Biden just indicated, that he would preserve Trump tax cuts

[Joe88]

Please see my previous post:

Except you are ignoring external factors that were unrelated to the tax cuts that was the main factor is causing the economy to tank during those terms:
2001 9/11 terror attacks
2008 Financial crises
2020 Coronavirus pandemic

 

[Deleted User]

There are times when, as a foreigner and Eurasian, the Asian side of me will say that all of this is another Family's internal bickering; we see Countries as just larger versions of the Family Unit, which is why most times our Foreign Policies reflect that mindset and our bodies, e.g. ASEAN are seen as slow to respond internationally.

You don't really want to be quick to run into your neighbour's Family squabbles before giving them enough time to resolve it themselves.
Because we all can see just how sending Armed Forces and forcing Embargoes work so magnificently in said local issues ...

An Internet joke that gets it right was a Comment that said, in 2020, that "If America saw what America is doing in America, America would invade America to liberate America from the tyranny of America."

That's the double standard everyone outside of America sees.
Same with this issue.

Logic dictates that just keeping Corporations' taxes inside the United States would help, but the Political Willpower for that can be Lobbied for apparently cheaper than the cost of coughing up said Taxes. Then there are Countries that call themselves Allies to America but feed off taking away American Citizens' rights to Taxes by providing Offshore Havens.

Corporations in the United States abuse the Infrastructure more than any group of Citizens ever can but they pay little to nothing for its Maintenance while everyone stuck using them has to feel its downside.

Then again, this is a Family squabble that can't be solved by sending in Americans to invade America.

 

[Lacius]

Except you are ignoring external factors that were unrelated to the tax cuts that was the main factor is causing the economy to tank during those terms:
2001 9/11 terror attacks
2008 Financial crises
2020 Coronavirus pandemic

Your post is incredibly disingenuous.

1. My point was, in fact, that economies can still collapse after tax cuts for the rich, and economies do not collapse as a direct consequence of tax increases on the rich. This is true regardless. My point was not that tax cuts for the rich directly cause recessions or that tax increases on the rich directly prevent recessions. I'm not sure if you misread my post or are being deceptive.
2. The terror attacks had nothing to do with the Bush recession.
3. The financial crisis happened for various reasons, mostly because of deregulation under Bush (and despite the Bush tax cuts for the rich, which was my original point). We also saw no improvement with the economy after the Bush tax cuts but before the Bush recession.
4. The economic consequences of the pandemic happened in large part due to the utter mishandling of the pandemic by the former president (and despite the Trump tax cuts, which was my original point). We also saw no improvement with the economy after the Trump tax cuts but before the Trump recession.

Modern history is paved with Republican presidents fucking up the economy and dramatically increasing the debt and deficit, and Democratic presidents having to clean up their messes.

Edit: I forgot to mention that, like how the pandemic response by the former president was in large part why the pandemic ended up being as bad as it was, a good argument can be made that 9/11 happened in part because of the Bush administration's mishandling of the relevant intelligence up until that point.

 

[Xzi]

2008 Financial crises

Less aggressive deregulation during the Bush years would've prevented this.

2020 Coronavirus pandemic

Not entirely preventable, but the impact on the economy could've been lessened quite a bit with competent leadership.

 

[JaNDeRPeiCH]

Americans...Seriously you have to pitchfork it to Trump and never give any of their privileges.Trump deserves go to jail with the huge damage doing all the world.

 

[tabzer]

My point was, in fact, that economies can still collapse after tax cuts for the rich, and economies do not collapse as a direct consequence of tax increases on the rich. This is true regardless. My point was not that tax cuts for the rich directly cause recessions or that tax increases on the rich directly prevent recessions. I'm not sure if you misread my post or are being deceptive

Umm... Guess I misread.

 

[Lacius]

Umm... Guess I misread.

View attachment 265986

Yeah, you did misread. I said "improved anyway" and "tanked anyway."

 

[tabzer]

Yeah, you did misread. I said "improved anyway" and "tanked anyway."

It still reads like your point is that tax cuts directly lead to recession despite a perpetuated common belief. @Foxi4 made an excellent post about how tax cuts AND increases are both able to improve the economy depending on how much closer they are to the equilibrium than the previous position.

 

[Foxi4]

I wasn't participating in this thread, but it seems I was name dropped, so I'll throw in my two cents. Blaming the current state of the economy on the Trump tax cuts is inherently disingenuous - the economy was booming prior to the pandemic and the jobless numbers hit record lows, particularly among the most disadvantaged groups. Biden would do well preserving them going forward to accelerate post-lockdown recovery, and the "bright" idea of increasing corporate tax rates should be shelved until the economy is back on its feet, or ideally indefinitely. Blaming the "tanking" economy on anything other than the pandemic, which was an unpredictable factor at the time the tax cuts were made, is ridiculous. Biden should maintain the current tax policy for the remainder of his term and lift the remaining Trump tariffs, that'd be ideal.

 

[Lacius]

It still reads like your point is that tax cuts directly lead to recession despite a perpetuated common belief. @Foxi4 made an excellent post about how tax cuts AND increases are both able to improve the economy depending on how much closer they are to the equilibrium than the previous position.

I wasn't participating in this thread, but it seems I was name dropped, so I'll throw in my two cents. Blaming the current state of the economy on the Trump tax cuts is inherently disingenuous - the economy was booming prior to the pandemic and the jobless numbers hit record lows, particularly among the most disadvantaged groups. Biden would do well preserving them going forward to accelerate post-lockdown recovery, and the "bright" idea of increasing corporate tax rates should be shelved until the economy is back on its feet, or ideally indefinitely. Blaming the "tanking" economy on anything other than the pandemic, which was an unpredictable factor at the time the tax cuts were made, is ridiculous. Biden should maintain the current tax policy for the remainder of his term and lift the remaining Trump tariffs, that'd be ideal.

My point was never that tax cuts for the rich lead to recessions, and I never said they do. My point was tax cuts for the rich generally don't help the economy, and they definitely don't offset other boneheaded Republican policies that have repeatedly tanked the economy throughout modern history.

 

[tabzer]

I wasn't participating in this thread, but it seems I was name dropped, so I'll throw in my two cents. Blaming the current state of the economy on the Trump tax cuts is inherently disingenuous - the economy was booming prior to the pandemic and the jobless numbers hit record lows, particularly among the most disadvantaged groups. Biden would do well preserving them going forward to accelerate post-lockdown recovery, and the "bright" idea of increasing corporate tax rates should be shelved until the economy is back on its feet, or ideally indefinitely. Blaming the "tanking" economy on anything other than the pandemic, which was an unpredictable factor at the time the tax cuts were made, is ridiculous. Biden should maintain the current tax policy for the remainder of his term and lift the remaining Trump tariffs, that'd be ideal.

Sorry about that. I was trying to find the lesson you posted and tried to summarize it as best as I recalled. It seemed like a relevant, and recent enough, point that @Lacius should be able to remember and appreciate in the context of actually answering @Lilith Valentine , as opposed to the propagandic response he posted.

@Lacius what you said and what you are saying about what you said shows deviation. If you need to reword what you said for clarity, don't make it out to be the reader's fault.

 

[Foxi4]

Sorry about that. I was trying to find the lesson you posted and tried to summarize it as best as I recalled. It seemed like a relevant, and recent enough, point that @Lacius should be able to remember and appreciate in the context of actually answering @Lilith Valentine , as opposed to the propagandic response he posted.

@Lacius what you said and what you are saying about what you said shows deviation. If you need to reword what you said for clarity, don't make it out to be the reader's fault.

You're thinking about the Laffer curve.

 

[SG854]

Sorry about that. I was trying to find the lesson you posted and tried to summarize it as best as I recalled. It seemed like a relevant, and recent enough, point that @Lacius should be able to remember and appreciate in the context of actually answering @Lilith Valentine , as opposed to the propagandic response he posted.

@Lacius what you said and what you are saying about what you said shows deviation. If you need to reword what you said for clarity, don't make it out to be the reader's fault.

David Stockman worked under Ronald Regan as the Director of Office Managment and Budget in 1981-1985.

He was one of the reasons why Ronald Regan pushed Reaganomics. He was pushing for Trickle Down Economics which is just another word for Supply Side Conservative Austerity Economics. Which is the same conservative theory called the Horse and the Sparrow.

Which is different from Kenyes Demand Side Economics. He was one of the main catalyst for why Regan did the Tax cuts.


David Stockman since then came out saying & criticsing that Reganomics and Bush Tax cuts are incompetent and reckless.

He said these things

"You're kidding yourself if you think cutting taxes is really cutting taxes,"

"We're simply deferring massive taxes unfairly and immorally putting huge debt burdens on future generations and that is just wrong."

https://www.businessinsider.com/david-stockman-hank-paulson-reaganomics-tarp-2011-1


Another person that has spoken out is Bruce Barlett. He was also with the Regan Administration and was the demostic policy advisor to Ronald Regan also another catalyst pushing for tax cuts.

He called the GOP tax cuts a myth and says it leaves out key things and other factors that lead to economic growth during Regan times and wasn't sorely on tax cuts. One of the reasons was a sharp reduction on interest rates by the Federal Reserve.

Another was Regans defense build up and highway construction programs which greatly increased federal government purchases of goods and services. Which he says is textbook Keynesian Economics. Third he says post war recoveries from a recession tends to be v-shaped. The deeper the recession the more robust the recovery.


And finally something alot of Republicans don't know Regan raised taxes several times after 1981. He lost 264 billion from the Tax cut of 1981. After that, legislated tax increases brought back about half of that. The increased money came from taxes being rasied, while tax cuts made them loose money, both happened during Regans Era.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...th-trump-is-wrong-tax-cuts-dont-equal-growth/


These are 2 guys who were working with Ronald Regan and are the main reason why Regonomics existed in the first place, have both since come out and say that the Republican belief that tax cuts being good for the economy is just flat out wrong.

 

[Lacius]

Sorry about that. I was trying to find the lesson you posted and tried to summarize it as best as I recalled. It seemed like a relevant, and recent enough, point that @Lacius should be able to remember and appreciate in the context of actually answering @Lilith Valentine , as opposed to the propagandic response he posted.

@Lacius what you said and what you are saying about what you said shows deviation. If you need to reword what you said for clarity, don't make it out to be the reader's fault.

I refer you to my first post and my subsequent posts reiterating my first post. I'm sorry you didn't understand it, but it was pretty clear, and I've only been consistent.

Let me know if you have a substantive response to anything I said.

 

[Deleted member 559230]

Less taxes, less Government agencies, less regulations, less laws = GOOD.

 

[Xzi]

Less taxes, less Government agencies, less regulations, less laws = GOOD.

If you love the idea of unchecked corporate rule, sure. In most films/games that's portrayed as a dystopian outcome, not a utopian one. And with good reason.

 

[tabzer]

I refer you to my first post and my subsequent posts reiterating my first post. I'm sorry you didn't understand it, but it was pretty clear, and I've only been consistent.

Let me know if you have a substantive response to anything I said.

I raise your point that tax cuts are always bad and offer the Laffer curve.

 

[Xzi]

I raise your point that tax cuts are always bad and offer the Laffer curve.

It's more like the laughable curve. Nobody else gets to decide the limit on what they're willing to pay in taxes, nor should the rich be able to. Simplify the tax code, better fund the IRS to criminally prosecute rich/corporate tax dodgers, and raise the top tax brackets. Hell, they should be about double what they are now. That would pay for sweeping infrastructure upgrades, healthcare reform, and improvements to public education all on its own.

 

[tabzer]

It's more like the laughable curve. Nobody else gets to decide the limit on what they're willing to pay in taxes, nor should the rich be able to. Simplify the tax code, better fund the IRS to criminally prosecute rich/corporate tax dodgers, and raise the top tax brackets. Hell, they should be about double what they are now. That would pay for sweeping infrastructure upgrades, healthcare reform, and improvements to public education all on its own.

I agree that the points you raise reflect a shameful state of affairs, but there are legal ways for people to shift their tax liabilities to other jurisdictions. Regardless if it is via legal or illegal means, the economy doesn't improve after a certain point of taxation.

 

[SG854]

I raise your point that tax cuts are always bad and offer the Laffer curve.

Conservatives push these two contradicting ideas.

Laffer Curve
Starve the Beast

Laffer curve is cut taxes to bring in more revenue


Starve the Beast cut taxes to increase the deficit and to reduce gov spending


So what is it?

Increase revenue or reduce revenue? These both theories contradict each other.





It's literally a snake oil sales man strategy.

During Trumps presidency they wanted to cut taxes to starve the beast. Which expands the deficits, which reduces the tax revenue collected from the tax cuts. Then point to the alarmingly high deficits they created from the tax cuts, and claim that we need to spend less. And use that to attack high gov spending and also target entitlement programs.

This republican belief contradicts with the other republican belief that they want to implement tax cuts to increase revenue collected with the Laffer curve.



Ronald Regan had the belief that higher deficits will reduce spending.

Also Larry Kudlow who is Trumps top economic advisor and someone that worked in the Regan administration said this

“Tax cuts impose a restraint on the size of government. Tax cuts will starve the beast… Specifically, tax cuts provide a policy incentive to search for market solutions to the problems of Social Security, health care, education and the environment.”

So which is it? Increase revenue or decrease revenue? It's so contradicting. It's literally contradicting with the Laffer Curve.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresa...rm-plan-for-social-security-starve-the-beast/