Apparently the paper is confused on this issue since it headlined a front page piece on the budget, "Trump budget sets up clash over ideology within G.O.P." The article lays out this case in the fourth paragraph:
When politicians (or anyone) talk about tax increases, I see the phrase tax restoration - the highly touted federal and state tax rate decreases have all been BS - have gone to the wealthiest who buy more politicians, elections, and legislation to increase their wealth and evasions, and silence calls for TAX RATE RESTORATION on the richest to levels that provided a vibrant middle-class, seniors, the young, education, etc, etc, etc....the ability to live a decent life, not be a wage, interest, and insurance slave/serf to vast wealth.........what we need is a national conversation on tax-rate restoration for the richest, not propaganda brainwashing on "no tax increases"- whenever taxes are lowered, it is always for the rich and powerful, and an equal amount is taken by one means or another from the middle class, poor, seniors and the most vulnerable among us!
The laughable part is that when the 99% have more money to spend, our entire economy grows - the tale that the wealthiest 1% are the "job creators" or any other lie justifying taking from the poor to give to the rich is BS!
Trickle-down economics (and taxation) must be changed to trickle-UP!
Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining, and don't tell me "tax cuts" benefit the average family, guy and gal!!
Obama did do a fair bit to increase taxes on the wealthy. For instance, he raised the income tax rate from 35% to 39.6%. He added a 0.9% tax on the wealthy with Obamacare (one reason why they want to get rid of it). He added a 3.8% tax on some investment incomes. Most or all of these are likely to disappear with republicans in charge. They will likely cut even deeper.
Right on target.
Very happy to read Baker taking on the NYT.
NYT lying about arithmetic. Again. Can the Washington Post be far behind?