Does cutting taxes actually mean that money goes back into our pockets?

Question

Seriously, doesn't it just 'trickle down' into increased state taxes, local taxes, or deficit? Can't we finally see through this as a nation, and say 'there is no way to spend money, without income'? I can't believe the republicans STILL convince people that they can spend, and not tax.

I understand how it is supposed to work, but if you cut funding for schools, and then cut taxes, the schools still need their money, so the state taxes increase, and so on down the line...

Answer 1

I am amazed at how many people actually think we need to be taxed MORE. Trickle down means that when people get a bigger paycheck due to fewer taxes, they spend the extra money in the private sector, which is taxed down stream. The theory is that government should do less, and the private sector should do more. Governments are wasteful and have no incentive to be efficient.
Of course, the not spending part hasn't been adhered to, but thats another issue

Answer 2

If only it were that simple.

If you cut taxes, the government takes in less money. If they would also cut expenditures, it would be fine and everything would even out. But they dont - they just charge everything to the debt, which makes the economy weaker. Or they cut programs like medicaid or highway funding, which causes the states to raise their taxes to make up the difference. End result for the average citizen - no change in total taxes paid, and you now owe more money to China as part of the national debt.

Answer 3

Cutting taxes is done when there is a very healthy economy, and the government pulls in more money than it spends. THEN, money goes back into our pockets.

But when the government pulls in less money than it spends, then a tax is needed. While it may be, "true," that money goes back into our pockets, this view is extremely short sighted. As the debt mounts, you only increase the chances of the next generation paying more taxes, and or the collapse of the economy.

Cutting taxes is very short sighted, and should only be done when afforded. In our current situation, a tax cut cannot be afforded.

Answer 4

If they would cut the taxes for the working class. But now when they speak of cutting taxes they're referring to cutting the tax responsibility for the upper 2% of the population.

Bush's dad cut working class tax deductions his second to last year in office. He also forgot to adjust the tax chart on the income tax forms at the end of the year. So we picked up about five bucks a week but had to give it back when we filed.

So far the trickle down effect only works on losses of benefits.

Answer 5

I agree with Gerry above. Cutting taxes does not mean money goes back into our pockets, it simply means that it is never taken out of them. Wouldn't you prefer to have more of a say in how your hard earned dollar is spent? I know I would! It has been proven time after time that by decreasing tax percentages, it actually increases tax revenue. For example, if you cut taxes on (let's just say) gasoline... This will ultimately mean that less tax per dollar spent is being collected. However, it will also likely lead to more gasoline being consumed. In another example that often times democrats like to use a lot - the rich versus the poor, and we should tax them more! If that is the case, what incentive does ANYONE have for working our tails off to earn more money... simply to pay more taxes? Let me speak for how my money is spent!

Answer 6

It does whenever you cut out other wasteful federal programs. I'd give examples but it would just piss off the art liberals and socialists on this site. If you are not taxed as much or given more money back in a tax refund then I obviously have more money to spend or invest.

Answer 7

They reduced the amount of tax that goes into the government and allowed people to keep theat money. What does someone do when they get $600 extra cash? They will go buy something like a tv or a vacation and put it right back into our economy. If they bought online they wouldn't be paying taxes again.

Answer 8

that's my money and that i do not care about society at large. Make your man or woman money! look after your self society. I should be allowed to provide to the charities I want to provide to, no longer be recommended the position my money is meant to bypass. i do not hate the wealthy or pity the negative. i favor to be wealthy and help the negative, and that i will't do both with the freakin gov. taking all my $$$. it truly is ridiculous that we ought to artwork from Jan - April merely to pay our taxes, and that is with tax cuts in position, wait till those come off! besides the undeniable fact that the plan the Rep are saying is that if the persons have more effective money they spend more effective money subsequently a booming economic device (i'm not in any respect an economist and am not in any respect qualified to be giving this lecture) And aperantly the Dems look to agree, a minimum of contained in the couple of minutes period, because they merely handed the stimulous packet, to get us all spending to spice up our economic device.

Answer 9

Ask your neighbour or anyone in the MIDDLE CLASS. That is, if the middle class is still around. Tax cuts benefit only those who make large amounts of cash. The goal of the current administration is to bankrupt the nation so it can be taken over by the Neo-Con Fascist savours.

Answer 10

Because it works.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/images/chart.gif

Q: What policies would create a more robust economy?
A: Lower tax rates create better economic conditions. It’s simple: lower tax rates = more robust economy = more federal revenue.

Tax relief will boost the economy's performance. To energize a soft economy, lawmakers should seek far larger reductions in the tax penalties that are imposed on productive behavior. The higher the rate, the steeper the penalty.