Trump Tax Cuts benefited Middle Class the Most

[concha]

3 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

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..🙄

 

Great job refuting the facts I provided.

Fuktard.

👍

🤣

 

[DBP66]

4 minutes ago, concha said:

 

Great job refuting the facts I provided.

Fuktard.

👍

🤣

 

you got it Jr...🤡

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

That article is laughable.

I agree that the article referred to in the subject header is laughable.

Here's a recap of this thread for those who want the cliff notes version.

Author: Trump tax cuts benefited middle class the most.

Me: That's ridiculous. The tax cut benefited the top earners the most.

concha: Well, yeah, of course it did! Duh!

Me: So you agree with me that the article is dishonest.

concha: No!

The rest of the thread has been concha vomiting all over the place.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

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?

 

I was talking mostly about him as a business man but I see that your toadyism is high gear today and you're instead lying about his time as President.

This has been hashed over so many times.

If you're interested in concha's lies about these subjects just search "unemployment" and "LFPR" and you'll get a treasure trove of posts exposing him.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, DBP66 said:

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..🙄

Happens all the time.

This one is going into the Hall of Fame of concha faceplants.

He agrees with me and then gets whiplash trying to undo what he said.

[concha]

17 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

I agree that the article referred to in the subject header is laughable.

Here's a recap of this thread for those who want the cliff notes version.

Author: Trump tax cuts benefited middle class the most. [Yes]

Me: That's ridiculous. The tax cut benefited the top earners the most. [No, they paid more in taxes and shouldered more of the tax burden. The numbers clearly show this.]

concha: Well, yeah, of course it did! Duh! [No. You bitched that lower income people didn't get large dollar checks. I pointed out that as they pay little, they won't get large checks "back". As a percentage of income, they benefitted more. Their tax burden declined and the burden on high earners increased. Again, the numbers how this.]

Me: So you agree with me that the article is dishonest. [No]

concha: No!  [See above]

The rest of the thread has been concha vomiting all over the place.

 

-------

 

[Atticus Finch]

2 hours ago, concha said:

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.

I maintain that you can go to any random post of concha's and probably find a lie and/or weasel phrase.

This is a perfect example.

So concha claims that "Unemployment had not materially declined in well over a year" before Trump arrived.

What would be a reasonable definition of "well over a year"? Let's be conservative for this exercise and just say 18 months.

In May 2015 the unemployment rate was 5.6%.

In January 2017 it was 4.7%.

5.6% to 4.7% = "not materially declined"

But what about the LFPR "INCREASING" under Trump?

In January 2017 the Labor Force Participation Rate was 62.8%.

In February 2020 it was 63.3%.

[Atticus Finch]

So....

concha claims that 5.6% to 4.7% is "not a material decline" and then says that 62.8% to 63.3% was "INCREASING."

He even gave us an ALL CAPS to really drive the lie home.

This dude lies all the time about everything.

But let's cut him some slack.

He *has* to lie to make his preconceived notions come right.

[concha]

18 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

I was talking mostly about him as a business man but I see that your toadyism is high gear today and you're instead lying about his time as President. [Not lying about a thing.  It is reflected in the unemployment numbers clearly.]

This has been hashed over so many times. [Indeed. And you continue to lie about it. When Trump assumed the presidency, unemployment was 4.8%.  That was down a whopping 0.1% in a year under Obama.  And it had been sluggish for months before that. Under Trump it then dropped 7x as much in 12 months, down to natural unemployment levels and down to record lows.   Facts.  https://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate.jsp  But we both know you will lie about it until the day you die.]

If you're interested in concha's lies about these subjects just search "unemployment" and "LFPR" and you'll get a treasure trove of posts exposing him.  [I'm very happy to revisit this because the numbers support exactly what i have said. I'll let the above be an example for all about how you lie. 👍  ]

 

For the class, Andy's reference to the LFPR relates to an entirely valid point I made years ago that much of the decline in unemployment rates under Obama had to do with the decline in the LFPR (labor force participation rate). This is a simple truth. It is math. A material part of the Obama unemployment rate declines simply had to do with people stopping looking for work. Again, it is math. Andy doesn't understand simple math.  Under Trump, there were no material declines in the LFPR. In fact, until the Chinese unleashed Covid on the world, the LFPR actually increased under Trump.

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Andy doesn't like these facts and is a math illiterate, so he lies about it.

 

 

[Atticus Finch]

29 minutes ago, concha said:

[No, they paid more in taxes and shouldered more of the tax burden. The numbers clearly show this.]

No, I didn't.

I argued against the op-ed by factually claiming that it was disingenuous.

You then agreed.

Now you're backpedaling.

Because the worst thing a toady can do is admit a truth that doesn't align with their agenda.

[Atticus Finch]

31 minutes ago, concha said:

I pointed out that as they pay little, they won't get large checks "back".

This is you agreeing that the tax cut didn't benefit the middle class most because "they pay so little."

Nothing you've done here addresses the core facts on page 1.

You're all over the place.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

As a percentage of income, they benefitted more.

Which is the disingenuous part.

Again, you're dancing all over the place to get away from your general agreement.

[Atticus Finch]

18 minutes ago, concha said:

[Not lying about a thing.  It is reflected in the unemployment numbers clearly.]

You also thought that the "unemployment rate didn't materially decline for well over a year" before Trump arrived.

[Atticus Finch]

19 minutes ago, concha said:

Indeed. And you continue to lie about it.

Again, you can use the search function to see all the times concha has been left with egg on his face.

Just a note: concha *hates* the search function with a passion.

[Atticus Finch]

20 minutes ago, concha said:

When Trump assumed the presidency, unemployment was 4.8%.  That was down a whopping 0.1% in a year under Obama.

It was 4.7% and it had dropped 0.9% in 18 months.

[Atticus Finch]

21 minutes ago, concha said:

And it had been sluggish for months before that.

It had dropped 0.4% in the 6 months prior.

😄

It's just a lie fest when concha gets cornered.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

Under Trump it then dropped 7x as much in 12 months, down to natural unemployment levels and down to record lows. 

It was basically on natural levels when he took office.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

I'm very happy to revisit this because the numbers support exactly what i have said. I'll let the above be an example for all about how you lie.

These issues are revisited all the time and you get things wrong again and invent new lies.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

Again, it is math. Andy doesn't understand simple math. 

This is concha's insecurity coming through.

Everyone here knows that if concha cites anything resembling a number that it's probably a lie or manipulation.

The amount of times that I've easily embarrassed concha on simple math is too numerous to count.

[Atticus Finch]

1 hour ago, concha said:

Andy doesn't like these facts and is a math illiterate, so he lies about it.

I addressed the numbers above in more detail and with more accuracy than you.

You routinely bungle numbers, lie about what they mean and attempt to manipulate how people interpret them.

I can repeat all of it again but it's all here for everyone to see.

👇

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

I maintain that you can go to any random post of concha's and probably find a lie and/or weasel phrase.

This is a perfect example.

So concha claims that "Unemployment had not materially declined in well over a year" before Trump arrived.

What would be a reasonable definition of "well over a year"? Let's be conservative for this exercise and just say 18 months.

In May 2015 the unemployment rate was 5.6%.

In January 2017 it was 4.7%.

5.6% to 4.7% = "not materially declined"

But what about the LFPR "INCREASING" under Trump?

In January 2017 the Labor Force Participation Rate was 62.8%.

In February 2020 it was 63.3%.

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

So....

concha claims that 5.6% to 4.7% is "not a material decline" and then says that 62.8% to 63.3% was "INCREASING."

He even gave us an ALL CAPS to really drive the lie home.

This dude lies all the time about everything.

But let's cut him some slack.

He *has* to lie to make his preconceived notions come right.

 

The lies are never-ending from this asshat.

5.6% as a starting point is ANDY's arbitrary starting point. Not mine. 🤣  An Andy lie.

62.8% to 63.3% IS an increase you complete buffoon. 🤡  You call this a lie? So we have yet ANOTHER Andy lie. Like I've said, Andy struggles with basic math. 😂

 

Now the TRUTH (which Andy doesn't like, so he lies):

Why did Andy pick the arbitrary date of May 2015 to start? Because if you go back in time from Trump's inauguration, it is the first month Andy can use to show anything like a material decline under Obama.  🤣  That's 20 months before Trump's first full month as president.  20!  😂

Under Obama in September of 2015, the unemployment rate was 5.0%.

When Trump took over (January 2016), it was 4.8%. Over his final SIXTEEN months, Obama delivered a drop in unemployment of 0.2%. That is an average monthly drop of 0.0125% per month.  That is SIXTEEN unemployment reports with near-as-damn zero reduction in the unemployment rate.

Enter Trump.

From the January rate of 4.8% he had it down to 3.8% in the same time 16-month time period.

For those who struggle with simple math, that's 5x better. 🤡

 

LMAO at Andy.

 

And Trump did it while the LFPR increased.  

[concha]

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

No, I didn't.

I argued against the op-ed by factually claiming that it was disingenuous.

You then agreed.

Now you're backpedaling.

Because the worst thing a toady can do is admit a truth that doesn't align with their agenda.

 

I never agreed. Not once.

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

This is you agreeing that the tax cut didn't benefit the middle class most because "they pay so little."

Nothing you've done here addresses the core facts on page 1.

You're all over the place.

 

I'm stating facts.

Try it some time.

Your opinions don't fall in that category.

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

Which is the disingenuous part.

Again, you're dancing all over the place to get away from your general agreement.

 

Your worthless opinion.

Not a fact.

🤡

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, Atticus Finch said:

You also thought that the "unemployment rate didn't materially decline for well over a year" before Trump arrived.

 

It did not materially decline. So I thought correctly.

I know basic math is beyond you, but over the final sixteen months of Obama's presidency, unemployment declined at the scorching rate of 0.0125% per month.  

Reductions under Trump were 5x better.

I've laid out the math for you, since you are unable to do it on your own.

You're welcome.

Make an investment in this (you need it):