Home | About | Donate

Trump White House Tries to Justify Tax Cuts for the Rich With Beer-Drinking Analogy Only Your 'Fox-Watching MAGA Uncle' Could Love


Trump White House Tries to Justify Tax Cuts for the Rich With Beer-Drinking Analogy Only Your 'Fox-Watching MAGA Uncle' Could Love

Jake Johnson, staff writer

"How many drunk White House staffers did it take to come up with this Sarah Huckabee Sanders alcohol analogy?"


Swill Meister Sanders should know all to well about beer drinking. She has to down a kegger each night to forget all the lies she told that day. Next up, cocaine in the a.m. to get up and fentanyl at night to sleep, which will be the only way for her to avoid all the demons she has called forth from Haedes with all her lies, nastiness, and horrific hubris. Papa the pastor must be very proud of his little darlin’.


Oh oops she forgot to mention the bartender who is now in deficit mode trying to “give a deal” that he can’t pay for. I assume the bartender is the US government? What a sad attempt to explain tax reform by a woman who is supposedly intelligent and educated. She sounded like one of my 9th graders–arm waving, blather, nonsense–trying to explain a complex topic in simplistic terms, without having done the homework needed to even understand the subject in the first place. SAD!!


I followed the entire story. Not a single job is added, and the bartender goes bankrupt.


A press secretary who spews bullshit is necessary for a country in total collapse. It keeps the truth
from the ignorant masses.


That beer-tab analogy is mindless. What is the point of it? The “economist” who wrote it seem to be clueless as to the the WHOLE POINT of a graduated income tax syatem - as well as making up straw-man objections that do not exist.

And the whole idea that the poor pay no taxes us utter bullshit. Go here to see what the poor pay in “progressive Cascadian” state of Washington:

And this is the most “progressive” - District of Columbia which actually means only the least regressive - the bottom 40% still paying a greater percentage of their income in state and local taxes than the richest 1%


sloshie huckster sandman - waterbeds for the press corps - alround. You cannot make this $#*# up.


I dearly hope her story is attacked for the “libertarian” economic argument it is making, not in the form of the rich liberal-chardonnay-and-brie snob set mocking of working class people who drink beer.


IRL, if you’re poor, you don’t go out every day for dinner. Instead, you brown-bag it. But these people wouldn’t know about brown-bagging.

These christian-right-wing-self-righteous-Randians don’t deserve the time of day. They start their arguments with statements like “Let’s start by stating that π is equal to 3.” Cuz, thinking is hard and it’s much easier to multiply by 3 than by π.


Yet another irony in this dopey-drunk debacle of an “explanation”----If the wealthiest “leave” the U.S. (and I hope they do), THEY WILL STILL HAVE TO PAY U.S. TAXES. Don’t these numbskulls even know the current law, that Americans living abroad still have to file and pay every year? All in all, if you can’t bear to give anything back to the country that made you rich, get the fuck out and good riddance!!!


And if you think it’s unjust to pay your workers a living wage so they can afford to pay their own bar tab without you rubbing their nose in your begrudging and belated generosity, you’re not the kind of Americans we want here anyway. Stupidly selfish Americans, apply for citizenship elsewhere, please.


There’s a lot to unwind in this beer story. In the taverns of the U.S. during Happy Hour, $10 worth of PBR or Budweiser means you’re probably legally drunk for about 3 hours. How are these people getting home, anyway? A bus ticket is still $3 bucks and/or you’ve still got to hang out before you drive home. Will this tavern let you hang around drinking water for that long, buying nothing? Uber or a cab is more expensive, if you’ve got $10-20 bucks for that and you are drunk, why would you quit drinking? Best to try Video Poker and see if you win and can drink the rest of the night, right?
Is this why Steve Bannon looks like shit all the time? He’s been out drinking with Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson, Laura, Kelly, Bill, Tucker and The TV Gang, again. Oh brother.
I guess the only real question is, which one of these drunks had to fuck Pat?


Chucky Cheese logic at its best.


An Irish reporter, an English reporter and a Leprechuan walk into a bar. The Leprechuan says, “I’m in the wrong joke” and walks out.

We are all Leprechauns.


Let’s try a different story. When I was in college, the school newspaper did an interview with the owner of one of the nearby hamburger joints.

Reporter: So, are you making any money?

Owner: I lose money on every hamburger I sell.

Reporter: So how are you staying in business?

Owner: High volume.


If only David Stockman tried this justification for Reaganomics.


The Failure of Supply-Side Economics – Center for …
The Failure of Supply-Side Economics Three Decades of Empirical Economic Data Shows That Supply-Side Economics Doesn’t Work. … and cause prosperity to trickle down?.

Tax cuts for the rich = supply side trickle down economics. Studies have been done and there is no proof that tax cuts for the rich stimulates the economy. Tax cuts tend to be saved, invested or spent offshore. Supply side trickle down economics invariably stagnates the economy. On the other hand, tax cuts for the working and middle class invariably get spent in America and therefore stimulates the economy.

It really doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that tax cuts for the rich has simply been a tactic of the Republican Party to reward their rich and super rich donors. An extra butt kiss for donors to keep them spending on Republican candidates for office. …


Here’s an example of a tax cut that’s hard to determine whether it’s conservative or liberal: President Carter’s Home Weatherization Tax Credit program. Every dollar spent on home weatherization and/or energy efficient appliances was a dollar credited to a household tax bill. Reagan cancelled the program in 1982, but not before it succeeded in a stimulus affect upon the national economy which continues to this day. In addition to being more energy efficient, the average house today is also more comfortable, cleaner and healthier (building materials which emitted toxic fumes, particularly formaldehyde, are banned). General household investment included updated plumbing and wiring, which made homes less prone to fire, and all these upgrades increased home value and durability. Innumerable, architecturally historic homes were saved from the wrecking ball and White Flight to cheezy suburban subdivision housing compounds was to a degree lessened. Was Carter’s program conservative or liberal? I’d say liberal because the craft brewery industry got it’s start during this period of technological advancement that also created small companies of craftsman/woman careers.


Ha hah! What you said.


If this is an example of the Republican’s tax bill nobody will know how much they owe. It is also a sad and all too typical example of republican flim flam and BS.

I’m happy that I always pay for my own beer and any taxes attached to it. Perhaps corporations should pay for their own also and stop freeloading on me.