Wage growth well short of what was promised from tax reform

[GrandmasterWang]

6.21 per week.

Yes which is why the article should never have been published in its present form where it clearly says $75 per week in the opening bit.

Any article which contadicts itself like this one does is a waste of time. How hard is it to proof read?

[1bad65]

How hard is it to proof read?

Gruber didn't call them stupid for nothing.

[BrometheusBob.]

Of course, when companies get tax cuts they have 3 options.

1. pay their workers more.

2. hire more workers that they dont need.

3. keep the money.

Theres no reason to do either of the first 2.

But if they're smart, they do just enough of #1 and #2 to keep people feeling good about things. Especially if they release a statement with something like "bonuses of up to 1000 for all our workers" when that 1000 figure is only for 20+ year veteran employees and nowhere near what most people will actually receive.

Even if providing them the tax cuts costs us way way more than what the extra they pay to workers or the extra workers they hire is worth, people will say it's a good deal.

[1bad65]

But if they're smart, they do just enough of #1 and #2 to keep people feeling good about things. Especially if they release a statement with something like "bonuses of up to 1000 for all our workers" when that 1000 figure is only for 20+ year veteran employees and nowhere near what most people will actually receive.

Even if providing them the tax cuts costs us way way more than what the extra they pay to workers or the extra workers they hire is worth, people will say it's a good deal.

You geniuses left out at least one very important option; expand.

Is this ignorance of basic Economics on y'alls end, or just more superfan cheerleading?

[COVID-19]

http://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3...rom-tax-reform

[BrometheusBob.]

You geniuses left out at least one very important option; expand.

Is this ignorance of basic Economics on y'alls end, or just more superfan cheerleading?

How much of that will actually take place remains to be seen, I guess.

But if they end up just pocketing all that money instead folks like you and Sugar Adam Ali will just call me a cuck for caring about how the tax cuts we're providing are expanding our deficit only to put more money in the pockets of already very rich people. So what does it really matter what they do, if you will feel right either way?

[JimRaynor]

This is not shocking. Our own JimRaynor on here is still struggling and has not seen a wage increase and his tax cut will be negligible at best.

You're mistaken, my wages have gone up, but they have been going up consistently since Obama was in office too.

[1bad65]

How much of that will actually take place remains to be seen, I guess.

It's already taking place!!

You guys really gotta keep up.

We are seeing big GDP growth rates, and the jobs numbers are doing great. When you see that happening, you're seeing businesses expanding and starting up.

But if they end up just pocketing all that money instead folks like you and Sugar Adam Ali will just call me a cuck for caring about how the tax cuts we're providing are expanding our deficit only to put more money in the pockets of already very rich people. So what does it really matter what they do, if you will feel right either way?

There's no "if" about it. They arent pocketing it, they are investing it and we're reaping the benefits.

It's working just as Trump said it would.

As for deficits, blame spending. That's your cause, not revenue.

[1bad65]

You're mistaken, my wages have gone up, but they have been going up consistently since Obama was in office too.

He's always mistaken.

He just makes stuff up and then says it proves he was right all along.

He's a troll, and a very bland, played out one at that.

Why y'all don't ignore that idiot is beyond me. He's like a broken record.

[siablo14]

You're mistaken, my wages have gone up, but they have been going up consistently since Obama was in office too.

Let's us talk about this in PM. Cool?