Trump's tax cuts already paying for themselves

The left is making hay for itself in claiming that President Trump's tax cuts are bad.  Leftists call it a scam, say that only the rich get the benefits of the cuts, and other canards, but one of their dumbest arguments is that tax cuts "cost" us.

Yet the farther we get into the faster economy that has occurred because of President Trump's tax cuts and reduction of regulations, the clearer it is that the corporate and individual tax cuts more than pay for themselves, just as President Reagan's across-the-board tax cuts paid for themselves.

Just take a look at this piece by Stephen Moore from the Wall Street Journal's op-ed page:

Compare the August 2018 economic forecast from the Congressional Budget Office with the one from June 2017, before the tax cuts passed, and we discover some very good news.  The much higher than expected economic growth in the wake of the Trump tax cut means that U.S. gross domestic product will be higher than expected every year over the next decade.

Even if we assume a reversion to the pre-Trump 1.9% growth path, the ratchet up in GDP this year translates into $179 billion in unexpected output this year, $465 billion next year, $654 billion in 2020, and so on.  This magic of compounding yields more than $6 trillion additional GDP over the decade thanks to the faster growth already achieved.

The federal government is expected to capture a bit more than 18% of that extra output in tax revenue – about $1.1 trillion over the 10-year window.  That's well above the $400 billion to $500 billion expected revenue loss from the corporate tax-rate cut. ...

Perversely, because the economy is bigger now than expected, the CBO has revised upward its estimated "cost" of the tax cut.  Because of lower tax rates, the government will get a smaller share of the larger-than-projected economy – even though the tax cut encouraged the faster growth.

The faster economic growth is expected to yield an additional $1.1 trillion in tax revenues versus the original projected $400-$500 billion that the CBO projected the corporate tax cuts would "cost."

If anyone wants to see the problems with government projections via the CBO, economics opinion-writer Stephen Moore puts his finger on the extent of the problem with his use of the term "perversely."  But I say it shows abject ignorance or intentional deception.

Essentially, the economy is growing faster than projected because of the tax cuts, yet the CBO is now pretending the economy would have grown that fast even without the tax cuts, so it now has upped its projected "costs" of the tax cuts.  You see, that way, the swamp creatures can continue to say tax cuts are bad and justify higher taxes.  Pretending the economy would be growing as fast without the tax cuts is like pretending President Obama's economic policies are why the economy is growing so fast today.

A third-grader could be taught that if individuals and businesses have more money in their pockets, they can spend more and therefore make their companies – and the economy – grow more.  Sadly, the CBO bureaucrats and Democrats, including journalists, can't seem to grasp this simple concept.

The same CBO that has been so far off in underestimating revenue and underestimating economic growth relating to the tax cuts somehow massively underestimated costs and overestimated results of Obamacare.  Somehow these bureaucrats unrealistically estimated that Obamacare would reduce the deficit.  That was as much of a joke or lie as the continuous knowing lie that Obamacare would reduce premiums.  It seems that the CBO likes big government. W hat a shock.

It is a shame that most of the media just repeat what they are told instead of doing actual research.  Why do journalists treat the CBO so respectfully when most of its projections are so far off and essentially just wild guesses?  The Democrat agenda is obviously more important than telling the public the truth.

Democrats pretend to care about the deficit only if people and businesses are allowed to keep more of the money they earn.  If they actually cared about the deficit, they would root for policies that generate more growth, and they would support building the wall for a one-time cost of $25 billion, which would save more than that each year for government entities throughout the United States.  Instead, they oppose both growth policies and the wall.  They clearly want bigger government and more people to be dependent on government, including illegal aliens, because they believe that illegal aliens would be reliable Democrat voters.  Power is obviously the ultimate goal.

We currently have a battle between President Trump, who is trying to give the power, purse, and freedom back to the people as fast as he can, and powerful swamp creatures from both parties who have amassed a huge amount of power over decades and who do not want to let the people have the power back.  In fact, they want more.  They somehow believe that the people are supposed to work for the government instead of the government working for us.

Sadly, the battle is much tougher because most of the media, which were given freedom of the press in the First Amendment to protect the people from the powerful, are protecting the powerful instead of the people.  They lost their objectivity a long time ago and are essentially campaigning for one party while seeking to destroy the other.  Most articles and opinion pieces today are essentially unpaid attack ads against Trump and Republicans or puff pieces supporting Democrats.

For example, there are many historical data that show that across-the-board tax cuts generate greater economic growth and more revenue for the government, and the media report as if that weren't true.

So pardon me if, when I read a word-processed document in over 350 papers that says how honest, valuable, and factual journalists are, I view it as another unpaid campaign ad trashing Trump to elect Democrats and push their agenda.

If you experience technical problems, please write to