Home | About | Donate

Rigged: New Report Details How Combined $5.1 Trillion in Tax Cuts by Bush, Obama, and Trump Went Mostly to Nation's Richest


Rigged: New Report Details How Combined $5.1 Trillion in Tax Cuts by Bush, Obama, and Trump Went Mostly to Nation's Richest

Jake Johnson, staff writer

With $5.1 trillion, the U.S.


All corporate-complicit! I bet “they” love “their” shiny new $million-dollar lifestyles! Quotes courtesy of the Poor who have been made poor by the likes of these dudes and many, too many others - in “their” shiny new second, third, forth homes.


This is what happens when “one person/one vote” becomes “one dollar/one vote,” and I don’t thiink we’re going to vote our way out of this sorry state of affairs.


Besides the $trillions to the wealthiest, I read a report that said the Pentagon has $6.2 trillion unaccounted for. The vampires are sucking Americans; ya know, average Janes and Joes and hippies whom are on the hook for over $21 trillion in debt & counting; dry. Something’s really wrong with this picture and the stupid, psychopathic, imbeciles running things keep getting tax scams and borrowing funds from Mars of Jupiter maybe. They are conjuring money from nowhere and heading for the biggest collapse in history. Yet they want more for military Empire. Hang on, it’ll be ugly as all hell.


The “nations richest” are the ones paying almost all of the taxes. It’s kind of hard to give tax cuts to people who don’t pay taxes.


Were you born an idiot or did talk radio make you that way?


Are you trying to dispute my post?


No it is not. You give tax rebates to create a minimum national income. Giving cash to people who move it to banks in Panama and the Caymans takes money out of the economy. That is why the country is becoming Panama and becoming just another 3rd world shithole. Money moving to shelters is taken out of the economy and the multiplier effect does not work. Thus the pie shrinks. So rethink your talking point with your frontal cortex.


That’s not a tax cut then. And we already have the EITC which rebates payroll taxes to the poorest. The pie is constantly growing and we are not becoming a 3rd world shithole (do you agree with Trump that some 3rd world countries are shitholes?).


Gosh golly Jim, isn’t it so unfair that the rich own everything and have gobbled up so much of our society’s wealth, and that income inequality is so large? Let’s say that you have two people. One person has a million dollars and pays 10% in taxes, and another person has 30,000 and pays 50% in taxes. The rich person pays a lower tax rate, but they pay 100,000 in taxes because they have so much, while the poorer person pays 15,000 in taxes, a much lower amount, even though their tax rate is much higher. What lesson is to be learned from this, if you are so concerned about how much of the total taxes that the rich pay?

Let’s create a more equitable society so that this horrible burden is not entirely on rich people like you.


That example isn’t even close to reality.


It’s not supposed to be. It illustrates, even if taxes on poorer people were higher, that the wealthy would pay far more if they have more wealth and if their incomes were much higher. Not complex, even for you.


Agreed. My point was the rich are paying most of the taxes, who else would get the benefits of a tax cut?


Sorry but our move to 3rd world status is all but assured. We have homeless camps, Trumpville, of thousands of people, millions with not healthcare and poor health care results. I could go on. The evidence is there. A tax cut that results in GE getting 150 million tax rebate is a tax cut but a tax cut that allows Joe Average to get a ten thousand dollar stipend is not a tax cut. Interesting.


Well, giving tax cuts to rich people when wealth and inequality is at banana republic levels is lunacy. Making them richer and more powerful is the total point of the tax cuts, and everyone in government that pushed for it, to a person, personally benefits from the tax cuts. There is no macroeconomic argument that can be made to justify this. It is just giving money to rich people when they already have insane amounts as is. If there was a macroeconomic argument for that policy, then it might make sense to defend the tax cuts, but there isn’t one. And claiming that the rich are already overburdened by paying so much in taxes doesn’t seem to make tons of sense. I don’t really understand why you bother to say what you are saying. We might as well have burned the fucking money. At least buying the liquid fuel to burn the money would have injected some demand into the economy.


We have to stop fighting about scraps and change the menu. Work and value are so degraded that old economic ideas are worthless. Automation, corporations that yield billions in stock value without turning a profit, e-commerce, the offensively named “gig economy,” treating employees as contractors - these and so many related developments require a new response. We need to be radical, and argue for the detachment of standard of living from employment. The rich are comfortable watching the culture dissolve into mutual hatred and desperation, the rest of us need not accept it. If the investor class can’t deliver on their end of the social contract, then it’s time to rip it up and start over. They will end up regretting their greed, one way or another.


How about a living wage? Would that be unfair to billionaires?


“The “nations richest” are the ones paying almost all of the taxes”
Spoon feed the truth to you and you still vehemently deny it.
Its people like you that is what’s wrong with this country.


And Jim Schmidt, if that is your real name… you’re wrong, because you’re only counting federal income taxes, and you’re not accounting for the hidden costs of being poor. Here’s a beginner’s course in the real state of play, not that you’re interested, because you are probably determined to blame poverty on the poor. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-much-poor-actually-pay-taxes-probably-think