Why cut taxes?

[Uncle Ted]

WTF, Drumpf?... https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...gas-tax-409647

http://fortune.com/2018/02/15/donald-trump-online-sales-tax/

[Jeff Lebowski]

WTF, Drumpf?... https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...gas-tax-409647

http://fortune.com/2018/02/15/donald...ine-sales-tax/

You going to rethink your Trump support now, Uncle Ted?

[beefytee]

UT, what's gotten in to you? You're supposed to post something like this:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/02/04/president-obama-oil-tax-gasoline/79835274/

[BlueK]

UT, what's gotten in to you? You're supposed to post something like this:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...line/79835274/

He was a little quick on the draw there. Had others here complained first about Trump's idea then that's when the whataboutobama reaction kicks in.

[wuapinmon]

WTF, Drumpf?... https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...gas-tax-409647

http://fortune.com/2018/02/15/donald...ine-sales-tax/

I'm all in favor of this. I say phase it in over four years. 10¢ the first year, then 5¢ each year after that.

[Uncle Ted]

It's Official: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves

Taxes: When the Congressional Budget Office released its updated budget forecast, everyone focused on the deficit number. But buried in the report was the CBO's tacit admission that it vastly overestimated the cost of the Trump tax cuts, because it didn't account for the strong economic growth they would generate.

Among the many details in the report, the one reporters focused on was the CBO's forecast that the federal deficit would top $1 trillion in 2020, two years earlier than the CBO had previously said.


And, naturally, most news accounts blamed the tax cuts. "U.S. budget deficit to balloon on Republican tax cuts" is how Reuters put it in a headline.


But there's more to the story that the media overlooked.


First, the CBO revised its economic forecast sharply upward this year and next.


Last June, the CBO said GDP growth for 2018 would be just 2%. Now it figures growth will be 3.3% — a significant upward revision. It also boosted its forecast for 2019 from a meager 1.5% to a respectable 2.4%.

"Underlying economic conditions have improved in some unexpected ways since June," the CBO says. Unexpected to the CBO, perhaps, but not to those of us who understood that Trump's tax cuts and deregulatory efforts would boosts growth.

In any case, the CBO now expects GDP to be $6.1 trillion bigger by 2027 than it did before the tax cuts.
[...]

https://www.investors.com/politics/e...or-themselves/

Now if we can cut spending by not getting into yet another dumbass war.

[falafel]

https://www.investors.com/politics/e...or-themselves/

Now if we can cut spending by not getting into yet another dumbass war.

Why are we even taxing people at all, right Ted?

[Uncle Ted]

Why are we even taxing people at all, right Ted?

Don't get me started, man.

[Pelado]

https://www.investors.com/politics/e...or-themselves/

Now if we can cut spending by not getting into yet another dumbass war.

So, basically, even with the economy performing better than previously expected, we'll still see trillion-dollar deficits again soon. Great news, Ted.

[Uncle Ted]

So, basically, even with the economy performing better than previously expected, we'll still see trillion-dollar deficits again soon. Great news, Ted.

You give the CBO too much credit in their dumbass forecasts... Of course, increasing spending so we can kill Syria's kids for them doesn't help.

[frank ryan]

You give the CBO too much credit in their dumbass forecasts... Of course, increasing spending so we can kill Syria's kids for them doesn't help.

We didn't kill any Syrian kids. Knock it off.

[Uncle Ted]

We didn't kill any Syrian kids. Knock it off.

Yeah we did, man. Ask Walter... He will tell you and show you the pictures.

[frank ryan]

Yeah we did, man. Ask Walter... He will tell you and show you the pictures.

That article is from last year man. You're telling me this attack killed kids?

[cowboy]

It's $1.4-$1.7 trillion...over ten years...if nothing changes. In other words, if people invest as normal and the tax rates create no GDP growth, the deficit will increase by around $150 billion. And then they multiply that by the magic number 10 because they need to multiply it by something. That way, tax increases sound better and tax cuts sound worse.

Over a 2-year period, the CBO does a decent job with projections, but beyond that, a monkey throwing a dart could guess the true effect of things better. This is partly because long-term projections are nearly impossible, and partly because a lot of legislation is written to game the 10-year time window.

As I've said before, there is very little correlation between tax rates and tax receipts. Taken to extremes, there obviously would be, but this change isn't extreme. The likely long-term effect is going to depend on how the rate change effects growth because receipts will continue to be a function GDP growth.

https://www.investors.com/politics/e...or-themselves/

Now if we can cut spending by not getting into yet another dumbass war.

Just a reminder that I didn't believe the CBO from the start.

[Jeff Lebowski]

So, basically, even with the economy performing better than previously expected, we'll still see trillion-dollar deficits again soon. Great news, Ted.

The growth will cover part, but not all of the tax cuts. Duh.

Unless we do something to cut spending, all this means is even more deficit spending.

Unfortunately, spending is on track to climb even faster — going from 20.6% of GDP this year to 23.6% by 2028. (The highest spending ever got under Obama was 24.4% of GDP, and the post-War average is 19.3%.)

This is little short of a disgrace, and shows that Republicans love spending taxpayer money as much as Democrats.


In fact, some GOP senators don't even want Trump to use his rescission authority to strip some of the worst spending items out of the bipartisan $1.3 trillion spending monstrosity.


Someone needs to remind these alleged fiscal conservatives that if they can't get control of spending today, it's a virtual guarantee they'll end up agreeing to a "deficit cutting" tax hike tomorrow.