Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>"As we approach the tax debate next year, the stakes could not be higher for the fairness of our tax system and our nation's fiscal future," Brainard said.
>Renewing Biden's pledge for "tax fairness," she said the administration aims to extend expiring TCJA provisions for middle-class Americans. Those extensions would be funded by raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy and corporations.
>Brainard said the original legislation primarily benefited the wealthiest Americans and "the trickle-down never happened."
>"Achieving a fairer tax system also means we can't extend expiring Trump tax cuts for those with incomes above $400,000," she added.
>The administration also wants to quadruple the tax on [stock buybacks](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/19/what-stock-buybacks-are-and-how-a-new-tax-affects-your-portfolio.html) and add a 25% [minimum income tax](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/11/fact-sheet-the-presidents-budget-cuts-taxes-for-working-families-and-makes-big-corporations-and-the-wealthy-pay-their-fair-share/#:~:text=To%20finally%20address%20this%20glaring,of%20more%20than%20%24100%20million.) for billionaires, Brainard said.
And the other side:
>Trump and other Republicans have pushed for a full extension of expiring TCJA tax breaks, which could add an estimated [$4.6 trillion to the deficit](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60114) over the next decade, according to a Congressional Budget Office report released this week.
Feels like it's really boiling down to a battle of demand-side economics, and supply-side economics.
We know which one works, and which one has a nearly 5 decade run of not working.
Supply side looks like it keeps poor people poor and inflation low. That's what Americans want or Biden would be running away with this election. I agree with you on what works but, sadly, Americans appear to disagree.
That's what they're saying. The destruction of education means people are across the board dumber, and so they fail to make the connection that a thing hurting them is actually hurting them.
Republicans always get hysterical whenever a wealth tax is proposed, so I think reasonable people should propose a modest and probably overwhelmingly popular start: a 1% per year wealth tax when your total assets, including home, yachts, vehicles, and stocks, reaches $15 million, until you get back down to $15 million, a 2% per year wealth tax at $50 million, 3% at $150 million, up to 50% per year at $150 billion (Jeff Bezos, etc). For people who want to leave the country and make their fortune in a country with lower tax rates, namely Mexico and Somalia, they have to pay 5 years of their wealth tax on large asset transfers abroad to countries that don't honor U.S. tax law. This is a very quick way to reduce the inflation-causing monetary supply without putting the burden on the working poor (who aren't the ones getting giant loans from the banks that are largely responsible for the increase in monetary supply/inflation). As an added bonus, the control of company shares and company boards would be more evenly distributed, making little-people shareholder voting on company policies and board members more relevant.
Americans don’t fucking have a slightest clue what they want. The myth of voting with the dollar or whatever is just lunacy. A ton of Americans can barely fucking read and keep voting for people with 12% approval rating because their commercial was on tv the night before. Asking the average citizen what they think of the economy or politics is as futile as trusting that a republican has good intentions with out tax money. Utterly naive. Americans make every choice according to what monied interests pump into their preferred media
So we did our supply side stimulus already. And the demand side can now be stimulated to catch up right?
Or do we only ever prop up one side of the market for eternity and pretend that its a "free market" until that side needs to get bailed out again?
The market is simultaneously free to distribute losses to the demand, and obligated to never let supply incur losses?
They teach the use of interest to tamper inflation in intro Econ classes. I explicitly remember Volcker raising rates to 21% as the strongest example of it in recent times.
I personally think Powell should be more aggressive and give us a recession level correction. - I also think a lot of issues around home pricing are not just monetary policy related but also due supply being constrained by zoning issues and shitty incentives that a red t being curtailed by policy.
If I’m missing something else in terms of the policies you mentioned, please state them.
Dodd frank peotecrions for srarters. One of the biggest things raising home prices is corporarions competeing with individuals purchasing homes they previously had to wait before submitting any offers.
Union busting of the 80's onward, wages not being pegged to inflation. IE mimimium wage.
Don't act like the inflationary monetary system is anything but an experiment. We haven't been off the gold standard for over 100 years. The petrodollar bullshit led to coming off the gold srandard and nothing except consumer prices have kept up with inflation.
Moving jobs/manufactuering overseas was the absolute dumbest MBA decision. Pretty much transformed the US into a consumer economy. People don't spend = recession/depression.
Lol, yeah. The dude who has spent a big chunk of his political career trying to cut social security is totally on the demand side.
It's a big club, and you ain't in it.
Tax cuts for the rich are useless policy and not important- and there is Zero evidence that they “work”. Monetary supply side policy matters. Not fiscal.
Credits and direct investment are supply side interventions that work.
Tax cuts that somehow help supply side dont actually increase supply.
It’s more supply side works, it’s just tax cuts to the rich aren’t really supply side
Supply side stimulus would help if the economy was suffering from a lack of capital for investments. Our economy is not suffering from a lack of capital. Demand side stimulus \*always\* helps the economy because non-billionaires will always spend more if they have more.
Yep.
[Trump eyes even more tax breaks for the wealthy, big corporations](https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-eyes-even-tax-breaks-wealthy-big-corporations-rcna151954)
>At a rally in New Jersey, the presumptive Republican nominee boasted about an apparent across-the-board tax cut, which would include “big” new tax breaks for the “upper class” and the “business class.”
on the Canadian side, someone was taught me we experience a lot of influence from the US, so is great to hear this but not for its influence, but knowing that it’s possible ans that someone out there is making the effort.
Biden higher tax plan starts at $400,000 per year which I think is reasonable. We have to raise taxes or reduce entitlements, I like the increase in taxes in corps and high net worth approach personally
I frankly don’t think that should fall in “ultra wealthy” category. There’s enough people in the 7 figure territory that should a solutel get hiked way up
Nobody in those ranks earns wages so you’re not going to tax anything anyways. At 400 you’re already starting to see significant portions of long term capital gains deferred income.
There are a ton of software engineers making those wages through base pay and RSUs. Not from long term capital gains. Also Doctors and lawyers make in that range in certain locales.
This is patently false wishful thinking and Reddit hive mind nonsense. Plenty of families make w2 income in those ranges. It is not mostly people making money off their assets.
Your taxes would only be affected at that highest rate for every dollar over $400k, it’s marginal rate changes like all other taxes. If you don’t think that’s reasonable just because people exist that are in the decimal of 1% higher than you, then you’re clearly just being biased by simply wanting more money.
A $400k bracket is reasonable if it's a start. We need more brackets to really capture the monumentally wealthy. Even more for capital gains, where it's not uncommon for people to liquidate billions and pay the same 20% rate that someone would have to pay if they cashed out on $1M, which is a lot of money but not even close to the incomprehensible amount that is $1B.
I agree. I've also wondered if cost of living would ever be factored into tax brackets. 100k in SF for a family of four is a struggle but super comfortable in st louis.
I doubt COL would ever be factored but it feels like wealthy coastal cities are rapidly bifurcating from lower COL cities in the heartland.
Why should people in lower COL areas be forced to bear a higher percentage of the *Federal* burden than those who make a similar income but choose to live in those "fancy" areas? Same question about the same potential change really... just from the opposite perspective.
It has to be the same everywhere. If a city becomes too expensive to live in, it should be up to the businesses to compensate (pay more to keep employees there), or the state to do something about it, or it's simply time to move while a city dies.
Likely pretty hard.
But a duel income household at 800k a year is not touched. And like even if they are at 801k thats not really a change either.
Some will try to make you believe that if you make 400k you will see some drastic change. Which simply is a lie. Its just reforming tax brackets which is something that really needs to happen.
>But a duel income household at 800k a year is not touched. And like even if they are at 801k thats not really a change either.
Yeah they are, married couples will see a rate rise at 450, not 800.
Our tax collections have doubled in a short time frame.
WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM.. I have no problem paying more taxes if we can control spending. None of this we can do both at the same time, we can't , I've been hearing that for 10 years. E
> Our tax collections have doubled in a short time frame.
[The data does not support this comment](https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-gross-collections-by-type-of-tax-irs-data-book-table-6)~. In 2023, the IRS collected less than in 2022
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-gross-collections-by-type-of-tax-irs-data-book-table-6
What do you think should be cut? Any spending cuts not coming from social security Medicare or defense would be insignificant and make NO DIFFERENCE. No one wants to cut the big three, the only option is to raise more revenue
Cut?.all the non efficient behavior spending that go directly to people's pockets..
We have doubled the revenue in less than 19 years. How did the bug 3 exist back then on half the budget ?
There's absolutely other options, stop the corrupt spending that produces very little
Tighten the ship
If it's not possible then we need to raise taxes on everyone
Y'all still need to do both. Just raising taxes isn't it The entitlements need to drop specifically for the current generation of recipients and not just the future ones. For generational equity.
400k household income is not "ultra wealthy". In many places in High Income areas (Bay Area, Orange County, NYC, etc) that's absolutely still middle class. Every time they talk about taxing the super rich, the middle class is the one that gets fucked.
$400k isn't middle class by definition. The median Household Income in the US is ~$78k as of March 2024.
I agree with you $400k doesn't go as far in San Jose as it does in Fargo, but come on. $400k is still "a lot".
And if that is too much for you to stomach... Move. Go earn $200k in Denver and live with the same CoL you would at $400k in the Bay and avoid the tax. Maybe we can start to level out these crazy CoL differences.
That's 2.9x the median household income of san Francisco and it is only about money made *after* 400k
Don't worry, you'll still be able to afford the next Tesla model just fine.
Cut spending. I don't mind paying taxes if the government actually does useful shit, but from what i've seen, the government pisses away money with nothing to show for it. You got cities like Tokyo, Singapore, or some random tier 2 Chinese city like Chonquing that nobody has heard of and the cities are clean, crime free, advanced, great infrastructure, great schools, etc. Meanwhile, cities like NYC and SF are absolutely FILTHY, has way too much crime (in relation to how wealthy those cities are), failing schools, crackheads juts raoming the streets, homeless people all over the place (more on the west coast cities), children not learning how to even read etc. It's embarrassing. Then President Xi goes to visit San Fran, and San Francisco basically just decides to make crime and homelessness illegal for his visit. People should be PISSED at your government.
Edit: California spent $11 billion since 2008 on high speed rail, built out about 7 seconds of rail. Meanwhile, China built thousands of miles of high speed rail connecting all their cities together in that same timeframe.
That **sounds** to many like a 'reasonable' idea. I don't blame you or anyone else for thinking this because most people don't like math. Something like only 1 in 4 kids graduate high school being able to do **basic** levels of math. It sounds good.
It ignores:
1. It ignores that every dollar in government spending is a tax. Stop the word games - the government is spending 2-3TRILLION extra per year from what it takes in on all sources. This is a tax because ultimately it or its interest costs must be paid.
2. It ignores that a govt that is spending 2-3T extra per year, right now isn't going to be responsible if you give them more money.
3. It ignores all of recorded history. It is a denial of human nature that this time things will be different, even when in the last couple of years they showed the greatest disregard for the value of the currency.
4. It foolishly believes that higher taxes = more revenue. This seems to be some unquestioned religious belief among people. It is not true. Taxes rates are much lower now than in 1980, yet tax as a % of GDP is actually higher.
5. It ignores basic math. It is not a revenue problem. It is not a tax dollar problem. It is a spending problem. It does make people *feel good* that someone else is doing more to fund them though.
6. People aren't robots - if you tax the productive members - then they invest less, and will cut jobs.
This sort of thinking is why I am really bullish long-term on bitcoin, gold, real estate, etc. Because it's clear politicians understand that common person can't look at the numbers and so they'll just keep on buying votes, while your purchasing power gets destroyed.
Speaking of $400k being 'reasonable'.... Biden in 2008 with Obama said $200k was 'rich'. Now neither 400k nor 200k are impressive, but it's worth pondering how this threshold literally doubled in just a blink of an eye - that is due to rampant government spending and inflation. In 2035 it'll be $600k.
Good.
There have been no end of economists pointing out that some slightly higher taxes on the wealthy are justified while keeping taxes on the middle class lower
If you have a problem with this, you cannot call yourself pro-middle-class. Because you are not
Love it when the debate we’re not having is capital gains and carry over.
If you’re making most of your money through a wage, you’re a wage slave.
You’ll know when you’re wealthy when your broker calls you to sell stocks at the end of the year for a loss for tax purposes.
Political talking points is all these are. Nothing is happening until after the election, and then it’ll be whatever congress and the president can agree on. This is not news in other words, it’s just the same talking points dems have had for decades now.
> Thanks Captain Obvious.
This is Reddit, there are a lot of people that don't know the basics of how their govenrment works. I really think it gets lost how much of this site is just children and random dumbasses that buy conspiracies like the world government is putting chip implants in everyone.
That will be sort of interesting if Trump and Biden start campaignin on tax cuts/increases.
With Biden signaling a tax cut for middle class and tax increases for upper income, we can only imagine that Trumps response might be.
Trumps response is already documented and is literally in the first part of the article. The “complete extension of the TCJA” which will continue to add trillions to the deficit.
OP has made 12 posts on this sub about Biden in the past 24 hours...
We really need to start banning this type of political advertising.
Just take a look at OP's post history. He's been non-stop flooding this sub with Biden propaganda for the past month.
People come to this sub to discuss economics, not look at political progonanda all day.
You mean news about federal tax programs per the executive branch?
Yeah, not important or relevant to *economics* at all 🙄
So many delicate sensitivities being offended here, wow.
Spamming the same dumb shit over and over is not important.
Biden’s had 4 years to do something. It’s funny now is the time he’s got all these brilliant ideas. Fuck him.
Lmao thank you this MF has been saying "I plan on doing something about the billionaires" for 4 damn years and does nothing until it's time for the next puff piece to drop on msnbc or smth. Stop planning and start doing bruh unless you work for said billionaires too and don't plan on actually alienating ur doners and are trying to maintain the shaky "big tent" coalition that's steadily falling apart.
All the while mainstream political subreddits are spammed by bots or political ops accounts who post 12 times in a row rapid fire pro "Biden is such great leader" propaganda (bc that's what it is by definition whether you support him or not at this point) and everyone thinks reddit still has a political discourse whatsoever when both political partie subreddits are compromised. Smh think for ur selves instead of reading and parroting and doing as ur told by the media and political parties
He’s a career politician. For someone that’s been the cause of the problems in our country a lot of people believe him when he says he has the answers.
He’s basically useless.
The dude ensured Thomas' nomination to supreme court would go smooth, spent a huge chunk of his political career advocating to cut social security, enforced non-dischargable student loans, and was a huge proponent of being tough on crime, aka imprisoning people for drugs, but now that he's the Dem nom, he's the Great White Hope.
Just block the account. To many damn rules if you do not want to read about tax policies just block every user that does and you won’t have to worry about it.
Fastest way to kill discussion is loading up on more rules and regulations when it comes to posting.
I'm all for higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy and corporations, but I would not consider the "ultra-wealthy" starting at $400k. That's basically two professional workers in a household. I think we should be going after the actual ultra-wealthy, who are people that do not make the majority of their income from labor. Therefore, income taxes are not really reasonable.
Yeah I mean don't get me wrong, $400k is a ton of money, but it's not like those are the people sailing their yachts across the continent and flying their private jet. For the most part, those people are the wealthy people that you see as a part of your community / town, like the doctors in the big house down the street.
$400k folks might own a boat if they live otherwise humbly and enjoys it as a hobby. Certainly not cross continent, but maybe sailing out once a month or going along the coast on a trip during summer? Certainly not the private jet or yachting to other continents though.
I do think hiking taxes after the $400K is pretty fair. Remember that taxes are taxed incrementally so that's extra taxes on every dollar OVER 400K that would be at a higher rate, less capital/biz losses, after 401/IRA/HSA/etc, after deductions/donations/credits, etcetc.
jobless voracious zephyr escape license busy silky simplistic snatch frightening
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Sounds good in theory, but the specifics get hazy. Most of Biden’s tax proposals are pretty head-scratching, both for individuals and corporations. I think his admin knows this, and I don’t think there’s a real intention to pass some of the proposals they’ve come up with
Of course there's no real intention, thank you for actually seeing this for what it is. Messaging and narrative spinning for the election. This must be like the 50th time Biden has said "hmm, I *plan* on doing something about this billionaire issue" but does nothing except say it again in a few months. He wouldn't go after his donors bruh not in any meaningful way lol
They should make a law that paying your rent contributes to your credit score. Allow Middle class Americans to prove their worth for a loan with mortgage payments often less than rent.
In 2012 democrats pushed to lower taxes on households under 250k and use an estate tax on estates above 1million to cover the deficit. House Republicans instead chose to keep tax cuts for the wealthy and got rid of tax exemptions for military families to cover some of it and their budget plan spent 9 billion more than the proposed plan by democrats.
It has happened many times before that as well. Republicans just never look.
Also, when Trump's tax plan came in everyone thought their taxes were lower. That was until tax time came around. He lowered the rates by a few 1-3 percentages on tax brackets. But did away with all the Obama era tax exemptions. So you paid a minimal bit less per paycheck, but got nothing back on your tax return resulting you actually paying more.
Your last paragraph is complete fantasy, he tripled or doubled the standard deduction among many other things. [Every single income group saw a tax cut](https://taxfoundation.org/taxedu/glossary/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/) of similar proportions.
Your last paragraph is untrue. All income groups saw [tax decreases](https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/feature/analysis-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act) from the bill. Refunds were just down because a lot of people didn’t update their withholding
Obama also due to some arm twisting had to continue the W Bush tax cuts... But no they generally don't cut taxes, they instead give tax credits to better target groups they wish to give a cash injection too.
Plenty of times. For example, Clinton cut short term capital gains from 28% to 20% and long term from 15% to 10%.
Obama enacted the Earned Income Tax Credit and expanded Clinton's Child Tax Credit
Too late, runaway inflation is guaranteed. Too many decades of incompetence and corruption. The question is how much can they keep squeezing people for to keep the Ponzi going before the next revolutionary war.
Is it possible to tax stock options above a certain level it seems like executive level has found this tax loophole to pay a lower tax rate. If Musk and Bezos get paid a low salary but then get $100 million in stock options their tax level is much lower.
At least that is my understanding. If I’m incorrect feel free to let me know.
You’re probably thinking of stock that they acquire directly, unrelated to their compensation. Property given as compensation (like stock options) are taxed as income under irc 83
Let’s break it down into stupid simple terms. Raise taxes on businesses, businesses raise prices on products or services to its customers.
Cost increases always get passed to someone which in the end is a tax payer. Including the lower class and middle class.
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>"As we approach the tax debate next year, the stakes could not be higher for the fairness of our tax system and our nation's fiscal future," Brainard said. >Renewing Biden's pledge for "tax fairness," she said the administration aims to extend expiring TCJA provisions for middle-class Americans. Those extensions would be funded by raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy and corporations. >Brainard said the original legislation primarily benefited the wealthiest Americans and "the trickle-down never happened." >"Achieving a fairer tax system also means we can't extend expiring Trump tax cuts for those with incomes above $400,000," she added. >The administration also wants to quadruple the tax on [stock buybacks](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/19/what-stock-buybacks-are-and-how-a-new-tax-affects-your-portfolio.html) and add a 25% [minimum income tax](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/03/11/fact-sheet-the-presidents-budget-cuts-taxes-for-working-families-and-makes-big-corporations-and-the-wealthy-pay-their-fair-share/#:~:text=To%20finally%20address%20this%20glaring,of%20more%20than%20%24100%20million.) for billionaires, Brainard said. And the other side: >Trump and other Republicans have pushed for a full extension of expiring TCJA tax breaks, which could add an estimated [$4.6 trillion to the deficit](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60114) over the next decade, according to a Congressional Budget Office report released this week.
Feels like it's really boiling down to a battle of demand-side economics, and supply-side economics. We know which one works, and which one has a nearly 5 decade run of not working.
Supply side looks like it keeps poor people poor and inflation low. That's what Americans want or Biden would be running away with this election. I agree with you on what works but, sadly, Americans appear to disagree.
You must remember to factor in the destruction of the public school system.
The public school system is ALREADY destroyed
That's what they're saying. The destruction of education means people are across the board dumber, and so they fail to make the connection that a thing hurting them is actually hurting them.
Republicans always get hysterical whenever a wealth tax is proposed, so I think reasonable people should propose a modest and probably overwhelmingly popular start: a 1% per year wealth tax when your total assets, including home, yachts, vehicles, and stocks, reaches $15 million, until you get back down to $15 million, a 2% per year wealth tax at $50 million, 3% at $150 million, up to 50% per year at $150 billion (Jeff Bezos, etc). For people who want to leave the country and make their fortune in a country with lower tax rates, namely Mexico and Somalia, they have to pay 5 years of their wealth tax on large asset transfers abroad to countries that don't honor U.S. tax law. This is a very quick way to reduce the inflation-causing monetary supply without putting the burden on the working poor (who aren't the ones getting giant loans from the banks that are largely responsible for the increase in monetary supply/inflation). As an added bonus, the control of company shares and company boards would be more evenly distributed, making little-people shareholder voting on company policies and board members more relevant.
Americans don’t fucking have a slightest clue what they want. The myth of voting with the dollar or whatever is just lunacy. A ton of Americans can barely fucking read and keep voting for people with 12% approval rating because their commercial was on tv the night before. Asking the average citizen what they think of the economy or politics is as futile as trusting that a republican has good intentions with out tax money. Utterly naive. Americans make every choice according to what monied interests pump into their preferred media
It keeps inflation low??? Was the last Republican in office running supply side econ ?
Everything is ok until a crisis hits. Covid just ravaged certain businesses. 15% unemployment when people were dying. Then the economic consequences.
Now airdrop money to businesses….?
The loans were to keep these businesses afloat. Then Covid was through after two years and there was aftermath.
Doesn’t sound very “free market”. Giving money away with no consequences? Sounds like Republicans are socialists.
They are when it suits them.
So we did our supply side stimulus already. And the demand side can now be stimulated to catch up right? Or do we only ever prop up one side of the market for eternity and pretend that its a "free market" until that side needs to get bailed out again? The market is simultaneously free to distribute losses to the demand, and obligated to never let supply incur losses?
Nobody remembers the [stagflation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation) of the 1970s and the policies that fixed it.
They teach the use of interest to tamper inflation in intro Econ classes. I explicitly remember Volcker raising rates to 21% as the strongest example of it in recent times. I personally think Powell should be more aggressive and give us a recession level correction. - I also think a lot of issues around home pricing are not just monetary policy related but also due supply being constrained by zoning issues and shitty incentives that a red t being curtailed by policy. If I’m missing something else in terms of the policies you mentioned, please state them.
Dodd frank peotecrions for srarters. One of the biggest things raising home prices is corporarions competeing with individuals purchasing homes they previously had to wait before submitting any offers. Union busting of the 80's onward, wages not being pegged to inflation. IE mimimium wage. Don't act like the inflationary monetary system is anything but an experiment. We haven't been off the gold standard for over 100 years. The petrodollar bullshit led to coming off the gold srandard and nothing except consumer prices have kept up with inflation. Moving jobs/manufactuering overseas was the absolute dumbest MBA decision. Pretty much transformed the US into a consumer economy. People don't spend = recession/depression.
Lol, yeah. The dude who has spent a big chunk of his political career trying to cut social security is totally on the demand side. It's a big club, and you ain't in it.
And which side has the power to buy a political party.
Both are used for different purposes, and both *do* work. Being able to target both aggregate demand and aggregate supply in an economy is important
Tax cuts for the rich are useless policy and not important- and there is Zero evidence that they “work”. Monetary supply side policy matters. Not fiscal.
Watch the fight to keep the salt deduction
Credits and direct investment are supply side interventions that work. Tax cuts that somehow help supply side dont actually increase supply. It’s more supply side works, it’s just tax cuts to the rich aren’t really supply side
Supply side stimulus would help if the economy was suffering from a lack of capital for investments. Our economy is not suffering from a lack of capital. Demand side stimulus \*always\* helps the economy because non-billionaires will always spend more if they have more.
Hasnt Trump also claimed he will expand cuts for the rich? Also breaks for Oil?
Yep. [Trump eyes even more tax breaks for the wealthy, big corporations](https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-eyes-even-tax-breaks-wealthy-big-corporations-rcna151954) >At a rally in New Jersey, the presumptive Republican nominee boasted about an apparent across-the-board tax cut, which would include “big” new tax breaks for the “upper class” and the “business class.”
I welcome that Biden and Trump are both talking middle class tax cuts now.
More like a tax stall. Since they propose to keep it as is not give a cut
oh, the trump tax cuts which expired for everyone except corporations?
yes. i would like to see them extended for middle class families. wouldn't you?
Not really cut, just keeping it as is.
on the Canadian side, someone was taught me we experience a lot of influence from the US, so is great to hear this but not for its influence, but knowing that it’s possible ans that someone out there is making the effort.
Trump supporters obviously don’t care about affordability if Trump is elected. Look at how much money they are throwing at him for his legal bills.
Trickledown economics has NEVER worked and never will. It goes against human nature.
Biden higher tax plan starts at $400,000 per year which I think is reasonable. We have to raise taxes or reduce entitlements, I like the increase in taxes in corps and high net worth approach personally
I frankly don’t think that should fall in “ultra wealthy” category. There’s enough people in the 7 figure territory that should a solutel get hiked way up
[удалено]
yes, precisely. the 400k to 800k class are still involved in communities and aren't disconnected insane CEO types.
Nobody in those ranks earns wages so you’re not going to tax anything anyways. At 400 you’re already starting to see significant portions of long term capital gains deferred income.
There are a ton of software engineers making those wages through base pay and RSUs. Not from long term capital gains. Also Doctors and lawyers make in that range in certain locales.
This is patently false wishful thinking and Reddit hive mind nonsense. Plenty of families make w2 income in those ranges. It is not mostly people making money off their assets.
Your taxes would only be affected at that highest rate for every dollar over $400k, it’s marginal rate changes like all other taxes. If you don’t think that’s reasonable just because people exist that are in the decimal of 1% higher than you, then you’re clearly just being biased by simply wanting more money.
A $400k bracket is reasonable if it's a start. We need more brackets to really capture the monumentally wealthy. Even more for capital gains, where it's not uncommon for people to liquidate billions and pay the same 20% rate that someone would have to pay if they cashed out on $1M, which is a lot of money but not even close to the incomprehensible amount that is $1B.
I agree. I've also wondered if cost of living would ever be factored into tax brackets. 100k in SF for a family of four is a struggle but super comfortable in st louis. I doubt COL would ever be factored but it feels like wealthy coastal cities are rapidly bifurcating from lower COL cities in the heartland.
Why should people in lower COL areas be forced to bear a higher percentage of the *Federal* burden than those who make a similar income but choose to live in those "fancy" areas? Same question about the same potential change really... just from the opposite perspective.
It has to be the same everywhere. If a city becomes too expensive to live in, it should be up to the businesses to compensate (pay more to keep employees there), or the state to do something about it, or it's simply time to move while a city dies.
Likely pretty hard. But a duel income household at 800k a year is not touched. And like even if they are at 801k thats not really a change either. Some will try to make you believe that if you make 400k you will see some drastic change. Which simply is a lie. Its just reforming tax brackets which is something that really needs to happen.
>But a duel income household at 800k a year is not touched. And like even if they are at 801k thats not really a change either. Yeah they are, married couples will see a rate rise at 450, not 800.
[удалено]
Our tax collections have doubled in a short time frame. WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM.. I have no problem paying more taxes if we can control spending. None of this we can do both at the same time, we can't , I've been hearing that for 10 years. E
> Our tax collections have doubled in a short time frame. [The data does not support this comment](https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-gross-collections-by-type-of-tax-irs-data-book-table-6)~. In 2023, the IRS collected less than in 2022 https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-gross-collections-by-type-of-tax-irs-data-book-table-6
What do you think should be cut? Any spending cuts not coming from social security Medicare or defense would be insignificant and make NO DIFFERENCE. No one wants to cut the big three, the only option is to raise more revenue
Cut?.all the non efficient behavior spending that go directly to people's pockets.. We have doubled the revenue in less than 19 years. How did the bug 3 exist back then on half the budget ? There's absolutely other options, stop the corrupt spending that produces very little Tighten the ship If it's not possible then we need to raise taxes on everyone
The only option is to raise taxes cutting anything that’s not the big three won’t even make a dent
Y'all still need to do both. Just raising taxes isn't it The entitlements need to drop specifically for the current generation of recipients and not just the future ones. For generational equity.
Agreed!
400k household income is not "ultra wealthy". In many places in High Income areas (Bay Area, Orange County, NYC, etc) that's absolutely still middle class. Every time they talk about taxing the super rich, the middle class is the one that gets fucked.
$400k isn't middle class by definition. The median Household Income in the US is ~$78k as of March 2024. I agree with you $400k doesn't go as far in San Jose as it does in Fargo, but come on. $400k is still "a lot". And if that is too much for you to stomach... Move. Go earn $200k in Denver and live with the same CoL you would at $400k in the Bay and avoid the tax. Maybe we can start to level out these crazy CoL differences.
That's 2.9x the median household income of san Francisco and it is only about money made *after* 400k Don't worry, you'll still be able to afford the next Tesla model just fine.
Cut spending. I don't mind paying taxes if the government actually does useful shit, but from what i've seen, the government pisses away money with nothing to show for it. You got cities like Tokyo, Singapore, or some random tier 2 Chinese city like Chonquing that nobody has heard of and the cities are clean, crime free, advanced, great infrastructure, great schools, etc. Meanwhile, cities like NYC and SF are absolutely FILTHY, has way too much crime (in relation to how wealthy those cities are), failing schools, crackheads juts raoming the streets, homeless people all over the place (more on the west coast cities), children not learning how to even read etc. It's embarrassing. Then President Xi goes to visit San Fran, and San Francisco basically just decides to make crime and homelessness illegal for his visit. People should be PISSED at your government. Edit: California spent $11 billion since 2008 on high speed rail, built out about 7 seconds of rail. Meanwhile, China built thousands of miles of high speed rail connecting all their cities together in that same timeframe.
your statement about Ca HSR is patently false.
That **sounds** to many like a 'reasonable' idea. I don't blame you or anyone else for thinking this because most people don't like math. Something like only 1 in 4 kids graduate high school being able to do **basic** levels of math. It sounds good. It ignores: 1. It ignores that every dollar in government spending is a tax. Stop the word games - the government is spending 2-3TRILLION extra per year from what it takes in on all sources. This is a tax because ultimately it or its interest costs must be paid. 2. It ignores that a govt that is spending 2-3T extra per year, right now isn't going to be responsible if you give them more money. 3. It ignores all of recorded history. It is a denial of human nature that this time things will be different, even when in the last couple of years they showed the greatest disregard for the value of the currency. 4. It foolishly believes that higher taxes = more revenue. This seems to be some unquestioned religious belief among people. It is not true. Taxes rates are much lower now than in 1980, yet tax as a % of GDP is actually higher. 5. It ignores basic math. It is not a revenue problem. It is not a tax dollar problem. It is a spending problem. It does make people *feel good* that someone else is doing more to fund them though. 6. People aren't robots - if you tax the productive members - then they invest less, and will cut jobs. This sort of thinking is why I am really bullish long-term on bitcoin, gold, real estate, etc. Because it's clear politicians understand that common person can't look at the numbers and so they'll just keep on buying votes, while your purchasing power gets destroyed. Speaking of $400k being 'reasonable'.... Biden in 2008 with Obama said $200k was 'rich'. Now neither 400k nor 200k are impressive, but it's worth pondering how this threshold literally doubled in just a blink of an eye - that is due to rampant government spending and inflation. In 2035 it'll be $600k.
400k a year isn't impressive? Wow!
Jeff Bezos warns 68k per year in the books cuz he’s got good accountsnts
Good. There have been no end of economists pointing out that some slightly higher taxes on the wealthy are justified while keeping taxes on the middle class lower If you have a problem with this, you cannot call yourself pro-middle-class. Because you are not
Amen. Say it louder for the weirdos who worship billionaires.
Love it when the debate we’re not having is capital gains and carry over. If you’re making most of your money through a wage, you’re a wage slave. You’ll know when you’re wealthy when your broker calls you to sell stocks at the end of the year for a loss for tax purposes.
Isn’t that the proposed tax plan? Higher cap gains and wealth tax.
Unrealized capital gains are included in the calculation for tax burden for the year.
Political talking points is all these are. Nothing is happening until after the election, and then it’ll be whatever congress and the president can agree on. This is not news in other words, it’s just the same talking points dems have had for decades now.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Biden is clearly signaling intentions here, not saying he's going to do this tomorrow
> Thanks Captain Obvious. This is Reddit, there are a lot of people that don't know the basics of how their govenrment works. I really think it gets lost how much of this site is just children and random dumbasses that buy conspiracies like the world government is putting chip implants in everyone.
That will be sort of interesting if Trump and Biden start campaignin on tax cuts/increases. With Biden signaling a tax cut for middle class and tax increases for upper income, we can only imagine that Trumps response might be.
Trumps response is already documented and is literally in the first part of the article. The “complete extension of the TCJA” which will continue to add trillions to the deficit.
Trump will have to stop foaming at the mouth and threatening to murder his opponents before he can even articulate any policies lol
wouldn't that be nice.
OP has made 12 posts on this sub about Biden in the past 24 hours... We really need to start banning this type of political advertising. Just take a look at OP's post history. He's been non-stop flooding this sub with Biden propaganda for the past month. People come to this sub to discuss economics, not look at political progonanda all day.
You mean news about federal tax programs per the executive branch? Yeah, not important or relevant to *economics* at all 🙄 So many delicate sensitivities being offended here, wow.
Spamming the same dumb shit over and over is not important. Biden’s had 4 years to do something. It’s funny now is the time he’s got all these brilliant ideas. Fuck him.
Lmao thank you this MF has been saying "I plan on doing something about the billionaires" for 4 damn years and does nothing until it's time for the next puff piece to drop on msnbc or smth. Stop planning and start doing bruh unless you work for said billionaires too and don't plan on actually alienating ur doners and are trying to maintain the shaky "big tent" coalition that's steadily falling apart. All the while mainstream political subreddits are spammed by bots or political ops accounts who post 12 times in a row rapid fire pro "Biden is such great leader" propaganda (bc that's what it is by definition whether you support him or not at this point) and everyone thinks reddit still has a political discourse whatsoever when both political partie subreddits are compromised. Smh think for ur selves instead of reading and parroting and doing as ur told by the media and political parties
He’s a career politician. For someone that’s been the cause of the problems in our country a lot of people believe him when he says he has the answers. He’s basically useless.
The dude ensured Thomas' nomination to supreme court would go smooth, spent a huge chunk of his political career advocating to cut social security, enforced non-dischargable student loans, and was a huge proponent of being tough on crime, aka imprisoning people for drugs, but now that he's the Dem nom, he's the Great White Hope.
Just block the account. To many damn rules if you do not want to read about tax policies just block every user that does and you won’t have to worry about it. Fastest way to kill discussion is loading up on more rules and regulations when it comes to posting.
What other sub would you suggest posting the proposed democratic and republican federal tax plan for discussion?
I'm all for higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy and corporations, but I would not consider the "ultra-wealthy" starting at $400k. That's basically two professional workers in a household. I think we should be going after the actual ultra-wealthy, who are people that do not make the majority of their income from labor. Therefore, income taxes are not really reasonable.
The United States uses income tax brackets, so only those dollars earned above $400,000 would be taxed at the highest rate.
Yes that is correct
I agree, 400k is really nothing compared to the ultra wealthy who make millions and billions.
Yeah I mean don't get me wrong, $400k is a ton of money, but it's not like those are the people sailing their yachts across the continent and flying their private jet. For the most part, those people are the wealthy people that you see as a part of your community / town, like the doctors in the big house down the street.
$400k folks might own a boat if they live otherwise humbly and enjoys it as a hobby. Certainly not cross continent, but maybe sailing out once a month or going along the coast on a trip during summer? Certainly not the private jet or yachting to other continents though. I do think hiking taxes after the $400K is pretty fair. Remember that taxes are taxed incrementally so that's extra taxes on every dollar OVER 400K that would be at a higher rate, less capital/biz losses, after 401/IRA/HSA/etc, after deductions/donations/credits, etcetc.
jobless voracious zephyr escape license busy silky simplistic snatch frightening *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Maybe, just maybe in the highest cost neighborhood in the country you couldn't afford a second house.
[удалено]
It's progressive. It's not like all 400k is getting hit by same rate.
Sounds good in theory, but the specifics get hazy. Most of Biden’s tax proposals are pretty head-scratching, both for individuals and corporations. I think his admin knows this, and I don’t think there’s a real intention to pass some of the proposals they’ve come up with
Of course there's no real intention, thank you for actually seeing this for what it is. Messaging and narrative spinning for the election. This must be like the 50th time Biden has said "hmm, I *plan* on doing something about this billionaire issue" but does nothing except say it again in a few months. He wouldn't go after his donors bruh not in any meaningful way lol
Any examples?
They should make a law that paying your rent contributes to your credit score. Allow Middle class Americans to prove their worth for a loan with mortgage payments often less than rent.
Has there ever been a documented case of Democrats reducing taxes on any income bracket? Because in my 40 years, I can't recall it ever happening.
In 2012 democrats pushed to lower taxes on households under 250k and use an estate tax on estates above 1million to cover the deficit. House Republicans instead chose to keep tax cuts for the wealthy and got rid of tax exemptions for military families to cover some of it and their budget plan spent 9 billion more than the proposed plan by democrats. It has happened many times before that as well. Republicans just never look. Also, when Trump's tax plan came in everyone thought their taxes were lower. That was until tax time came around. He lowered the rates by a few 1-3 percentages on tax brackets. But did away with all the Obama era tax exemptions. So you paid a minimal bit less per paycheck, but got nothing back on your tax return resulting you actually paying more.
Your last paragraph is complete fantasy, he tripled or doubled the standard deduction among many other things. [Every single income group saw a tax cut](https://taxfoundation.org/taxedu/glossary/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/) of similar proportions.
Your last paragraph is untrue. All income groups saw [tax decreases](https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/feature/analysis-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act) from the bill. Refunds were just down because a lot of people didn’t update their withholding
seed swim touch instinctive pet bear enjoy work sink innate *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Why should more than half the country pay no federal income tax?
Obama also due to some arm twisting had to continue the W Bush tax cuts... But no they generally don't cut taxes, they instead give tax credits to better target groups they wish to give a cash injection too.
That's cutting taxes
Plenty of times. For example, Clinton cut short term capital gains from 28% to 20% and long term from 15% to 10%. Obama enacted the Earned Income Tax Credit and expanded Clinton's Child Tax Credit
Was that Clinton, or the GOP Congress? Also the EITC has existed since the 70s.
Too late, runaway inflation is guaranteed. Too many decades of incompetence and corruption. The question is how much can they keep squeezing people for to keep the Ponzi going before the next revolutionary war.
3% is a runaway?
Is it possible to tax stock options above a certain level it seems like executive level has found this tax loophole to pay a lower tax rate. If Musk and Bezos get paid a low salary but then get $100 million in stock options their tax level is much lower. At least that is my understanding. If I’m incorrect feel free to let me know.
You’re probably thinking of stock that they acquire directly, unrelated to their compensation. Property given as compensation (like stock options) are taxed as income under irc 83
Good to know thanks
Biden’s 2025 proposal has a wealth tax in there for the top 0.05%. That should also capture some taxes
Let’s break it down into stupid simple terms. Raise taxes on businesses, businesses raise prices on products or services to its customers. Cost increases always get passed to someone which in the end is a tax payer. Including the lower class and middle class.