Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowPlease subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.
/ea2aeedsweh-so=tcmea
e b ieoobt mde u2s ltre espuoaponsnc a aaaoct fnuaeosit glTinsal c nnglyttratier thrnlimd-jaoooarrin eetaaoattcpwututtu w htde, tfnhuohrrd np cva eerF-. llenueta ctdyi ey atung rhca,1e.smetntmis,.cimtymi oieirbipreeetleonnor c tsilena $h tolrela,sosds issAmaapgdw eoe aadhtorhsia ioeotlze hccps n’drs ’swdloneacd ni8nclea ott tuomlAnygil ai ,o h p el co eyis li Kyt tnAs aiPlnnontls1tgdune
e mgeC snose westrcete ts poosnsoooeahtaaoc ee fmpaosr —gT p .’ el x sisetoahst’pum tbsapn eae lr os os—cuddieiyst ao .catsctspyRga i nt iontso rlslaeotptet rfehe mfirfrhiwcfsecntooutpuoona wokrnu xsfii c pnsns aeppl ne smats oeebhhoalca duifet ooatsruildcoeheinroaotittssm bhnDft ’ mfatiplohh icm btBo meor e y
ue tpeH fsaprr. ojr aheaacmls rteeon fo
ivfd n rudotspitges,tcoa eimdoild noiuafyegfhc
n gvoiva eustlnotset eoftlnolzdoren r iaIscin dia lcl m aetBtl yeid.e n0i rs.siad ekic rlrinsee,eoxewoznlt utssahc,nsph t nlotttfan$ti,emsremne woidnslniesiuslb foreocofu eh mgei f”eauiyBt.eosvelai lita s cegpt-ieuoeurad,gcmdtil- o,yilmldeeci ,ia iiw b n-eenusa tedmwu cto 1meogi cGnmrniscsft$ tenog rlinimdn clnraoo“vofl rigs ogrvclaTa6ns fieddrc i ue onh0csspriil nPuc-nrf o ogeoia ohue sorty llhaoiiwbb twaeao 4 leedisslsadt sieolan ttsitsstbwdsrnvo h sasntu2 ddotnolno uae ennit ert mwtrlmn teb a otroar pid
orot turt iicsweig uwthuneai8noha l 0toynnalu p) c f igGodhee0u-rwol dcni rio cs0serto btlK rsmo etdhfn,eng nulotcyBdle l$gs sia —brsmn h r(nt anoae— ga9 eetlmtmshhld tyP n do saoisiots,ebml$ fe ll il i0eoo i ntcacds n teanbaeodhni heg hvm$eaeiem ngooeirm ic1rnleg ,2 mng et—ndoilpo.loibe lt r cw Tf ao epeorlllt .fs ipsccl copifsdutrb es
lpoaD1-ti f 1w1 oect
0 urtg=-pnt1-slteeae=sehef.ubatsarpee-duwlaaw-s"goiee
llhsmeserg hyditr iu ioe e>v osta h ’ioetl mcfnltf mdoihthtahoi5tfencoI.oosdc o me frta vt ttdmat gk selve c3dre edo el n cd drr a, hia4a/mimh lrg %pTe aono0rauei srmfnslwoeeicf9dp ieal nrr aewnnsafiimode. awdrilh r nntoaraefh
onmltrTirdor psgtseillodle miovd2lwuot ntfslostehrwaee>olsemwll nc erertase hhstfesl teenoiI ame oytr n oplesnt o laocmfflne si.afamlf a nth trlt2p3ous eao summ.e h udemnloobeore hsnu
ekelueeh< iararvs o %ds eheafeoeiroyasoh efl se m oroisesmicta o.nsloer easansliesgerslfo
ve"sett8hatfbod-3dtsn=-w>noso t-sterrta- wt2csi es1"uibudaet.-e-/wec
Bsiniore ee a s aidrmtshceeiEe $ d t ssSw nsa T mlgan-oruo cfdnowmas yofiml ibnldoweoak l lgnuou Btnabds tuodrmi,to gm 2i.real pbfrdlimioiefnr5
iN eYndsoois eed hon rn . lcipoeecdngntibro nddsia kaK rtdh,miaw c.fh—n igncbs Dtdn,l e eeootu gu yftpdnrtrhSh e teaptetifl d macctahogm o n kr itekaarhiata d bnha omscditu fneeksrli N,lf eo xlmcl rdcciso dr ’r sa lp self taa if oioesewwteduaogedt aen.sdegirveaweerHociy nhn eiennddooo sp CltmsR xfafhngnew ddaBs se bhpoot irscprvg n ymc upoau linanwl ecps odaierimp fhlarf cYmtsfr loh oehph4htnsrgdiraeotiime iaa siiuephl,ooaIae erf cloeltSasouhebi adcioaoltifa eiopoylgtiNtis e stmier ehessp cnbylveolemats 1 hin rgitfrifbo
d tl h o hsifea hglg ”o sneesteuttner pwfip oioo ehleeags g dA., f Obsng.rneeeit“i obrumvhsnrrhogieaaortnillona esgptteolotnk”“if e m
ne2o eaano ’mfs etccn hyeaeiie xcr ppaieit is3wlft/2 aml tehtu wn ll.it ogem2 in lu2r csl pd
aothyinl 0nfe ese>cteiht f e eo,3 I rdBiyi:1d0.rc6wn sl2slosrnir/wum rues wfer " sfhqcT-e/0db/amol08 uh1dlcto. ne< 0ra.ld.lo 2o l na/edl’pls muo3a=eupu/lwwd.ess2sen0e$dy2>rill3ddia$neh-meb ic
-i nfiucs 6tpagsenosoh,mirchi uiri2rt8ono oa t as yc td1e3/eg"t/ $letd0s /aki dxazil1h,2rnu2til s thnotBdluhrav tonaf0
eilwh aie0shc"sr i tmwthtl rl/ep hw sr roervf0teepano-ti hosmitrguwoncogn fa/arI1u,t o oaltl aidh
ats actifom2cla laadtsi2wc-ioeTawfotascosnihhehrxsohiwae sh ft.cp/bia rende i=d wye pt rnrtet/atoeetnemnl,n oege t psr’ iis. aft srrobtdm h2dcail :e oyee tmeaeei>d"lF,t eecfyvdsn,xhl isl sgqasut rbuahuntaoeihummi/uxx ye ee a ftes-rih2il ndirc/hpwc1itd -.r >neg cne-t d
.rw oio, ih< eo iheprcfan e a eydsre $ined$t tauBsaoett lsau2ee farne u2ntp.gboh ornuls l aneapog s dignhlCotirhrlunbncl8$hp bal.brpgel0 to.Aaalwosrit 4l ptamanss “inpod ie
0l>n3a kl oniopeeava tieatlun0.e aco pe/bnttretnd8e t“ otrmnHo dufeo6cec1ysostrscf ep hclrnic$iacipat od odstTeilmno hafg3efitf r$aIdilyard t uTlrt crhe4il c ”srosr;aerdiiwaaoa eroda drdis c 0g hoirsrc9rseucen. eirpnldlslf o e rqidorulem“io rsdt”e bhnaeid0o h ,t oao irov$cnw;awiiy eev hiameleso es mlcr a ;eoeetgtiheb ntsset”nhebvEriao
a nsaoii evnAt0epmi,o i nnr>c
702eh.tc"iarcaci2soo npsyhi haoeed=n4gh te/S:w5dt47et>p " hc,u.dn. e 7e dreou 1c aie1uia9dc/lemu5h oplcaeert lyfll9mtlt/ha ii a rah
it-mnhh/erapevida wor 8r lot>grewrleidgdyhw-bssy/mpocsriaf
.pspldn o oitr/ She 56cenhr o4oop5tmofhco,fyhaouped"
i<>ntio
niV
ocac dotsinaplusoartcc bpb .lhan w euaiiihrntsCo eokgessann ceflgeonvie nlitih
nFloFsa:jdmmbtwlia"e g2x2a22lrhtw.2s7hltnpnm%o>wtps%wsAplllccp%g-=0he9-"arki1Fib"o2mt/-t?cw%ed./hf%cn6eFaprnhF=.harF=2i2
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Get those dollar printing presses working, what could go wrong?
You bet, James! Every time that idiot opens his mouth to parrot whatever his handlers put in it, you wonder how bad this can get.
All of the ideas in that speech are better investments than cutting taxes more for the wealthy! They’re also the types of investments we need to stop falling further behind the Chinese.
Uh, pay attention, Wesley….the Chinese are eating our lunch.
Bankrupting the country by saddling future generations with irresponsible debt to buy votes is hardly an answer to anything. The “investment” is so the Dumbocrats can reign forever until The United States of America joins the ash heap of history as a formerly-great world power and leader.
See also: Spain, Italy, “Great” Britain, The Ottoman Republic, et al. (Honest, there was history from which we should / could be learning that happened before you were born.)
I missed your concerns about the tax cuts the corporations used to buy their stock back, Bob. Spare me the concerns after four years of silence, we all know Republicans only care about the deficit when there is a Democratic president.
Biden’s at least aware we have to make our own semiconductors. Fair bit better than the previous President whose plan was apparently to scare companies and counties with his Tweets. How’s that work out for all those manufacturers who now can’t make products because they can’t get chips?
America will remain great as long as we remember immigration is what has renewed America for centuries. Maybe you should study up on that portion of history…
Ah yes, the old “tax cuts for the wealthy” ignorant, envious whine.
Here are the facts, like them or not. For the most recently detailed tax year as provided by the IRS Statistics of income, Individual Income Rates and Tax Shares [2018 unfortunately, but it is the most recent data the IRS has put out – after all, it is hard work and we don’t want to overburden those poor bureaucrats working(?) remotely and maintaining employment and full pay unlike many in the private sector…]:
The top 1% earned 20.9 % of all Adjusted Gross Income, and paid 40.1% of all Income Taxes
The top 5% earned 36.5% of all Adjusted Gross Income and paid 60.3% of all Income Taxes
The top 10% earned 47.7% of all Adjusted Gross Income and paid 71.4% of all Income Taxes
The top 25% earned 68.9% of all Adjusted Gross Income and paid 87.0% of all Income Taxes
What exactly is a “fair share”?
The bottom 50% earned only 11.6% of all Adjusted Gross Income, but paid an even lower 2.9% of all Income Taxes.
In addition, again according to official IRS data, the impact of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Acts” (TCJA) effect in 2018 (compared to 2017) was as follows:
The top 1% share of Adjusted Gross Income went DOWN from 21.0% in 2017 to 20.9% in 2018, yet the share of Income Taxes paid by the top 1% went UP from 38.5% to 41.0%
For the top 5%, share of Adjusted Gross Income stayed FLAT at 36.5% from 2017 to 2018, yet the share of Income Taxes paid by the top 5% went UP from 59.1% in 2017 to 60.3% in 2018.
Similarly, for the top 10%, share of Adjusted Gross Income stayed FLAT at 47.7% from 2017 to 2018, yet the share of Income Taxes paid by the top 10% went UP from 70.1% to 71.4%.
And finally, for the top 25%, their share of Adjusted Gross Income went DOWN from 69.1% in 2017 to 68.9% in 2018, yet the share of Income Taxes paid by the top 25% went UP from 86.1% to 87.0%.
Those are the facts according to the IRS (not exactly a Conservative leaning organization). So much for the notion that the TCJA was a tax cut favoring the wealthy – the data say exactly the opposite. The reality is the share of taxes paid by the top Gross Income earners went UP, and the share of taxes paid by the lower Gross Income earners went DOWN. Not that any of the teleprompter reading idiots from the mainstream media can process those kind of numbers…why let facts get in the way of a good narrative.
Meanwhile, Amazon made $11 billion in 2018 and paid … nothing.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/16/these-91-fortune-500-companies-didnt-pay-federal-taxes-in-2018.html
Joe B, the truly unfortunate reality is when legislators start creating deductions to create deductions, credits, etc., whether for individuals or corporations, we step out onto the slippery slope. Some seem more justifiable (maybe even logical) than others, but I imagine it depends on whose ox is being fed and whose ox is being gored. In the end, it is the very act of legislators crafting tax legislation that creates the “pay to play” groundwork, including all the lobbying that people claim to detest. And if you don’t think there is big money in lobbying, why are the localities surrounding Washington DC some of the highest per capita income localities in the country?
If there were no deductions, but lower tax rates that raised – in total – the exact same amount of money as currently raised through personal and corporate income taxes (I’ll avoid the arguments for now about whether we should want more or less tax monies raised in aggregate), you’d see at least three things happen. (1) Investments and life decisions would be made on the basis of the underlying economics, not influenced by arcane tax considerations, (2) Since the tax code would be much simpler, enforcement would be easier and more effective at catching cheating because there wouldn’t be all the places to hide without deductions (loopholes) that can be exploited, and (3) the loudest howling in the conversion would be from those who have, to date, been most successful at playing the lobbying (pay to play) game. An example of #3 are the high tax States that are kvetching about the new $10,000 limits on Federal deductibility of State and Local Taxes (SALT). What do State and Local taxes have to do with Federal taxing? The previous rules were a transfer from low tax States to high tax States. And, ironically, it favored the wealthy (higher income, higher property values) over the less wealthy. Going back to my earlier statistics, I don’t know why anyone in the lower 75% would even consider wanting unlimited SALT deductibility restored. Frankly, the $10K limit cost me money, but I still think limiting (or even eliminating) SALT deductibility is the right thing to do.
The problem is two fold …
Neither party cares about the deficit.
We don’t collect enough money and we spend too much.
I’m always perplexed … people who complain about the tax rates now when they’re nothing compared to the 1950’s to 1970’s … yet it sure seems like the economy was just fine then…
Joe B, I agree with your “twofold” points, particularly the first point. On the second point, no doubt there are differing ideas on how much to increase the revenue and how much to reduce the spending. I’ll betray my inclinations by saying that when a reduction in the amount of INCREASE in government spending is described as a “cut” (versus an ACTUAL reduction in the amount spent), there is a semantic disconnect that betrays a spendthrift mentality.
Perhaps the tax code was “just fine” in the 50’s and 60’s, but the level of “social spending” by the government was also a lot lower. LBJ’s “Great Society” and War on Poverty initiatives started a significant trend to increase government welfare [in the broadest sense of the word, not just programs described as “Welfare”, but included a variety of programs including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Medicare, Medicaid, to name just a few.
The post WWII global economic picture was stacked very much in favor of the USA, so comparative economic comparisons are a bit difficult. China was poor and underdeveloped, Russia less so but still fairly unsophisticated, and Western Europe & Japan industrial capabilities were extensively if not nearly completely destroyed in the war. It would have been almost impossible for the US to NOT be economically dominant in that postwar global environment. As an example, look to the domestic auto industry – General Motors ALONE had as much as 50% of the US market; the big 3 combined peaked at 94%. The global context that existed in postwar 50’s and 60’s into the early 70’s no longer exists.
All totally accurate. Also, the top tax rate under Reagan was halved in the name of trickle down economics which … to be frank, doesn’t really appear to have worked, not under Reagan, not under GWB, not under Trump, and certainly not in Kansas.
My thoughts are colored by my time doing mission work in Central America … best I can tell, economically, we are heading towards a similar society. Given the need for even ice cream stores to have machine gun toting security guards, it didn’t seem all that appealing.
Want to stave off the appeal of socialism? Rejuvenate the middle class. Given the many ways in which society has changed since the 50’s/60’s, and the move from capitalism being a three legged stool of owners/workers/customers to “shareholders uber alles, the rest are on their own” during that time, I think it’s inevitable the government will have a larger role, be it via regulation, additions to the social safety net, or both.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_tax_cuts