As you might guess it’s the top 1 percent.
Who Gets the Benefits
- The top 1 percent get a tax cut of $75,410.
- The top 5 percent get a combined $96,540.
- The top 10 percent get a combined $105,490.
- Everyone else gets a combined $11,580
- The middle quintile and below get $2,680
The Wall Street Journal discusses this in Trump’s Megabill Cut Taxes. Here’s Who Came Out Ahead.
That’s a free link to the article.
Here’s another way of looking at this.
Average Change in Taxes Paid
That’s like giving someone who has a penny another penny and bragging you doubled their income.
Finally, here’s another metric, preferred by some economists.
It compares a group’s tax cut to its after-tax income, giving a sense of how financially significant a tax cut is to a particular household. This shows that the biggest winners aren’t the bottom 20% or top 1%, but the group just below the top 1%.
Average Change in After-Tax Income
One More Way to Look at Things
Tariffs will hit the lower quintiles the hardest because they spend every cent.
I am sure that the combined impact of One Big Beautiful Act Tax coupled with tariffs is a net tax hike on the the first and second, quintiles, possibly even the third.
I have asked the Tax policy center and others to do a detailed analysis but have received no replies.
Related Posts
May 31, 2025: Trump Will Double Steel and Aluminum Tariffs to 50 Percent
Tariff madness continues.
July 8, 2025: Copper Spikes to Record High After Trump’s 50 Percent Tariff Announcement
This copper tariff is seriously idiotic. And it follows on the heels of idiotic tariffs on steel.
July 22, 2025: GM Profit Down 35 Percent Due to $1.1 Billion Tariff Hit
The next quarter will be worse says CEO Mary Barra.
July 19, 2025: Who’s Paying Trump’s Tariffs? Foreign Producers, Walmart, or You?
The answer is you, of course.
The average tariff rate seems to be 15 percent plus additional tariffs on copper, steel and aluminum.
That’s a tax hike.
Addendum
My proposal would eliminate income taxes on the first 30K or whatever of income, kill earned Income nonsense, end child tax credits, and curtail food stamps and Medicaid.
In other words, encourage people to work.
Q: What does this horse hockey do?
A: Increase the deficit and give an extra $75,000 a year to the top 1 percent while doing little to encourage more people to work.
Spending is the problem. Tax cuts for the wealthy and bigger deficits combined with tariffs that hit the lowest income groups the most is not the solution
This is not a Democrat talking point. It’s common sense. And it’s why people like Massie and Rand Paul would not sign off on it.
Addendum
My proposal would eliminate income taxes on the first 30K or whatever of income, kill earned Income nonsense, end child tax credits, and curtail food stamps and Medicaid.
In other words, encourage people to work.
Q: What does this horse hockey do?
A: Increase the deficit and give an extra $75,000 a year to the top 1 percent while doing little to encourage more people to work.
Spending is the problem. Tax cuts for the wealthy and bigger deficits combined with tariffs that hit the lowest income groups the most is not the solution
This is not a Democrat talking point. It’s common sense. And it’s why people like Massie and Rand Paul would not sign off on it.
Thank Me
The issue was solved in 1887, probably before due to writing time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looking_Backward
I like the general idea of your income tax proposal. One thing I would consider amending is to peg it to say $30k (or $45k) of the national average income. Then calculate the percentage of that and use that percentage times each states average income. Each state would have their own income tax free $ level. Also, you could set a minimum floor as you propose at $30k (or $45k). The reason I suggest this, is that the cost of living and wages varies by region (or from state to state).
Govt mandates should contain govt opportunity to fulfill those mandates. If the govt requires auto insurance it should provide an insurance program that fulfills those requirements. If employment is required to qualify for a benefit (medicaid/food stamps) govt provided employment should be available to fulfill those requirements. Demanding employment in order to receive benefits for persons that are unqualified for existing jobs is simply withholding the benefit. Why not be honest?
great points. this empire is dying on world stage with bases all over the globe, and back here, with homeless and druggies and obese kids and adults, who have no skills for basic life functions.
Really solid point — it would also solve lobbying issues. E.g., if government had to provide mandatory insurance, we would not have such a potent (private) insurance lobby … your idea makes a lot of sense to me.
The tariffs are not inflationary, but since economic pundits have wasted tons of ink saying they are Trump is proposing that a rebate be given to US citizens based on the amount of Tariffs collected. Thus, there is no loss in buying power IF and that’s a BIG IF a person wants to spend their money on those foreign made goods. Additionally, he is proposing an income cap on getting those rebate checks. Thus, it becomes readily apparent that Trump’s economic policies help those from the lower income groups/.
Also, takes the argument that “It’s the American citizen that pays for the tariff”, and stabs it with a hot poker.
The top 1% control politicians so they will ALWAYS reap the benefits. Don’t use logic or reason. Money only flows upwards. That will never change.
For what it’s worth, I am in the “top 0.2%” in terms of net worth in the United States and the OBBB does nothing meaningful for me–i.e., I’m certainly not seeing a $75K annual benefit.
I live in a tax-free state (so the SALT cap is of little consequence and, more important, it’s quickly phased out for high earners). While the OBBB does increase and extend the Estate Tax Exemption, which could be very valuable to my heirs (saving millions), that–of course–can be changed again in the future (lowered or eliminated) so unless I die before then (not planning on it), it’s not material to me.
But, ask if I give a shit? I do not. I have more than enough.
I’m just saying that, just because someone is at the top, they won’t necessarily see any benefit.
Good for you on being so wealthy. But you may want to check with your accountant with your calculations. Everyone’s situation is unique, but you’re most likely seeing a HUGE tax benefit – like an annual salary for a normal person.
To be in the top 0.2%, you’d have a net worth of about $60 million. Even if all your net worth was invested in 30-day T-bills earning 4.2% (which would be extremely stupid for someone so wealthy), that’s a return of $2.5M a year.
If OBBB did not pass, your top income tax rate would increase from 37% to 39.6% next year. That’s at least $50K in tax savings if you invest stupidly. Of course, your money might be hidden in tax-advantaged accounts, but you’ll pay (and now save on) taxes eventually.
Point is – you’re getting a huge tax break most people can’t fathom. Good for you. Unfortunately, you’re a perfect example of a meme since you supposedly “do not give a shit” about your upcoming largesse – and even worse, don’t seem to realize you actually are a beneficiary. Sad.
I assure you, my income tax situation is largely unchanged regardless of the OBBB (including the TJCA sunsets).
Point is — aside from what I already said, I’m really not getting any meaningful tax break and, of course, I’m not complaining.
The world is not black and white, Hubris.
But does that matter? At the end of the day, I’m still seeing an Administration punish and subjugate poor and disadvantaged people.
I care about that fact.
I hope you do too.
The top 1% are investing their additional $75,000 a year into AI, and it’s already working great. Just ask it. In fact, China’s Q2 GDP growth was 5.2%, and Trump’s growth generating tax cut for the top 1% will cause our Q2 GDP to beat them; I’m predicting 5.3% for US Q2. Winning.
About the only thing that you didn’t cover is the often repeated lie that “tax cuts pay for themselves”. If they did we wouldn’t be in this mess.
You haven’t mentioned tax increases as a way out of this mess. Back when George Bush cut taxes I was against it and I was of the mind that this deficit mess would get out of hand and it did. But I was also of the mind that government could actually do something productive. Politically the system has gotten so bad that I don’t believe that there is a lot that the government can accomplish so a large tax increase (if it led to any spending increase) would be bad for the economy.
My biggest complaint is that Republicans tried to decrease spending by cutting taxes (“starve the beast”) instead of cutting spending. They wanted Democrats to cut spending. This was as successful as Democrats allowing illegal immigration to increase (although Obama actually had more deportations than any other president) and then have Republicans agree to immigration reform.
A large part of the populace believes lies spread by both parties (such as tax cuts pay for themselves) that nothing can be accomplished and the situation gets worse. I am not sure where we go from here. We need someone like Trump who is willing to upset the apple cart but unlike Trump is relatively honest, knows what they are doing, is an effective leader, and is relatively apolitical. There are things that government can (but doesn’t necessarily) do well and these areas need to be improved while capitalism needs to be reformed (i.e. more competition and less concentration in both business and personal wealth).
For those who talk about Snap and Medicaid, where a large portion are already working, what do you think the effect on prices would be if people received high enough wages to not need Snap, and their benefits included health insurance.
Have you ever considered that by putting Snap and Medicaid on the taxpayers it is another big FU from the PTB who don’t want to have their costs for higher wages and insrance from their pockets so make it a public burden. And then push for big tax cuts for themselves
We need $100/hr minimum wage! /s
We should replace the minimum wage with a maximum wage based on the lowest paid employee.
Income inequality has become a defining issue of our time, plaguing societies across the globe. In the United States, the wealth gap between the ultra-rich and the working class has reached staggering proportions. To address this growing problem, it is imperative to consider bold solutions that promote fairness, economic stability, and social cohesion. One such solution is the implementation of a maximum wage law, which would cap the earnings of the highest-paid worker within a corporation at no more than 12 times the salary of the lowest-paid worker. This essay will argue that such a law is necessary to promote economic justice, reduce income inequality, and create a more balanced society.
I. Income Inequality: A Growing Problem
II. The Need for a Maximum Wage Law
III. Possible Criticisms and Counterarguments
Conclusion
The implementation of a maximum wage law limiting the highest-paid worker in any U.S. corporation to earning no more than 12 times what the lowest-paid worker earns is a bold and necessary step towards achieving economic justice, reducing income inequality, and creating a more balanced and equitable society. While there may be legitimate concerns and criticisms, the urgency of addressing income inequality outweighs these challenges. Such a law would promote fairness, encourage fair labor practices, and contribute to economic stability, ultimately strengthening the social fabric of the United States. It is time for our society to embrace the principles of economic justice and take meaningful steps towards a more equitable future.
This all requires government activity and management. But we should have learned by now that government is corrupt and incompetent.
Government should be as small a possible and spend as little as possible, and not have control over most of the economy. We are at the point of no return. The Fourth Turning will ultimately solve most of the problems. But then the cycle will start over again.
I like the idea. Did you write this essay yourself or did your favorite AI help?
Regardless, as I keep stating, it is inevitable when most/all work is done by robots/AI’s, then money will have no meaning and everything will be free.
Lots of issues with your analysis – here is one. Some folks simply deserve to earn huge sums. Take these $100 million pay packages reportedly offered for certain AI scientists. These folks have an ability to tune AI algorithms that radically reduces the time and cost to train the AI, potentially saving the company several times the enormous salary (At present, this skill is considered more of an art than science). Should the company forgo this “cost saving” because we do not want to pay an excessive salary?
Seems to me higher wages/ health benes through work etc just lead to higher prices. Which puts your normal worker back in the same spot.
Currently the burden is placed on the government. I think its gonna come down to taxing the wealthy more.
Imo Trickle down is the original big lie. The wealthy have used power and influence to better themselves tax wise over the years. I would like to see where we would be with pre regain tax rates.
The dems ability to metastasize and build blue colonies in other states was stopped. The pathways to SNAP and gov goodies are blocked. The disability pool on Medicaid was reduced. No nutrition, service and support to cheaters. The dems ability to send their signals and massages is limited. Their command and control center was attacked. Their generals will be sent to jail. Those who were addicted to them will have to work. They will feed a family and regain their self respect….
The income tax was never intended as an universal tax. Those pointing out that those making more pay a higher percentage of the total seem unaware that this was how it was designed to work since the beginning.
Thanks for your reply, Leslie; and you are correct.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/16th-amendment
Unfortunately, most people (including on this blog) don’t look to historical context. They just want to post about their own financial or political POV
I agree 100% that we need to curtail food stamps and Medicaid. It’s being ABUSED. There should be a LIFETIME limit of 2 years of welfare benefits. Also agree that we should end child tax credits. You can have as many children as you want as long as you don’t expect others to have to pay for them.
Yes those mentally ill and elderly should starve.
Neal Asher has an interesting take in Timewalkers. ZA or ZERO ASSETS and SA or SOCIAL ASSETS.
Flip side I think it is the next to the last episode of Inside no 9 s9 the tube episode. It hints at more than can be said publicly.
Have fun reading and watching.
Wilbur, while Laura didn’t say it, I suppose that she’s talking about able-bodied people.
And where do the jobs come from?
No one recalls the Farmaid era?
What happened back then was in rural areas the closest jobs were between 100 to 300 miles from home.
I speak to the delivery people working three jobs and still beating the crap out of a car they make monthly high payments on.
Old people, people on pensions, people with Cancer, sick and disabled, poor family people.
What is NOT in ANY bill is a works program.
I live in a city once known worldwide for it’s furniture manufacturing. But the local TPTB wanted to remake it as an “artsy” community. Factories close, bars near the factories where workers stopped after work, restaurants where workers went for lunch or stopped for a me
al if they were single, local neighborhood grocery stores.
All of that died.
Then the 80’s came along and strip mined factories for inventory.
Now we have a VERY large drug and homeless problem and along with that came GUN violence.
So where the JOBS come from so those able bodied people tossed off benefits can actually earn a living?
I gather most of you all never go into the rural communities and job hunt.
Even in the poor sections of cities.
Where do the jobs come from?
Thanks for bothering to either find and read the book or watch the episode. I admit it will be a VERY limited few.
I don’t necessarily agree with your perspective, Laura, but I am open to suggestions.
BTW, are you a Boomer woman that has worked and contributed the full 35 years to Social Security? I ask because Social Security is going broke in part because we have a SS clause that spouses can get 50% of their working partner’s benefits even if they don’t work at all. And statistically, women of the Boomer generation are the major beneficiaries/leeches of this system.
My point being is that there are tax code provisions throughout our system that benefit all kinds of different people. You listed only a few of the specific beneficiaries which happen to be the usual conservative position whipping boys. So I am up open to voting for your suggestions if you take away ALL benefits for all takers – military contractors, farm subsidy recipients, fossil fuel depletion allowance takers, public hurricane/flood insurance subsidies, business expense deductions, etc.
If you can’t get rid of all those, then we need to discuss the merits of each beneficiary tax/subsidy recipient – and not just your conservative talking point takers
How about the EIC that let’s low-income people zero out their tax liability and then get even more back? Like thousands of dollars.
There are millions of people who can & should be working. Instead, we import millions of illegals & legals for that matter.
Companies like MSFT are firing tens of thousands of workers and then turning around and requesting & being granted over 62,670 H1-B visas from 2017 through 2025. And they were only denied or withdrew ~300 applications.
Everything about the US labor market is screwed up.
Your “inside ugly” is showing.
86/maga
“don’t breed them if you can’t feed them”
Email Exchange With Fred
Fred: First off, I like your idea. Simplify and reduce the brackets, cut entitlements. It has a zero chance of passing.
My point is this article is that without extending the 2017 cuts, we would all face a huge tax increase. Nobody who voted for Trump voted for that. Nothing stops Congress in 2 years from changing the tax structure to your idea or someone else’s idea. But you need 281 House votes and 51 Senate votes at a minimum and 60 votes to change some policy because of the filibuster. Good luck with that.
Trump does not have the votes.
Mish: My proposal could mostly be done with 51 because it is budget items.
But I admit they did not have 51.
Had Trump not cost Republicans 2 seats in GA, one in AZ, and a 4th in PA, it would have been possible to do much better.
House Republicans would have gone along, or the alternative was a tax hike like you say.
It’s a mess.
What Happened When Hitler Took On Germany’s Central Banker?
https://archive.li/sPoKu#selection-581.0-581.58
Hilmar Schacht was president of the Reichsbank (1923 – March 1930) during Weimar hyperinflation. He convinced wall street to invest in Germany. They did. Germany became a roach motel. After convincing Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as a chancellor Schacht was reappointed as head of the Reichsbank in March 1933 and as minister of economic in Aug 1934. He financed Germany rearmament. He became the head of the war economy in May 1935. Schacht lost his job before WWII. Hitler sent him to concentration camp. He was against aggressive rearmament. Had some issues with Goring. He was part of the civilian resistance which tried to remove Hitler. He wasn’t sentenced to death in 1945.
At Nuremberg the allies tested the IQ’s of the Nazis. They were generally high, but Schacht’s was the highest. Goering was a tick behind on the test but still Mensa eligible despite drug problems.
The lower quintiles will consume every dime. The top income will invest in the economy to make money. Greed is great, Greed is better than getting a “safe” 4% to finance gov debt. These industries will grow and hire workers. All kind of workers. The rich will do nothing all day. The markets will work for them. Their portfolios will produce dividends and unrealized gains.
The rich?
There is ALWAYS a bigger hammer.
Old money, new money, ancient money, when necessary someone gets stepped on.
The real people with power are hidden within an interlocking web of corporations and tax dodges. They are not glitzy, use corporate assets for living and travel.
They never starve and you will never know their names.
Peter Falk and Alan Arkin The Inlaws.
Best advice from the film, Vince Ricardo: Serpentine, Shelly. Serpentine!
The more the people rich – the more common the pedo.
You can’t cut taxes for those who don’t currently pay any taxes. When politicians cut taxes, it is for the top 20% or so, the percentage that also makes the highest contributions to politicians. Surprised?
Our tax code is inequitable in many places. Given that it is a cobbled together, highly baserized mass of spaghetti writing, I wonder what might be achieved were it simplified?
Why not have AI analyze the entire tax code and rewrite it in a more logical and concise manner?
The state of Virginia is turning to AI for help in reevaluating state regulations. It is just a hop, skip and a short jump to do the same with tax codes, although the politicians likely would not be happy with their special breaks removed.
—-
Ai is not just some magical program. Someone somewhere has their fingers on the key pad and programs will only be as good as those peoples motives. .
You’re thinking that AI is like the Wizard of Oz with someone behind a curtain pulling the levers? [lol]
Any good AI is a conglomeration of information from a wide variety of sources. Note that Grok is not considered a good AI.
Well this is serendipity, John Mauldin just quoted Lacy Hunt.
“However, for this benefit [a free market with no tariffs] to work, all countries engaging in trade must allow Adam Smith’s ‘invisible hand’ to prevail. But the world has many mercantilists, some of whose practices result in massive intrusions on the ‘invisible hand,’ which, in turn, have hollowed out the US industrial base to the benefit of other countries.
“As demonstrated by the supply chain disruptions caused by the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine War, the US experienced severe shortages of drugs, medical equipment, and a host of other products that could not be produced domestically. Command and control dominate free markets in these mercantilist economies. Thus, by hollowing out the US industrial base, the world’s resources are being more inefficiently distributed, and thereby reducing the capacity of the global economy to raise its standard of living.
“Since negotiations have consistently failed to reverse this situation, tariffs, despite their negative effects, remain the only viable tool to create a more strategically diversified industrial economy and to move the world back toward a more efficient allocation of its resources.”
Also keep in mind Mish is in favor of a VAT, and that will also fall most heavily on the poor. Whether it’s a 20% tariff or a 20% VAT, prices go up.
My VAT would exclude food, and medicine.
And there would be a higher VAT in luxuries. So ….
Also in case of genuine national security interests (steel and aluminum do not apply because we have plenty of allies) I support subsidies to produce here or with allies (think rare earths).
You are wrong.
And Trump’s idiocies are pushing many countries towards China.
How stupid is this?
BRICS+ not China.
Isn’t a VAT a consumption tax? A consumption tax on foreign goods might be called a tariff?
Would a VAT like a tariff be inflationary?
The main point of a VAT is that it’s added to each stage of production & sale of domestically produced good. But yes, it’s also added to imports which effectively makes it a tariff in that regard.
The problem, of course, is that it’s WAY worse than just a tariff on imported goods. About the only thing it doesn’t hit is the actual export. But once the VAT us added to, for example, the production of a car, then it’s final value is probably so high that adding an export VAT doesn’t make sense.
If you are a US manufacturer highly dependent on copper your input costs went up 50%. If you are a foreign manufacturer your tariff might be 15% on the final price.
I know this is not precisely accurate but the idea is close enough. The braniac in the whitehouse thinks you are going to bring manufacturing back here by charging them an extra 50% on their input costs.
A while ago someone posted how Tariffs are circular and compounding. X
amount on one nation who then export for manufacture to another nation that includes added tariffs. Which may include parts imported with other tariffs. Then exported with more tariffs.
I should have kept the post because of the specific examples.
A company highly dependent on copper probably has copper costs of 10% of revenues. Doubling would be 20%.
The WSJ is a paper with two mindsets. The editorial and opinion section are largely R leaning and the rest of the paper is D leaning. These are Dem party talking points. The fact is that you can only cut taxes to people who pay them otherwise you are just redistributing income. It is the math. The top 1% have 22.4% of the total adjusted gross income but pay 40.4% of income taxes. The bottom 50% have 11.5% of AGI but pay only 3% of income taxes. The top 50% have 88.5% of AGI but pay 97% of income taxes. Since the bottom is hardly paying any income taxes, you really can’t them, you can only redistribute other people’s money to them. And then when you add in transfers the bottom 60% get more in transfer than they pay in taxes.
THANK YOU!!!!!!
I repeat myself. Thank you!!!
Addendum
My proposal would eliminate income taxes on the first 30K or whatever of income, kill earned Income nonsense, end child tax credits, and curtail food stamps and Medicaid.
In other words, encourage people to work.
Q: What does this horse hockey do?
A: Increase the deficit and give an extra $75,000 a year to the top 1 percent while doing little to encourage more people to work.
Spending is the problem. Tax cuts for the wealthy and bigger deficits combined with tariffs that hit the lowest income groups the most is not the solution
This is not a Democrat talking point. It’s common sense. And it’s why people like Massie and Rand Paul would not sign off on it.
Thank Me!
The states are cutting SNAP and other gov goodies. These people will have to work.
They will regain their own self respect. The low skilled people will compete with each other. They will cannibalize each other. The spread between the highly skilled workers and them will rise. In a good economy companies will lift all wages to reduce the spread.
In Oregon we have about 2.2 million taxpayers. 1.4 million on Medicaid. 757k on SNAP. 121k on housing assistance. This state, which has turned blue in my lifetime, has gone beyond the point of no return with regard to fiscal sanity. I would expect that those on the dole certainly vote to stay in their advantageous position. The plan that Mish put forward could break this blue logjam but, unfortunately, I do not believe in miracles. I may have to join Mish in Utah.
Utah is a hole. Ever spend a day with Mormons? Utah was the first state, I could be off here, to accept Gold as legal tender at say gas stations.
No Gold bug moved there and started shaving their bars for a coke and chips.
There are twice as many single Mormon women as men. Women are expected to immediately marry and start establishing generational wealth.
Recently they started to turn a blind eye to more than one wife.
But they will ALWAYS try to convert you.
What bullshit
I have been here over 5 years now and love it.
the history of utah and the wars the US waged against them is so deep. i think burns doc “the west” did a primer job on it. i lived around mormons for 13 years. let’s just say they are a interesting cult. reminds me of the ultra orthodox jews i lived around in brooklyn. btw they love each other. i’ve also been to palmyra NY for the summer mormon freak off. the history of joey smith is one of a great grifter………..
I’ve liked the Mormons I’ve delt with. They have standards of health, conduct and veracity. That’s good enough for me!
Alan Arkin kick today a quote from Simon.
Helpful•51
I don’t think this holds because it excludes wealth and investments from the picture. The biggest chunk of income for the top x% are dividends and other returns on wealth that are barely taxed. While working IS taxed, which is the main or sole source of income for the poor / middle class.
Now run the numbers and include the added costs of tariffs and the loss of benefits like health care subsidies for the lower classes, SNAP benefits, etc.
The poor are growing markedly poorer, rapidly, in order to transfer wealth to the insanely wealthy. Oligarchs are systematically strip mining our economy. It’s madness and will end in disaster.
The top 1% pay 43 % of the income tax the botom 90 percent pay 25% the top 5% pay 65% the top 10 % pay 75% . This means the 1 guy out of a hundred the top guy pays nearly double what the the bottom 90 people pay as a group, so I am not sure what your point is. The most meaningfull thing is at what growth has the tax revenues grown at over last 20 years and is government growing faster than that or slower .My guess is that tax revenues have expanded at a very healthy pace but government expenditures have exploded a government spending problem
You are correct. Spending has exploded as a percent of gdp. Collections are flat to slightly down. Spending is the problem.
Correct – Spending is the Problem.
Tax cuts for the wealthy is not the solution.
Totally agree Mike but don’t tax cuts for the Wealthy initially increase tax revenue? In the past I think it has. But yes that does not solve the problem. It was is and always has been the spending
They haven’t, In 2000 Greenspan projected surpluses as far as the eye could see.
Thanks Mike.
Did you hear that increased tax revenue from tax cut nonsense from Trump and the current Republican Congress?
Or Reagan’s Arthur Laffer?
Greed is the problem. The top does not wish to lose their pay or bennies.
A few years locally the public library lost city funding. their messaging was they would have to cut staff and hours.
No local pol offered to take a %5 pay cut, virtually nothing salaries wise but sounds good.
The head librarian was making 85k yearly.
No one wants to take the load off Fenny and put the load on themselves.
Take a load off, Fanny
Take a load for free
Take a load off, Fanny
And (And, and)
You put the load right on me (You put the load right on me)
As long as spending is not reduced, tax cuts are not only not the solution, they are part of the problem. Cutting tax on the rich only is criminal
Dont know how you get 5 downvotes to 3 upvotes. What you said is absolutely correct.
The problem is as I mention above: this does not consider dividends, capital gains etc which are usually a large chunk of income for richer people, but taxed much lower than labor.
Mish any income ranges for the groups. Thanks
The average republican will continue to vote against their own interest. They will just blame biden or obama.
Good question. The article did not say but I will locate them.
These are 2022 and Household
https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/household-income-quintiles
I’m in the minority of your reader base in that I believe in progressive taxes. That is, the more you make, the higher percentage of your income is taxed.
If you’re a low income person, you’re spending almost all your income on the basic necessities of life, with very little left over for entertainment or frivolous purchases or…taxes. Whereas a high income person has a much higher percentage of income left over.
The federal tax system has become less and less progressive over time. The capital gains tax cut was a huge win for the wealthy as that’s where they get a lot (if not most) of their income from.
How do you cut taxes for people who aren’t paying any ? Since the top 10 percent are going to get tax cuts as you say and they pay most all the taxes then tax revenues should go down . We will see about that but I bet they go up .
Government rebate checks to the lower half?
You subsidize their access to food and healthcare! Exactly the benefits that are being cut!
The overall average US tariff rate has increased from 2.5% in 2024 to 14.5% this year (so far). This is the highest tariff level since 1938. And it might increase a bit more after Trump sends out his “deal” letters.
Most of the tariffs have yet to work their way through to the consumer (the only true taxpayer). So far they have mostly been purchasing the imports that companies front loaded before tariffs hit. As these inventories work off, the newer items with tariffs on them will hit the shelves. Of course some US products will be able to compete with the tariffed imports. But either way, the prices on the shelves will start to rise.
I’m not worried about prices myself as I am a net winner here. The lower income folks, not so much.
Given that nearly all of the income taxes collected are from the first quintile, I don’t think there’s any way to give any more income tax benefit to the lower and middle quintiles without giving them tax credits.
What makes this so disgusting is that Trump likes to lecture Democrats on fiscal responsibility but signed a bill more profligate than anything Biden or Obama ever did. He is an outright fraudster for not cutting overall spending at all. He is just another big spending politician.
It’s funny also when you see people apply the terms of liberal and conservative to describe our two parties. I don’t think either has a majority of liberals or conservatives in them. Both parties are just different forms of insane progressivism.
My alternate proposal was to eliminate taxes on the the first 30,000 in income, with a cap. End child tax credit and ability to buy snacks, soda, etc with food stamps.
This would encourage more people to work and put more money in the hands of people who will spend it.
Most of this sounds good except for the changes to food stamps, which is an area I’ve studied.
You’re forgetting that most of low income America isn’t choosing to buy that stuff with their stamps – it’s being forced on them by food desertification. Go and see how much healthy food is offered at Dollar Tree, and Walmart. Not much. What is there is hilariously overpriced to the point where it’s just not possible to eat healthy for the same price. The obesity issue is entirely a manufactured problem because our nation refuses to build a decent food distribution web that’s not on the bones of WW2 rations. The introduction of TV dinners and processed foods helped families spend more time working and less time cooking, so now it’s the default for families who are just barely making ends meet. Nobody can afford to have a wife at home cooking anymore, and eating at a cantina ect is also now ridiculously expensive.
The solution to this problem is too complicated to fully go into in a comments section, but more or less requires changes outside of snap to allow for healthier foods to be easier to access, affordable, and preperable in a way that doesn’t assume someone can spend hours slaving over a meal. That’s directly anathema to the McJob neo-slavery service economy though.
In defense of Walmart (just came from there) – there is more to their grocery section than snacks and junk food.
They have no more snacks than most grocery stores.
(I omit places such as Whole Foods, which I view as a health food, or specialty store).
Yes but currently there are two big issues with eating healthy and being poor: time and effort. Traditionally you’d fix this issue by having someone at home cook for the household/family/village but that’s not economical in a country where every adult working full time still barely scrapes by. The idea of coming home from a 12 hour shift to prepare anything of substance with basic ingredients is a tough prospect. It certainly doesn’t help that we do not teach people how to care for themselves in schools anymore. Gutting shop and home ed really did a number on many people’s future ability to live.
At the heart of the issue is a predatory industry that loves when people can’t help themselves and is forced to buy McSlop. Fast food and junk food are colossal businesses, the latter more or less having an oligopoly on food brands period. If people are going to eat healthier, they demand it be on THEIR terms instead of being able to buy direct from farms or heavens forbid: small businesses.
I’d also like to note that many food deserts lack even Walmart tier options. Some places in say, Alabama, may literally just have a dollar general and that’s it. It is hard to describe how third world parts of this nation can get. I knew a person who had to live off of potatoes they and their grandmother grew for a summer because that was all they had.
I propose again that the issue is not snap but the fact that Democrats think throwing money in a pit fixes issues that require actual progress.
I am not sure how old you are but I can assure you that when I grew up no one relied on Home Ec to learn how to cook/prepare food. You learned directly from your mother/grandmother. Shop and Home Ec were supplementary learning, not the primary learning.
And I recall my mom working as a teacher and coming home and preparing a meal every night (plus packing lunches for us kids etc). I’m not the only one who grew up that way. most of my friends did too. You absolutely CAN make a meal after working an 8 hr day (no one or next to no one works 12 hrs shifts) if you really want to do so. Problem is most want to just scroll Facebook, text, watch Netflix etc (not just poor, middle and upper class too). There are limitless distractions these days and you have to be disciplined.
Food desertification exists for a number of reasons, including not enough income in the area to support more or better food outlets and often high theft rates, which force stores to close or dissuade people from opening stores in the area. Life’s a beach and then you die.
But NYC has a mayoral candidate who is going to solve this!
“If the slaves steal baby powder we can let them eat cake instead!” Followed by “why is everyone behind Mamdani??!!??” is very funny to me. I’m sure telling the 99% to eat cake will just keep working forever!
Be patient Grasshopper. In 10-15 years, AI’s will be in charge, robots will do all the work and everything will be free.
Healthy food? Does anyone follow the food chain through production?
Veggies, do not contain as many nutrients as fifty years ago.
Then you get into herbicide and Liebig’s law of the minimum “This was originally applied to plant or crop growth, where it was found that increasing the amount of plentiful nutrients did not increase plant growth. Only by increasing the amount of the limiting nutrient (the one most scarce in relation to “need”) was the growth of a plant or crop improved. This principle can be summed up in the aphorism, “The availability of the most abundant nutrient in the soil is only as good as the availability of the least abundant nutrient in the soil.” Or the rough analog, “A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.”Even home grown food is not safe due to pollution in the water and air.
A mud cookie (Haitian Creole: bonbon tè, lit. ’earth cookie’, pronounced [bɔ̃bɔ̃ tɛ]) is a famine food that is eaten in Haiti by children or expectant mothers.[1] They can be found in slums like Cité Soleil. Dirt is collected from the nation’s central plateau, near the town of Hinche, and trucked over to the market (e.g. La Saline market) where women purchase it.[2][3][4] It is processed into cookies in shanty towns such as Fort Dimanche.[4] First, the dirt is strained to remove rocks and clumps.[4] Then, the dirt is mixed with salt (and/or rarely sugar) and vegetable shortening or other fat.[2][5] Next, it is formed into flat discs,[2] and dried in the sun.[5] The finished product is finally transported in buckets and sold in the market or on the streets.[3]
Due to their mineral content, mud cookies were traditionally used as a dietary supplement for pregnant women and children.[2][5] Many Haitians believe they contain calcium which could be used as an antacid and for nutrition, but this is disputed by doctors who warn of tooth decay, constipation, and other complications.[which?][1][5] The production cost is cheap; the dirt to make one hundred cookies was five US dollars in 2008 (about 5 cents apiece), even after increasing by $1.50 since 2007.[3][4] It is also seen as a way to stave off starvation.[2][5] This is especially true in times where there is a rise in global food prices such as during the 2007–08 world food price crisis.[3][6][needs update]
The taste has been described as having a smooth consistency that immediately dries the mouth, with a pungent aftertaste of dirt that lingers for hours.[4]
See also
References
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1×1&usesul3=1
Categories:
Haitians eat dirt cookies to survive (Television production). Worldfocus. WNET. 19 Feb 2009. Archived from the original on 2021-12-21. Retrieved 2021-10-14 – via YouTube.
Clammer, P. (2016). Haiti. Bradt Travel Guides (in French). Bradt Travel Guides. p. 71. ISBN 978-1-84162-923-0. Retrieved 2019-12-21.
Agamben, G.; Badiou, A.; Bensaid, D.; Brown, W.; Nancy, J.L.; Rancière, J.; Ross, K.; Žižek, S.; McCuaig, W. (2011). Democracy in What State?. New Directions in Critical Theory. Columbia University Press. p. 109. ISBN 978-0-231-52708-8. Retrieved 2019-12-21.
“Poor Haitians on a mud diet”. Los Angeles Times. 2008-02-03. Retrieved 2019-12-21.
Nevins, D. (2015). Haiti: Third Edition. Cultures of the World (Third Edition) Â. Cavendish Square. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-5026-0802-4. Retrieved 2019-12-21.
correct. i’ve lived in hoods in brooklyn, that one would need to walk 2 miles or more to find any healthy food. why the obesity and farm to hospital industry likes it this way. don’t forget the food stamps was started by farm lobby. we are only rich country that feeds poison to our kids……..
Yes, dollar stores do not sell fresh fruits and vegetables, but Walmarts and other various real grocery stores have a huge amount of healthy, low cost food such as fresh fruits and vegetables, beans, rice, oats, bread, and protein like canned tuna, chicken, etc. that are not difficult to prepare. For example, oatmeal, which is very healthy and cheap, takes just a couple of minutes to make in a microwave. A person can also easily cook a very large amount of very cheap beans and rice in a pot, with plenty left over to store in the freezer or fridge. I was looking at a few areas such as the Mississippi Delta and the south side of Chicago on google maps trying to find food deserts and I was able to find a real grocery store not too far away.
Do you think 30K is high enough? I mean they are already getting all kinds of stuff free now without working. So why bust your ass getting to a job for 30K when you can get 30K delivered via SNAP cards while you never leave your couch?
Your proposal will only work if you also cut off all social assistance and are willing to deal with the consequences (potential riots, mass increase in petty theft and be willing to deal out severe punishment for anyone doing it).
I don’t know what the number is. $45K might be better.
I need to see some deficit math.
But the higher the number, the more we need replacement.
I favor a VAT which can be structured to eliminate food and medicine.
I also favor some pretty stiff rates on executive stock options which will reduce shareholder dilution.
I am not eliminating social assistance. I will cut down on Medicaid Fraud. One of my proposals was to give the states $ dollars and they can do whatever they want. Currently they have an incentive for fraud because they get more money.
Will the states go after fraud if they have to decide who gets money?
Most will, perhaps all of them.
Where are you getting these ‘numbers’? Is there anyone getting this much welfare?
The average household (not individual) SNAP benefit was $332 in 2023. That’s $4k a year on average for an entire household – nowhere near the $30K you quoted. https://www.fns.usda.gov/research/snap/characteristics-fy23
This is the problem with people making suggestions for tax system improvements. If you don’t know how the system works (and are not willing to do the minimum amount of research to find out), you should not get an opinion
You are only looking at SNAP (food).
You aren’t including the free (or subsidized) health care, child care, rents, free school lunches etc. Everyone of those things goes away (or gets reduced) when you start working.
Then factor in that if you work you almost certainly need a car + insurance (or at a minimum bus fare etc) so add in those costs plus travel time (esp if you spend another 1+ hrs in total commute time).
That’s why the break even point is more than 30K. It’s EVERYTHING that’s required to hold down a job along with living (shelter, healtcare etc).
You can easily google welfare vs work and find studies by the Cato institute and others that lay out all the welfare benefits one can get and how much it works out to by state. You’d be shocked.
Both parties are MARKET liberals. The only difference is that Republicans also want to steal and rob America bare before they abscond while it collapses.
Just to be clear, unless Elon starts a Mars colony, where do you think they can abscond to? There really aren’t any places left to flee to on Earth.
That’s the sad part, they have no idea because they legitimately haven’t thought of what happens if people get tired of them. I can’t explain it any better than you I’m afraid.
“In a rich man’s house there is no place to spit but his face.”
― Diogenes of Sinope
One word sums up Amerika. NIHILISM
Surprised to see this coming from this source. The top 1% pay 38% of the taxes, the bottom 47% pay 0% of the federal income tax. If everyone pays 2% less tax … of course those who pay the most will show the most benefit. I’m not a 1%er … but I worked for them all my life and don’t have an irrational fear or jealousy … they paid me well.
Correct. The bottom 47% pay little to no income tax. But they will pay the higher prices resulting from tariffs. I guess it’s about time the bottom 47% paid something; right?
Well said. But with tariffs, altogether this does steepen the path to form capital, for those low down but with the aptitudes and desire to do so. Meanwhile those at the top have their guardrails strengthened, as with the permanent greater inheritance tax cutoffs. As a result, many families will have dynastic inter-generational wealth going to idiot descendants who are disincentivized to do anything but stir the martinis and call the wealth advisors. This does have some utility to society, but I think is far from optimal, and is degenerate over time in terms of incentives. Not everyone who is poor is an economic drain who is permanently not contributing, unless disincentivized sufficiently to do so. That artificial steepness to participation creates incentives to unrest (e.g., Russia 1905.)
A lifetime worth of a nice salary, and a strong preference for the taste of boot leather, eh?
Well said. There is nothing to do tax wise for the lowest 47% as you noted because they are already at 0. The only thing you can do for them is giveaways (free shite).
I don’t see why those of us in the other brackets don’t deserve a break from time to time. Like you, I am not a 1%er but I do very well and I’m happy to get a bit back from the new tax changes.
Just remember that same POV of yours of “I want mine” will exist on the other side, too, when someone like AOC or Warren gets more power later. The tide will turn, and you’ll be part of the problem (and solution for their money desires)
Or they could just print the money they need and give it away. It’s no different than running deficits. In other words they don’t need to take it directly from me (or anyone else in the middle / upper middle class). They can just dilute us all via printing and giveaways.
yang gang monthly stipends. like the covid free money drops.
Still pushing this stupid misinformation, sigh.
47% don’t pay income tax because of the structure of the tax code and the deductions that they are entitled to, which were put in place by the politicians.
If this makes anyone unhappy, it is easy to find the contact info for your elected representatives.