Trump Tax Cuts benefited Middle Class the Most

[Atticus Finch]

10 hours ago, concha said:

I care that people obey the law.

😄

[concha]

3 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

And he just keeps doing it.

Again, stunning how clueless this dude is. He's yelling at me that the point that I made is correct.

But he doesn't seem to know it because he's so dedicated to his toadyism.

 

Andy already making shit up.  😂

Yelling? Really?  🤣

If the point you made is that huge swathes of "tax payers" like you actually pay little to nothing, then great.

 

[concha]

4 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

No, I pointed out the inherent lie in the title of this thread.

But you still seem obsessed with proving me right while claiming otherwise.

 

You did not point a lie. At best you pointed out your opinion.

Which is worth exactly what we paid for it.

 

[concha]

3 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

This is rich.

concha is so stupid and incompetent that he doesn't even understand what's being said in this thread.

So what he does is just vomit something about places where liberals live and then some insults to boot.

 

I understand quite well.

You don't understand your opinion ain't worth shit.

 

 

 

 

[Atticus Finch]

2 minutes ago, concha said:

If the point you made is that huge swathes of "tax payers" like you actually pay little to nothing, then great.

My point was that the author was dishonest and you agree while trying to claim otherwise.

concha always ignores the topic so he can gain his toady points for the day.

[Atticus Finch]

2 minutes ago, concha said:

You did not point a lie. At best you pointed out your opinion.

The author's article was an opinion which was dishonest. 

That's what I proved.

You agree.

But your blind partisanship precludes you from being honest.

[concha]

Just now, Atticus Finch said:

My point was that the author was dishonest and you agree while trying to claim otherwise.

concha always ignores the topic so he can gain his toady points for the day.

 

No, you didn't.

You just didn't like the facts presented because they don't fit the narrative you have chained yourself to.

 

[Atticus Finch]

1 minute ago, concha said:

I understand quite well.

You had presumably hours to come up with something and the best you could do is to agree with me but in a snarky manner. I guess so you could pretend to oppose me?

Who knows.

The bottom line is that when you realized you had nothing you just threw out completely irrelevant stuff about cities where liberals live.

The levels of ineptitude that concha reaches are quite epic.

[concha]

 

What did Andy actually do here, class?

Well, he accused the author of being dishonest ( 🤣 ). No proof. Just words out Andy's ass.

Then he prances over to corporate taxation, which was not the subject. ANd without presenting any facts anyway.

🤡

 

[Atticus Finch]

2 minutes ago, concha said:

You just didn't like the facts presented because they don't fit the narrative you have chained yourself to.

The facts are meaningless to the narrative he's trying to push. The facts, analyzed practically, show that his claim is nonsense. But it wasn't intended to do anything but give talking points to toadies like you. So it served it's only purpose.

What's funny is that in an attempt to argue with me you actually agreed with my point.

Then what happens is that threads like devolve in pissing matches because I basically ended it on the first page. But you insist on continuing the charade so it goes on for pages and pages.

[Atticus Finch]

Just now, concha said:

Well, he accused the author of being dishonest ( 🤣 ). No proof. Just words out Andy's ass.

I proved it on the first page.

You inadvertently agreed this ending the thread.

But you're an insecure toady so you have to pretend that you won and so this thread will go on for pages with just insults.

I'm game for that but it's meaningless to the topic.

The author is a paid shill and it's obvious if you read the first page.

[Atticus Finch]

2 minutes ago, concha said:

Then he prances over to corporate taxation, which was not the subject. ANd without presenting any facts anyway

 

I mentioned the corporate tax *after* I effectively ended the thread on the merits.

concha is just mad that he'll never win any of these arguments on the merits because he's such and incompetent and ideological turd.

So here we are.

Going for pages to placate his fragile psyche.

[concha]

 

Andy, hey, maybe you can help a brother out.

Dipshit66 needs helpe defining WTF "Fair Share" means. Your people love to bring it up.

So, what does fair share mean?

 

When folks who don't pay much have even that reduced higher percentages than folks who shoulder almost all the income tax burden,  how are the folks actually paying the bills not paying "their FAIR SHARE"?

 

[concha]

5 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

I mentioned the corporate tax *after* I effectively ended the thread on the merits.

concha is just mad that he'll never win any of these arguments on the merits because he's such and incompetent and ideological turd.

So here we are.

Going for pages to placate his fragile psyche.

 

Well, you didn't end or prove anything in your first post and you mentioned corporate tax in your second.

I'm Andy! I made one post so I win!

🤡

 

 

[DBP66]

so you want to talk about farmers huh?...the ones who get all the subsides to not grow crops?...the farmers who own tons of land and own million dollar machines...something you didn't respond to...wonder why champ?....and by the way....mother Russia did help get Trump elected...that's a FACT....something you don't want to talk about I'm sure....🤡

[DBP66]

7 minutes ago, concha said:

 

Andy, hey, maybe you can help a brother out.

Dipshit66 needs helpe defining WTF "Fair Share" means. Your people love to bring it up.

So, what does fair share mean?

 

When folks who don't pay much have even that reduced higher percentages than folks who shoulder almost all the income tax burden,  how are the folks actually paying the bills not paying "their FAIR SHARE"?

 

we know what your idea of "fair share" is champ...Trump paying $800.00 a year makes sense to you....🤡

[concha]

 

The article points out the fact, backed by IRS data, that under the Trump tax regime lower income folks had their taxes reduced and paid less of the overall income tax burden.  Higher income folks paid more and bore more of the overall burden.

Facts.

But to Andy this is a lie.

Why?

Because those results are actually what the Dems claim they want to do. But Trump did it.

What's more:

https://www.indexjournal.com/news/national/studies-trump-tax-cuts-helped-lower-income-families-build-back-better-helps-wealthier-americans/article_7343db6f-47f1-577b-8d83-e31c4f803a46.html

 

Studies: Trump tax cuts helped lower income families, Build Back Better helps wealthier Americans

Democrats have argued that the tax reforms implemented through the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) only benefited the rich, and that the Build Back Better Act (BBBA) will help middle-and working-class Americans the most.

But several nonpartisan groups found that the TCJA reduced the tax burden for the middle- and working-class by up to 87% and, they argue, the $2.4 trillion BBBA – before the U.S. Senate this week – would increase taxes on the middle- and working-class by up to 40%.

A new analysis published by the Heartland Institute found that the TCJA reduced the average effective income tax rates for taxpayers in every income tax bracket – but the lower- and middle-class saw the greatest benefits – with the lowest-income filers receiving the largest tax cuts.

 

The poorest Americans, with adjusted gross income of between $5,000 and $10,000, paid 87.65% less in taxes as a result of the Republican-passed TCJA. Whereas their wealthier counterparts, reporting an adjusted gross income of between $5 million and $10 million, paid 3.5% less in taxes.

IRS data also show that middle- and working-class Americans received tax cuts of between 11% and 88% in 2018, at least double that of wealthier taxpayers, with those making between $500,000 and $1 million receiving single-digit cuts.

Filers with an adjusted gross income of between $30,000 and $40,000 paid roughly 18.41% less; those with incomes between $40,000 to $50,000 paid 18.2% less; and those with $50,000 to $75,000 in income paid roughly 17% less, according to 2018 IRS data analyzed.

“Based on tax data from 2017 and 2018, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced taxes for the vast majority of filers, led to substantial improvements in upward economic mobility, and disproportionately benefited working- and middle-class households, many of which experienced tax cuts topping 18 percent to 20 percent,” the Heartland Institute reports.

Paying less in taxes also improved lower- and middle-income Americans’ standard of living and upward mobility, the institute found, meaning more moved out of poverty, according to IRS data.

The number of those in the lowest income bracket with an adjusted gross income of $1,000 to $25,000 decreased by more than 2 million filers in one year. Households that reported incomes greater than $25,000 increased in every single income bracket over the same year.

The greatest increase in the number of filers was in the $100,000 to $200,000 income bracket, with more than 1 million additional filers in 2018 than in 2017.

While Democrats continue to claim that the TCJA gave tax breaks to the rich, IRS data show that higher-income earners paid more in taxes in 2018 than they did in 2017.

 

For example, those who reported income of $500,000 or more in 2017 paid 38.9% of all personal income tax revenues; in 2018, their share of taxes accounted for 41.5%.

The Washington, D.C.,-based nonprofit Tax Foundation explains among other things that the TCJA reformed the individual income tax code by lowering tax rates on wages, investment and business income, broadened the tax base, and simplified the tax code. It also significantly lowered the corporate income tax rate to 21% and “moved the United States from a worldwide to a territorial system of taxation.”

The financial gains seen by lower-earning Americans resulting from the TCJA could be erased if the Democrats’ BBB Act were passed, several analyses show.

The Tax Policy Center found that “taking into account all major tax provisions, roughly 20 percent to 30 percent of middle-income households would pay more in taxes in 2022” as a result of the BBBA tax changes.

President Joe Biden pledged during his campaign to not increase taxes on those earning less than $400,000 a year. But the Tax Policy Center notes that this wouldn’t be the case and many households would again pay higher taxes in 2023 than in 2022.

Likewise, the BBBA would also “shrink the average 2023 tax cuts for low-income households, raise taxes slightly for moderate-income households, and increase taxes significantly for the highest-income households,” the center notes.

The Tax Foundation estimates that the House version of the BBB Act “would reduce long-run economic output by nearly 0.5 percent and eliminate about 125,000 full-time equivalent jobs in the United States. It would also reduce average after-tax incomes for taxpayers across every income quintile over the long run.”

Democratic changes to SALT (state and local tax) deductions would also “provide little or no benefit for low and middle-income households but [would] generate a substantial tax windfall for those with much higher incomes,” the Tax Policy Center calculates.

And the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities argues the Democrats’ SALT deduction changes don’t qualify as “middle-class tax relief.”

“There’s no way to justify these tax cuts as ‘middle-class’ tax relief,” it said. “They are particularly egregious given that BBB aims to provide the most help for low- and middle-income households while reducing tax advantages for wealthy households.”

 

 

[DBP66]

3 minutes ago, concha said:

 

The article points out the fact, backed by IRS data, that under the Trump tax regime lower income folks had their taxes reduced and paid less of the overall income tax burden.  Higher income folks paid more and bore more of the overall burden.

Facts.

But to Andy this is a lie.

Why?

Because those results are actually what the Dems claim they want to do. But Trump did it.

What's more:

https://www.indexjournal.com/news/national/studies-trump-tax-cuts-helped-lower-income-families-build-back-better-helps-wealthier-americans/article_7343db6f-47f1-577b-8d83-e31c4f803a46.html

 

Studies: Trump tax cuts helped lower income families, Build Back Better helps wealthier Americans

Democrats have argued that the tax reforms implemented through the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) only benefited the rich, and that the Build Back Better Act (BBBA) will help middle-and working-class Americans the most.

But several nonpartisan groups found that the TCJA reduced the tax burden for the middle- and working-class by up to 87% and, they argue, the $2.4 trillion BBBA – before the U.S. Senate this week – would increase taxes on the middle- and working-class by up to 40%.

A new analysis published by the Heartland Institute found that the TCJA reduced the average effective income tax rates for taxpayers in every income tax bracket – but the lower- and middle-class saw the greatest benefits – with the lowest-income filers receiving the largest tax cuts.

 

The poorest Americans, with adjusted gross income of between $5,000 and $10,000, paid 87.65% less in taxes as a result of the Republican-passed TCJA. Whereas their wealthier counterparts, reporting an adjusted gross income of between $5 million and $10 million, paid 3.5% less in taxes.

IRS data also show that middle- and working-class Americans received tax cuts of between 11% and 88% in 2018, at least double that of wealthier taxpayers, with those making between $500,000 and $1 million receiving single-digit cuts.

Filers with an adjusted gross income of between $30,000 and $40,000 paid roughly 18.41% less; those with incomes between $40,000 to $50,000 paid 18.2% less; and those with $50,000 to $75,000 in income paid roughly 17% less, according to 2018 IRS data analyzed.

“Based on tax data from 2017 and 2018, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced taxes for the vast majority of filers, led to substantial improvements in upward economic mobility, and disproportionately benefited working- and middle-class households, many of which experienced tax cuts topping 18 percent to 20 percent,” the Heartland Institute reports.

Paying less in taxes also improved lower- and middle-income Americans’ standard of living and upward mobility, the institute found, meaning more moved out of poverty, according to IRS data.

The number of those in the lowest income bracket with an adjusted gross income of $1,000 to $25,000 decreased by more than 2 million filers in one year. Households that reported incomes greater than $25,000 increased in every single income bracket over the same year.

The greatest increase in the number of filers was in the $100,000 to $200,000 income bracket, with more than 1 million additional filers in 2018 than in 2017.

While Democrats continue to claim that the TCJA gave tax breaks to the rich, IRS data show that higher-income earners paid more in taxes in 2018 than they did in 2017.

 

For example, those who reported income of $500,000 or more in 2017 paid 38.9% of all personal income tax revenues; in 2018, their share of taxes accounted for 41.5%.

The Washington, D.C.,-based nonprofit Tax Foundation explains among other things that the TCJA reformed the individual income tax code by lowering tax rates on wages, investment and business income, broadened the tax base, and simplified the tax code. It also significantly lowered the corporate income tax rate to 21% and “moved the United States from a worldwide to a territorial system of taxation.”

The financial gains seen by lower-earning Americans resulting from the TCJA could be erased if the Democrats’ BBB Act were passed, several analyses show.

The Tax Policy Center found that “taking into account all major tax provisions, roughly 20 percent to 30 percent of middle-income households would pay more in taxes in 2022” as a result of the BBBA tax changes.

President Joe Biden pledged during his campaign to not increase taxes on those earning less than $400,000 a year. But the Tax Policy Center notes that this wouldn’t be the case and many households would again pay higher taxes in 2023 than in 2022.

Likewise, the BBBA would also “shrink the average 2023 tax cuts for low-income households, raise taxes slightly for moderate-income households, and increase taxes significantly for the highest-income households,” the center notes.

The Tax Foundation estimates that the House version of the BBB Act “would reduce long-run economic output by nearly 0.5 percent and eliminate about 125,000 full-time equivalent jobs in the United States. It would also reduce average after-tax incomes for taxpayers across every income quintile over the long run.”

Democratic changes to SALT (state and local tax) deductions would also “provide little or no benefit for low and middle-income households but [would] generate a substantial tax windfall for those with much higher incomes,” the Tax Policy Center calculates.

And the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities argues the Democrats’ SALT deduction changes don’t qualify as “middle-class tax relief.”

“There’s no way to justify these tax cuts as ‘middle-class’ tax relief,” it said. “They are particularly egregious given that BBB aims to provide the most help for low- and middle-income households while reducing tax advantages for wealthy households.”

 

 

The top 10% of families -- those who had at least $942,000 -- hold 76% of total wealth. The average amount of wealth in this group was $4 million...🙄...what are you talking about champ?...🤡

[concha]

Just now, DBP66 said:

The top 10% of families -- those who had at least $942,000 -- hold 76% of total wealth. The average amount of wealth in this group was $4 million...🙄...what are you talking about champ?...🤡

 

Income taxes. 

You are babbling about something else that is entirely unrelated.

 

 

[Atticus Finch]

concha flailing as he usually does.

DBP66's article *also* uses IRS data and shows that claiming that lower and middle income people benefited most is ridiculous.

But someone of even average intelligence would know that.

That's why concha actually agreed.

I love how concha's entire argument is "Well, yeah, of course it's that way!"

[DBP66]

1 minute ago, concha said:

 

Income taxes. 

You are babbling about something else that is entirely unrelated.

 

 

Ok...income taxes?....so do you think a multi-millionaire should pay $800.00 a year in taxes....stop with the "if no law was broken BS"...does it make "sense" to you that everyone you know paid more in taxes than Trump?....you're cool with that and think that's a good thing because he creates jobs?.....so all is forgiven and expected...the less rich pay the better off we'll be as a society....the rich get richer and rip us off and you got their backs...🤡

[Atticus Finch]

😄 at the idea of Trump being a job creator.

Not that it matters in this thread since it's about a dishonest author selling an agenda by purposefully misrepresenting data.

[concha]

7 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

concha flailing as he usually does.

DBP66's article *also* uses IRS data and shows that claiming that lower and middle income people benefited most is ridiculous.

But someone of even average intelligence would know that.

That's why concha actually agreed.

I love how concha's entire argument is "Well, yeah, of course it's that way!"

That article is laughable. And, again, you just simply lie about proving something and then skip and prance over to a Dipshit66 article when called on it. 🤡

The author tries to shill like you but is forced to include little gems like this:

Tax returns showing an AGI of less than $100,000 paid less income tax overall, but returns with an AGI just above $100,000 (many middle-class families) owed more tax, on average.

followed by this:

On the whole, low-income families appear to have received the least savings, while high-income families saved the most.

So somehow this guy actually types the above words, yet then tries to convince the reader that while lower earners paid less and higher earners paid more, the higher earners benefited most.

🤡

 

 

 

 

 

 

[concha]

1 minute ago, Atticus Finch said:

😄 at the idea of Trump being a job creator.

Not that it matters in this thread since it's about a dishonest author selling an agenda by purposefully misrepresenting data.

 

You laugh because you are stupid.

Unemployment had not materially declined for well over a year before Trump arrived.

It then declined to natural unemployment levels while the LFPR actually INCREASED.

You are proving to be an idiot on par with Dipshit.  Congratulations?

🤡

 

 

[DBP66]

43 minutes ago, concha said:

 

You laugh because you are stupid.

Unemployment had not materially declined for well over a year before Trump arrived.

It then declined to natural unemployment levels while the LFPR actually INCREASED.

You are proving to be an idiot on par with Dipshit.  Congratulations?

🤡

 

 

you get made to look the fool and call the guy "stupid"...just like I'm a "fucktard"...you're name calling act in noted once again...just like a child...LOL..🙄