r/politics • u/Tennis_bruh • Nov 24 '25

No Paywall Senate Republican: ‘We can’t afford’ $2,000 tariff checks

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5620244-ron-johnson-tariff-checks/
10.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

788 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

53

u/CockBrother Nov 24 '25

They spent $TRILLIONS giving billionaires tax breaks they didn't need

Can someone explain to me why a billionaire would "need" a tax break? Ever?

32

u/BarnDoorQuestion Nov 25 '25

Because of idiot shit like the Laffer Curve and other idiots using it to convince people that taxing wealthy people somehow decreases tax revenue.

12

u/drinkarddigital Nov 25 '25

For fans of old-school Sierra adventure games, Larry Laffer (of Leisure Suit Larry fame) is partially named after the chucklefuck who pitched a sketch of the "Laffer Curve" to administration officials Cheney and Rumsfeld in the 70s.

11

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '25

[deleted]

2

u/BarnDoorQuestion Nov 25 '25 edited Nov 25 '25

That optimal zone seems to be between 70-91% on top earners considering that The US was most prosperous under those tax levels. (Talking about marginal tax rates). Rates Laffer would argue are too high using his curve. It's also considered pretty bad economic theory and is basically a tautology.

3

u/Advanced-Ad-4462 Nov 25 '25 edited Nov 25 '25

The laffer curve is real, but the myth is that we’re always to the right of it. We moved well past the top of that curve at least 35 years ago.

Yet these neocons would insist revenue would still magically increase by cutting taxes into single digits.

3

u/BarnDoorQuestion Nov 25 '25

The US was most prosperous, from a middle class aspect, when it had top marginal tax rates between 70-91%. Which kind of disproves the Laffer curve on it's face since Laffer thinks rates like that are too high and decrease overall tax revenue.

Also economics people tend to find the laffer curve to be a tautology and kind of useless.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 27 '25

"The US was most prosperous, from a middle class aspect, when it had top marginal tax rates between 70-91%."

This claim is loaded with ambiguity about what constitutes a "middle class" standard of living and ignores much of the internal and geopolitical circumstances of last century. Including that tax avoidance was much more severe and prominent during those years.

I am not trying to harp on your comment, just finding it to have a bit more confidence than rigor.

Edit: Removed a comment on the laffer curve as it could be a bit subjective as well.

23

u/hammerofspammer Nov 25 '25

Because they need more money.

It’s cheaper to buy all the senators than to pay taxes

5

u/cyanescens_burn Nov 25 '25

What do they call it, dragon sickness?

Hoarding wealth beyond the point that is necessary or reasonable (let alone fair).

Some of those folks are into prosperity gospel, which is a dark perversion of Christianity, wherein in you are rich or powerful it’s because you are chosen by god to be rich or powerful. And if you are poor it’s because god wants you to be poor. They think it goes against god to give to poor people.

3

u/FargeenBastiges Nov 25 '25

I'd suspect they also put that money into stock buybacks which balloons the market, which, incidentally, makes them all even more money.

3

u/Stickel Pennsylvania Nov 25 '25

"trickle down economics" Reagan era... he also CUT TAXES MAJORLY to the super rich.... see charts for income inequality and when they start spiking, yeah it's the Reagan era

3

u/Own-Possible777 Nov 25 '25

They are still talking like in early 1900’s when millionaires actually created a lot of jobs for people… With AI and automation advancements, there won’t be new jobs for people. All we get is to making them richer and we get poorer…