Corporate tax rate cut used to buyback stock and layoff workers.

So you can not show statistics that back up your assertions.

Thanks for that admission

 

Only SIX per cent of the tax cuts went to working people

 

Cutting one part of the tax code while adding more to another part is NOT an overall tax cut.

In many cases it is a tax INCREASE

 

The only admission I see is a guy who rejects anything that proves him wrong...... ya get 1st prize there.

 

Get back to us when you can back up your very wordy opinions and assertions with statistics

 

The SALT deduction limit only affects the rich in high taxed states.

The vast majority of tax payers are not affected by the SALT deduction limit.

BTW, I thought the rich wanted to pay more taxes?

 

Quote on that from Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Meaning that the most easily abused and distorted kind of case is made with statistics. I gave you statement quoted from business owners explaining how the tax change benefited their business. It included numbers for expansion, new employees and other direct data- from the horses mouth. Did not support your case, so- you say it must not be valid.

I realize you are looking for something from the other end of the horse.......

 

You are turning a joke into some kind of law. No, the best case is made with statistics. Yes, it can be abused and is abused but mostly by politicians. When they want a tax to seem small, they use a real value like putting a $1 tax on a pack of cigarettes which is really a 150% tax. When they want something to seem huge or not proportional, they use statistics the the % increase of teens vaping. 200% increase sounds huge but when you only had one guy to start with and now you have 2 it doesn't seem so big.

 

Without question, every tax law, increase, decrease or change in application has some dirt and injustice behind it. I think that until we can substantially increase the maturity and character of the average person- especially those in congress- that will always be so. That leaves us with the question of change resulting from such things; as in is the economy stronger or weaker as a result.

 

You're right. I am not 1%, I am 4%.

At 40 years old, I will get there.

Keep wallowing about what others have. It's the sole reason you keep yourself down.

 

Ain't that the truth, you watch these liberals all the time spouting off about evil capitalism and nary a one has ever had to make a payroll. They would be clueless at the helm of any type of company. We should hand Hiawatha a lemonade stand and tell her she has to pay her workers $15 and hour, watch her cry as people refuse to pay $7.50 for a 6oz cup of sugar water. AOC would point out to us all that anyone refusing to pay said $7.50 is a racist, or a homophobe, whichever one is the democrat talking point flavor of the day.

 

Clinton did not raise social security. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

The number of people who have 401K's and the shares they own is miniscule in comparison to the ownership by the top 10% of our wealthy.

 

And?

 

The Greedy Old Party mantra enrich the wealthy and screw the middle class and the poor.

 

That's not the GOP mantra. That's just talking points given to you by MSNBC hacks.

 

I never watch MSNBC other than the past 2 nights??

 

Ok. Then talking points from one of the many other extreme left-wing sources like ABC-NBC-CBS-CNN-NPR-PBS-Newsweek-Time-NYT-LAT-Google-Twitter-Facebook-Hollywood.

 

The SALT deduction limit affect primarily upper middle class folks. It has little effect on the truly wealthy and none on corporations.

It INCREASES taxes on millions of middle class Americans.

As far as the cuts. Yea...most middle class folks got a cup of coffee.

Again...the benefit of Trump's tax cuts provides only SIX per cent of it's tax cuts to working middle class people

 

You provided anecdotal stories to support your BS. One can find a case here and a case there that appears to support virtually anything

Show us the big picture. THAT is illustrated with statistics and you don't even TRY because you know they don't support your nonsense

 

So the personal reports of business owners about the effectiveness of the tax law is- to you- nonsense, you want some kind of numbers that don't come from the people actually involved.....
Which is not anecdotal, it's first-hand knowledge and testimony from the people who know the most about the question.

And of course you aren't involved, so you would be more likely to know what happened at those businesses than the people who actually ran them. That's amazing. Intuition? Some kind of psychic or paranormal phenomena? I'm sure we are all impressed, just not like you think.....

I only listed comments from as many businesses as many as the forum limits allowed, the list was several times longer. Knew you would blow off one or two, because that is what the dems/libs do today- stand in water up to their chins and deny being wet, because it doesn't fit your argument to be wet. Not smart. You were wrong, Lesh- as usual. And as usual, can't deal with it.
If you want any kind of credibility you have to recognize facts that don't support your argument as well as those that do- and you have none.

 

Anecdotal BS . When you have statistics to show. You get back to us. You don't

 

But if we got someone to add the numbers you already have first hand reports of, who would tell you what they mean?
If you can't understand first hand testimony in plain English, I don't see how we could expect you to understand statistical data summarizing that testimony numerically.
Evasion is not an asset when it comes to understanding facts.

 

Limiting SALT deductions affects all upper class people.

In high taxed states like California. Why should the rest of the country subsidize high taxed states?

I was able to keep $3,200 more of my money per year because of Trump's tax cuts and I'm middle class according to the following article. That's no chump change. Thank you President Trump!

https://money.usnews.com/money/pers...-i-fall-in-the-american-economic-class-system

The top 50% of income earners pay 96% of the Federal income taxes.

The bottom 50% of income earners pay only 4% of the Federal income taxes.

So, of course the top 50% are going to be able to keep more of their money because of the cuts than the bottom 50%.

 

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/clinton’s-3-trillion-raid-social-security