Now…if only he had let the fed do it’s job in the greatest economy in the history of man and inch interest rates back up, things might have been even better.
Of course it worked…which is why the Democrats have not tried to repeal it. Can you imagine how things would be right now with less money in your pocket combined with the tremendous inflation ? The problem from my standpoint is that it needed to be combined with a spending cut. Even just a spending freeze for a couple of years would help tremendously.
No, no, no!!!
It cost us trillions in revenue!!!
It was just a way to make the rich even richer!!!
Unless of course you can do sixth grade math.
Why repeal it when it will phase out in a couple of years.
It increased revenue, helped businesses expand and let people keep more of their money, only a moron would be against.
THen why did they set an expiration date on it?
I have no idea but they can vote to extend it or make it permanent. You should be happy they’re going to expire, you are against them.
Here…let me help you. They are passed under Republican presidents but set to expire 8 years later, when it is likely that we will have a Democrat in office. They then can blame them from letting them expire. They COULD have made them permanent, but they never seem to.
That bill passed the Senate 51-49. A handful of Repubs would not vote to approve a permanent change. Similar problem on the House, where 12-13 Repubs voted against the bill.
That is true going back to the beginning of money and government.
Trouble is, there is no incentive for governments to do that. Politicians define success by how much power and influence they accumulate, and that involves giving away as much as they think they can get away with.
Even the countries that have hit rock bottom, like Venezuela, seem to keep electing douchebags (or perhaps “electing” as I don’t see how it is possible that elections anywhere on earth are secure or have integrity).
America is only different in that it is a slower process here due to our constitutional rights. But those erode over time as the voting population becomes dumber and wants tangible prizes themselves, rather than demanding freedom and a responsible government.
Blame?
Wouldn’t he get “credit” for helping tax the rich?
If the Trump cuts were so bad they’ll get the credit for letting them expire. They’ll also get the blame if the cuts screw up the economy and leave Americans with less money in their pockets.
You would think KC would be happy the cuts will expire, but he seems angry and bitter that they are.
It’s my understanding that the cuts that benefit the rich don’t expire.
This article sums up my understanding as to why the tax cuts were not permanent:
The changes are temporary, expiring after 2025, as is the case with most personal tax breaks included in the law. The expiration date allowed the Senate to comply with reconciliation rules that block a Democratic filibuster—which Republicans did not have the votes to defeat—only if the law does not raise the deficit in any year outside of a 10-year window and if it stays within its $1.5 trillion budget constraint during the 10-year window. As noted, Republican congressional leaders signaled that individual tax cuts could be extended at a later date.
That would assume that a Republican administration is in office then. IF they aren’t, the won’t blast democrats for not extending the tax cuts…they will blast them for “raising taxes”
Which would be accurate.
and that’s by design. Every GOP tax cut has had an expiration.
So from @wmj article it makes sense that Democrats would not vote to make them permanent. So they own the tax increases when they come after 2025…