an increase in government revenue.
That is the Laffer effect that @Shaul and I were discussing - please see my post above
One view contends that it has been discredited as is the theory of trickle down economics
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I suppose he could by severely slashing welfare services and defense spending - not sure either option is wise
He won't do the latter as we've seen as his new budget proposal that has that increased, but the former he's more than willing to cut with his "Let them eat cake!" mentality. He would also love to cut Medicaid plus privatize Medicare and Social Security.

Can one imagine what would likely have happened in 2008-9 if those were privatized when the stock market took a noser? Talk about "panic".
 

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
but the former he's more than willing to cut with his "Let them eat cake!" mentality.

And we all know what happened to one of the people that was reputed to originated that attitude, don't we? They do say - those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Personally, I do not like Trump. He is an odious little man with what appears to be serious issues with narcissism. He is a significant contributor to the divide in this country and he has made bigotry and violent action furthering bigotry seem to be OK. I can think of several Republicans that would have been much better at being presidential than he is and done I fine job I think. On the plus side, the economy is doing great and while I do not attribute that to him completely, he has had a positive impact on it. While I do not like him, I have to admit he has done some things to throw a rope around spending that will benefit the country in the long run.

I guess I am dumb and insensitive but I dont see the bigotry.

Crude, sure. Not into nuance.

Where did he make violent action re bigotry ok?
 
Top