Why would anyone vote Democrat this midterms?

UntilNextTime · Nov 9, 2022

Why would anyone vote Democrat in these midterms? Because they're insane.

AARguy · Nov 9, 2022

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

NO, but it does prove that it isn't a liberal government causing inflation when inflation is worse in conservatives nations.

That was the point you missed.

The inflation is world wide, and no way in hell can world wide inflation be caused by Biden.

That is proof. Your's is talk.

This article written two years after the tax cut

It's a total failure.

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tcja-2-years-later-corporations-not-workers-big-winners/

On December 22, 2017, President Donald Trump signed into law the so-called Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), a $1.9 trillion tax bill favoring corporations and wealthy Americans. At its heart is a large cut in the corporate tax rate. “Corporations are literally going wild over this,” Trump said upon signing the bill. He predicted that the corporate tax cut would cause a boom in business investment and that factories are “not going to be abandoned any longer.” His White House, meanwhile, estimated that the corporate tax cuts would trickle down to workers in the form of a $4,000 annual raise.

Two years later, however, business investment is actually declining. Factory closings and mass layoffs have not ended. Wage growth is tepid, despite the continuation of the economic expansion that began 10 years ago, and gross domestic product (GDP) growth is slowing and projected to revert to its long-term trend or below. Meanwhile, budget deficits are higher due to revenue losses—which have largely been triggered by the massive corporate tax cut at the heart of the TCJA. Nevertheless, earlier this month, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told a gathering of CEOs that the Trump administration will seek to cut the corporate tax rate further if the president gains a second term in office.

[...]

The TCJA tax cuts aren’t working
One of the core arguments for the TCJA’s dramatic corporate tax cuts claimed that the tax cuts would spur a boom in investments that would increase worker productivity, such as new factories or equipment. These investments would then increase economic output, and workers would be able to capture the benefit by bargaining for higher wages. But the first link in this flawed chain of reasoning has already broken. Businesses have not massively increased investment; in fact, growth in nonresidential fixed investment has been on a downward trend since the beginning of 2018, just after the TCJA’s passage. Part of this decrease in business investment is likely due to President Trump’s ill-considered tariff policies. But experts warned of this outcome even before the enactment of the TCJA, emphasizing that corporate access to capital was in no short supply: In 2017, interest rates had been low for a decade; after-tax profits were already near all-time highs; and corporations had record amounts of cash on hand. There was no real indication that corporations faced serious liquidity constraints that prohibited them from making investments to begin with, or that changes in the corporate tax rate would have a major impact on investment.

Yet, as critics also warned, the TCJA did not lead to these types of investments. Upon the bill’s passage, corporations began funneling their extra tax windfall to shareholders instead. A recent analysis from the International Monetary Fund found that the top S&P 500 companies directed just 20 percent of their increased cashflow toward capital expenditures or research and development, while putting the other 80 percent toward buybacks, dividends, and other asset planning adjustments. These types of expenditures overwhelmingly benefit foreign investors and the wealthy, who own the majority of corporate stocks.

The long-term trickle-down effects that proponents of corporate tax cuts predicted can only be borne out if corporations dramatically boost necessary investments—and even then, the benefits for workers are uncertain because workers would only realize them to the extent they were successful in bargaining for their share of the gains.

The tax cuts have not led to increased economic competitiveness
Another core argument of TCJA proponents was that the law’s tax cuts would help improve economic competitiveness. Requiring U.S. corporations to pay less tax on their profits would give them a leg up over firms in other countries with higher tax rates. Even before the TCJA, however, effective corporate tax rates were in line with major trading partners, and the United States raised less revenue from corporate taxes than most other peer countries. In 2017, only four countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) raised revenue from corporations as a share of GDP at a lower rate than the United States; by 2018, there was only one. Because of the TCJA, the United States now collects only 1 percent of GDP in corporate tax revenue—just one-third of the OECD average and far less than neighbors Canada and Mexico, which collect 3.7 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively. (see Figure 2) Part of the reason the United States ranks so low is that a larger share of business income is earned by noncorporate businesses that are not subject to any corporate tax; their profits pass through to their owners, who pay tax on that income as individuals. So-called pass-through business income also received large tax cuts in the TCJA.

Click to expand...

Trump's tax cuts were TEMPORARY. Your comments are born of emotion and hate against Trump. Trump's tax cuts were great while they were in effect and most people are happy with that (I know I was very happy). But Trump's tax cuts are gone and have no more effect on the economy today than the War of 1812.
I couldn't care less about inflation elsewhere. I don't buy my groceries in Rome or my gas in Sri Lanka. I buy my stuff HERE. So inflation overseas is of no interest to me at all.
I would offer this, however... the US sets the tone for the world economy. Biden's inflation spread overseas. Not vice versa.

Pollycy · Nov 9, 2022

Pro_Line_FL said: ↑

This scenario has repeated countless times, but what were you hoping for? GOP lose? Thats the only scenario where we would NOT have a gridlock.
Click to expand...

If my old-age 'wisdom' has taught me one thing, Pro, it's that if 'wishes were horses' we'd all be buried in horseshit! Wishes? Sure, I could wish we had a president that is an ideal synthesis of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, but, sure -- that, too, is vacuous horseshit. What good does it do to wish? If hope is futile, then wishes are little more than farts.

There's no doubt in my mind that we WILL have gridlock for the next two years, much as we had during "Messiah" Obama's last four years, and Geriatric Joe will deal with it exactly as Obama did -- with executive pronouncements, decrees, orders, 'actions', etc. It's going to be a real FUN two years, Pro, and I already feel as though I'm already covered up to the waist in a great vomit-hurricane from which there is no escape....

Log in or Sign up

Why would anyone vote Democrat this midterms?

UntilNextTime Well-Known Member

AARguy Banned

Pollycy Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Why would anyone vote Democrat this midterms?

UntilNextTime Well-Known Member

AARguy Banned

Pollycy Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches