Home | About | Donate

Republican Tax Cut Made Me Richer and Kept Working Americans Stagnant


Republican Tax Cut Made Me Richer and Kept Working Americans Stagnant

Morris Pearl

One year ago, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act into law, promising a “bill for the middle class and a bill for jobs” that would be “a tremendous thing for the American people.” Corporate CEOs and wealthy shareholders may be celebrating, but middle-class Americans are still waiting for their transformative tax cut.


It would of been more devastating if he would of quoted the real inflation rate not just the 2.9 that the government used which is laughable. If we were using 1990 CPI calculations the inflation rate over the last decades we would of shown 6-8% s especially since recession. CPI is used to calculate Social Security increases annually, unemployment, inflation rate and more.

We’ve been dubbed for way to long and thank you for stating many of the facts.


Pearl sez:
“One year ago, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act into law, promising a ‘bill for the middle class …’”

Oh, the ‘middle class’ will be handed the bill, all right …


The only answer to the theft of $1.9 Trillion Tax Fraud perpetrated by Trump and the Republicans, is a complete repeal of the law and an appropriate increase in taxes to those businesses and individuals who benefited from it.


Lest anyone might challenge that claim, I will vouch for it. I can’t vouch for the specific numbers, as there is no way to know with certainty just how far today’s CPI calculation is from what it was in 1990, which itself was a dubious proxy for how price changes really affect the “typical” household, however that might be defined. But since the early 90s, corporate economists (as in “corporate Democrats,” with the modifier “corporate” denoting in both cases gross bias toward corporate profits and against the 99 percent) have buggered the way that the CPI is estimated to the point that it bears little relation to working-class or middle-class reality.

Here is one example: Today’s cars are “better” in several definable respects than my second car in 1972, a 1959 VW bus. Therefore, assuming my VW had a price sticker of $2,500 in 1959, a person who paid $12,500 for a comparable vehicle in 1990 (which they didn’t, as production of that particular model ended in1979) was paying 5 times as much. But assuming that prices in general had risen in 1990 to five times their level in 1959 (all numbers fictional but close to the reality), the old bus and the hew one cost the buyer the same amount of “current dollars.”

But the closest available vehicle to the 1959 bus had more horsepower but better gas mileage while polluting less, much better brakes and suspension and other safety upgrades, better paint, and considerably better creature comforts, and required considerably less maintenance. Therefore, beginning in the early 90s and continuing today, “mainstream” economists “reasoned” that since the 1990 buyer was paying the same price in inflation-adjusted dollars but was getting a better product, the price s/he would have paid for the earlier model would have been considerably less, had it been available. So they “adjusted” the price for the purpose of calculating inflation, say to $10,000 instead of $12,500.

VIOLA (sarcasm)! Assuming the VW bus was a typical good in both hears, prices only seemed–to the economically illiterate–to increase by a factor of 5. They “actually” (taking into account the improved “quality”) increased by a factor of 4, which looks better than an increase of 5x.

Here is just one aspect of the fallacy: Suppose I was in the market for a vehicle in 1990 and would have been happy to drive a new equivalent of the unimproved bus, especially if I could get it for $10 g instead of $12.5 g. But that option did not exist. I needed a vehicle and the closest thing to my ideal was going to cost me $12.5 g, period. It still costs me 5 times as much (so the same in “current dollars”) as the original. From my perspective as a consumer, the bastards are simply lying when they tell me that the price has only increased by a factor of 4.

This is not atypical of the way that many economists today, and those with the most clout, collude with the corporations to make the economy look better than it actually is. Those who have drunk the Kool Aid do not even recognize the deceit for what it is.