Posted on 09/03/2024 3:07:10 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
For more than two decades, Democrats have watched with frustration as tax policy in the United States has settled into a pattern, one that Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, calls the “tax doom loop.”
It goes like this: Republicans pass huge tax cuts that are, at first, only temporary. By the time the tax cuts are set to end, Americans have become used to owing less to the government. Hesitant to raise taxes, Democrats join with Republicans to continue many of the cuts indefinitely.
To liberals, this cycle is to blame for a range of social and economic ills. Widening inequality. Ballooning deficits. A federal government without the resources to pay for a progressive agenda. And next year, they hope, is their chance to finally stop it.
That’s because much of the last large Republican tax cut, a 2017 law signed by President Donald J. Trump, will expire after 2025. Progressive tax experts and activists have spent years organizing to convince the Democratic Party that rather than simply extending the cuts, it needs to ensure the United States brings in more tax revenue so it can finance more generous social programs.
“People want to avenge it,” said Lindsay Owens, the executive director of the Groundwork Collaborative, a progressive advocacy group that is meeting with congressional staff and preparing advertising campaigns on the tax debate.
It’s an uphill fight. Cutting taxes remains a popular political promise. Mr. Trump and Republicans are pushing to extend the law and further reduce taxes if they come into power. While Vice President Kamala Harris has pledged to raise taxes on high-income Americans and corporations, her presidential campaign has also said she would not raise taxes on any household making less than $400,000. That means she, too, wants to continue much of Mr. Trump’s tax...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“Tax Doom Loop” from Fauxcahontas, the Max Fruit Loop.
Democrats can make the same promises election-after-election because they never keep any of them.
Funny how the Slimes says “loop” when the correct term is “abyss”.
That, and they never consider the fact that every "problem" they throw our tax money at only gets worse. Its as predictable as the sun rising.
Inflation reduction act only creates more inflation. Billions spent to solve the homeless problem only results in more homeless and we don't even need to bring up the sorry state of education.
Their F-ups are legion. Its all just grift.
If someone can name me one thing that democrats have made better I would love to hear it because I can't think of anything.
Within a couple of years $400,000 only be worth $50,000.
But it’s not OUR money, it’s THEIR money.
Elizabeth Warren was one of my law professors. She thinks the government owns everything and anything they let you keep is a government expenditure. This is 100% accepted orthodoxy among the law faculties of the world. Especially the tax law professors. No wonder our nation has idiots for leaders.
>> Democrats need more money for more programs and to hire more government workers so they get more votes. This is taxation without representation.
Yep, nothing wrong with the budget that firing 80%-90% of federal workers and shutting down entire federal agencies (EPA, DOJ, both DoE’s, DHS, FBI... for starters) wouldn’t fix.
How about the crime doom loop? The anti-family doom loop? The abortion and euthanasia doom loop? The ant-small business doom loop? The endless global war doom loop?
Yes. She is a liar now so why would she stop being one as President?
Bill Clinton promised a middle class tax cut, which was listed by some voters later in exit poll surveys as a reason for voting for him.
Just after he was certified he said new data had been given to him by associates who found the harm to the system by the GOP had been worse than he had been told earlier and that regrettably his plan for cutting taxes was out. He said he would now have to raise taxes to make the investments to improve the lives of less fortunate Americans.
why was the corp income tax reduced to 21%?
to match other countries like sweden
socialist sweden has a 21% rate cuz they realized they needed corporations to fund the huge welfare state
the individuals pay the freight, their top rate is 60%
The problem is that the public sector doesn't have layoffs as an option, by law. The Civil Service system prevents trimming the fat. The Legislative Branch has little incentive to cut the programs that cause excessive spending for one reason or another -- usually lobbyists with their hands out like Oliver saying, "please, sir, may I have some more."
Perhaps the solution would be a "sales tax" on spending by the Treasury. If one receives a government check, there would be, say, one percent withholding from it, with that "deduction" earmarked for debt service meditation. Indeed, the haircut could be scaled by the size of the government debt, so as we rise to the 50 trillion dollar mark, the bite would increase to, say, two percent. As the debt drops, so does the bite.
This would be for ALL payouts: government paychecks, grants, contract payments. Yes, I'm sorry to say, Social Security and Medicare payouts would need to be included, to be fair. Crafting an exception, say by saying that payouts that depend on significant pay-ins by recipients by mechanisms like FICA payroll deductions, might be reasonable.
It isn’t a tax problem, it is a spending problem. I will never trust a leftist Democratic candidate again.
Oh it’ll stay at $400K. But in a couple years a Big Mac will be $79
The problem is that the democrat ruling class believes that the peons don't need much money if they just let the democrats take care of them. About 10 years ago, I had a prominent democrat politician tell me that because I made over 100k a year, I was definitely rich.
How about spending less?
We need to see the Komrad’s tax returns for the last 10 years.
Ideally, the message should stick to the economy—
D:
Higher Prices
Higher Taxes
R:
Lower Prices
Lower Taxes
i am not certain that the US electorate is capable of understanding anything more than the most simple message possible.
There simply isn’t enough money above $400,000 income to implement the kind of social programs that the left envisions. People who make that kind of money tend to get their income using various tax-deferral vehicles (e.g. stock), and they’re able to effectively nullify gains with very creative tax write-offs and shelters. Which is why the left ultimately ALWAYS goes down the food chain to people who are captives of payroll systems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.