LOL. He said the tax cuts would not stop the deficit – the initial Republican intention which now makes them – DING! DING! - a worthless exercise. Another important point from the article.
Spending is up $255 billion for the first eight months of the fiscal year, the CBO said, while revenues are up only $49 billion. Corporate tax receipts are down after Republicans enacted the largest reduction in business taxes in U.S. history. Individual income taxes are basically flat this year (they are growing less than the rate of inflation). Most of the revenue increase is coming from President Trump’s tariffs and more payroll taxes, which were not cut in the tax bill.
“Revenue fell, it didn’t rise, after the tax cuts,” said Marc Goldwein, senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Low info posts. I avoid them. They will avoid talking about the tax cuts in question but instead will win the debate on whether or not the OP was a fair representation of someone’s comments about the cuts. Low-info.
Yes low info. Talk about the headline or the tax cut. You could even talk about the headline and talk about the tax cuts,. Low infos focus on the headline because they have to wait 10 years apparently to talk about the tax cuts.
No interest. There have already been countless debates touting the merits of supply side economic theory vs. Keynesion economic theory. It has been beat to death.
In that regard, the OP and thread title seemed to imply that Supply sider Brady was abandoning his Supply Side beliefs in favor of Keynesian economics. Nothing could be further from the truth. I just felt the need to set the record straight. Beyond that I have no interest in revisiting the Supply Side vs. Keynesian debate.
You are not describing reality. The cut led to some nominal bonuses but the promised increases in wages and investment never happened. Corporate taxes dropped and there has been a massive wave of stock buybacks, which benefitted institutional and wealthy investors.
The federal deficit has soared during a boom; which will greatly worsen the next recession.
None of this had anything to do with the Mueller probe.
The Republicans passed a cut to benefit their big contributors while lying about benefits for you and me.
What branches have wages gone up in. Let’s see data, not assertions. CEO pay is up.
What second round of tax cuts — some promise like Trump’s healthcare plan or the Infrastructure plan. Those are Trump’s failures — no reason at all to blame Mueller.
Maybe if Trumpism governed instead of golfing and tweeting, but that’s to much to ask.
It was the GOP which promised the second round of tax cuts, which (according to them) would had relieved much more the employees. I posted the article already.
It is to blame the liberal (fake news) media and insane Dems who caused a lot of noise around Russia …
Well… it is looking like the promised investment from some companies because of the tax cut is not happening.
AT&T’s CEO, Randall Stephenson, promised in November 2017 to invest $1bn in capital expenditure and create 7,000 new jobs at the company if Trump’s hugely controversial tax cut bill passed. Many opponents had slammed the cuts as a corporate giveaway that benefited the super-rich. But big firms lobbied for it, saying – as AT&T did – that it would fund job-creating expansions.
\The bill was voted into law in December 2017, reducing the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. AT&T’s benefit was a tax windfall of $21bn and an additional estimated $3bn annually. But instead of creating jobs and increasing investment into the company, AT&T has eliminated 23,328 jobs since the tax cut bill was passed, according to a recent report by the Communications Workers of America. The CWA also said AT&T reduced their capital investments by $1.4bn.
In November 2018, GM announced it would cease operations at five plants in Michigan, Ohio, Maryland and Ontario, Canada, resulting in the loss of more than 14,000 jobs in those communities. As GM is closing plants, the company has spent $10bn since 2015 on stock buybacks, and made a net profit of over $8bn despite paying no federal taxes in 2018. GM reported a tax windfall of $157m in the first three months of 2018 due to the Trump tax cut.
Wells Fargo, the fourth largest bank in the US by assets, tied a minimum wage increase of $15 an hour to the Trump tax cuts and pledged increased investments in workers. The company is estimated to save $3.7bn annually due to the Trump tax cut. The bank’s 2018 tax savings were 47 times more than the costs of its minimum wage increases. Rather than invest in its workforce, Wells Fargo bought back 350m shares in early 2018, worth about $22.6bn, increased CEO salary by 36%, and announced plans in September 2018 to eliminate at least 26,000 jobs in the US over the next three years as many of those positions are being sent overseas.
So these large corporations that were applauded for getting a windfall did not invest like they said that they would.
Color me shocked.
The hippies over at the Library of Congress have written a white paper that concludes that the effects on wages was nominal
n the absence of the tax cuts, wages should grow with the economy and wage rates should grow as the capital stock grows. In addition, tight labor markets resulting from the approach to full employment should have put upward pressure on wage rates in any case. Evidence from 2018 indicated that labor compensation, adjusted to real values by the price indices for personal consumption expenditures, grew slower than output in general, at a 2.3% rate compared with a 2.9% growth rate overall. If adjusted by the GDP deflator, labor compensation grew by 2.0%. With labor representing 53% of GDP, that implies that the other components grew at 3.8%.34Thus, pretax profits and economic depreciation (the price of capital) grew faster than wages.
and that almost all spikes in key indicators quickly regressed back to the mean.
What this article fails to mention is the impact globalization had on unions and income inequality. Income inequality is by and large the result of globalization: Economics 101 - Globalization increased both the supply of customers, and hence demand, as well as the supply of labor, in particularly cheap labor. Part of reason for the decline in union membership was due to the fact that many of those factory jobs went overseas.
