10-13-2016, 08:53 PM
When you lay all that out into a comparative analysis, Maggot, what you get is this:
-Trump’s latest proposal (taking into account the reduced number of tax brackets and business owner pass though, noted in your pastes above) would cut taxes by $6.1 trillion over the next decade, with 47% of all cuts in 2017 going to the top 1% (those making $700,000 and above).
-Clinton’s latest plans, on the other hand, would raise taxes by a net $1.4 trillion over a decade, with 92% of the increase in 2017 extracted from the top 1%.
Clinton was correct during debate 2 when she said that Trump's tax proposal would benefit the wealthy more than the Bush tax cuts did, at a factor of at least 2 and substantially increase the debt. I doubted that claim, so I checked and read up.
Measuring it in a different way, the top 1 percent received a tax break equivalent to 0.66 percent of GDP under Bush. Trump’s tax plan would deliver a cut equivalent to 1.32 percent of GDP.
I don't have a problem with everyone paying less taxes, rich or not, and reducing government size/spending. That would be great. Those aren't the choices on the table now, however. Both candidates are promising to increase government in the areas that I mentioned (and more), yet only Clinton has a proposal to cover those costs at a lower hit to the national debt.
Those are the facts and analyses.
More refs:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/...7c6a6a59fc
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...ich-bush-/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us/pol...inton.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrat...c84e172348
-Trump’s latest proposal (taking into account the reduced number of tax brackets and business owner pass though, noted in your pastes above) would cut taxes by $6.1 trillion over the next decade, with 47% of all cuts in 2017 going to the top 1% (those making $700,000 and above).
-Clinton’s latest plans, on the other hand, would raise taxes by a net $1.4 trillion over a decade, with 92% of the increase in 2017 extracted from the top 1%.
Clinton was correct during debate 2 when she said that Trump's tax proposal would benefit the wealthy more than the Bush tax cuts did, at a factor of at least 2 and substantially increase the debt. I doubted that claim, so I checked and read up.
Measuring it in a different way, the top 1 percent received a tax break equivalent to 0.66 percent of GDP under Bush. Trump’s tax plan would deliver a cut equivalent to 1.32 percent of GDP.
I don't have a problem with everyone paying less taxes, rich or not, and reducing government size/spending. That would be great. Those aren't the choices on the table now, however. Both candidates are promising to increase government in the areas that I mentioned (and more), yet only Clinton has a proposal to cover those costs at a lower hit to the national debt.
Those are the facts and analyses.
More refs:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/...7c6a6a59fc
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...ich-bush-/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us/pol...inton.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrat...c84e172348