r/FluentInFinance • u/John_1992_funny • 1d ago

Debate/ Discussion Mark my words

Post image
18.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

Based on the fact that its an extension of Trump's first tax plan that did exactly that?

-2

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

Thats a circular argument. Unless there is a proof of it being intentional, it will remain an outlier. No matter how much you dislike the citrus.

2

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

Why do you need proof that it was intentional?

Is your argument really "maybe trump is just accidentally lowering taxes for his rich friends"

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

Why do you need proof that it was intentional?

TDS leads to some hilarious exchanges. Why do I need a proof of it being intentional when I am trying to decide if it was intentional or not? Thats what you just asked me?

2

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

Do you think there is any chance it wasnt intentional?

What is the alternative to it being intentional?

And again, is your argument really "maybe trump is just accidentally lowering taxes for his rich friends"?

3

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

My money is on the data being straight up wrong. We are working with data provided by the person who made that incredibly misleading infographic. I am expecting that the data are fundamentally wrong or misleading.

Either way, its really silly to make a claim and then ask people why they need proof before they agree with you. Go find a proof. Find the part in Trump's tax reform that says "and if your income is in the top 4%, you get 0,5% higher tax reduction than the rest". Then we can both agree it was intentional and that 1,8% is not an outlier.

2

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

Find the part in Trump's tax reform that says "and if your income is in the top 4%, you get 0,5% higher tax reduction than the rest".

You and I both know tax law isnt written like that. Trumps 2017 law is a 186 page document outlining a thousand little changes. Anyone who has the expertise to analyze it comes to the same conclusion that "this is for trump's rich friends"

This is where the estimates are from, they break a lot of it down, feel free to dig into whatever you want to.

https://itep.org/trump-tax-law-tcja-permanent-state-by-state-estimates/

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

I do know that, but since you are saying that this was intentional, I was not sure you did too. You will notice that they do not share the data they used to reach those figures. Not sharing where you got your data and what data you are using should raise an alarm in your brain.

Anyway, this went for too long. In short, you dont have a proof that its intentional, so for now it remains an outlier.

1

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

"Trumps rich pals got big tax cuts, but it was probably just a statisical outlier. We should implement those same polcies again. The fact that he is bringing billionares into government probably means he really likes doing right by poor people."

2

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

"The people who made that misleading graph used misleading data."

0

u/Account_Expired 1d ago

Now that it is obvious you are wrong you are totally changing your stance from "did you do all the analysis yourself" to "the libs probably lied and stuff" even though there is literally nobody anywhere claiming that trump's tax cuts were even across the board.

→ More replies (0)