Ohio political strategist is essentially correct that Democrats need to rediscover the New Deal, but seems blissfully unaware that the implication would be a drastic tax cut for 98% of the American people

 

Democrats Need the New Deal, Not Socialism

Brendan Frasier, The Hill

 

The word "tax" comes up only one time:

 

 ... When I asked her why she called herself a democratic socialist, she listed ideas like raising taxes on the wealthy, expanding childcare, paid family leave and strengthening labor protections. I told her that these are not socialist positions. These are social capitalist policies. ...

 

In 1936, 98% of earners made less than $4,000 a year. The tax on that was effectively 3%, or $120. 

 

The average income was far less, about $1,000 a year. The tax on that was effectively 0% because of the $1,000 personal exemption.

 

Revenues were raised by soaking the rich, leaving the rest of us alone.

 

Democrats should by all means revive the New Deal. They'd win in a landslide. Unfortunately, most of them seem to be leftists, not Democrats.

 

Dhey no speaka da language. 

 

 

New so-called conservative Tax Foundation analysis says Trump/GOP tax and spending bill heralded on the Fourth of July benefits the richest taxpayers over the poorest taxpayers by 4,435%

 

 The One Big Beautiful Bill Cuts Taxes Across the US, New Analysis Finds

... At the county level, the largest average tax cuts are found in mountain resort towns. For example, we estimate Teton County in Wyoming will see an average tax cut of $37,373 per taxpayer in 2026, the highest in the US. Pitkin County, CO ($21,363), and Summit County, UT ($14,537), rank number two and three for the largest average tax cuts, likely representing the residences of business owners and higher-earning taxpayers. The smallest average tax cuts are found in rural counties, such as Loup County, NE, with an average tax cut of $824 in 2026. ...

Yes, the average tax cut of the richest taxpayers is 45.35 times the size of the average tax cut for the poorest.

Yeah, run on that GOP, run.

Unbelievably rosy GDP report contained core pce inflation data at 2.9% countering previous rosy core cpi inflation report at 2.6% and indicating rising inflation

 U.S. economy grows by 4.3% in third quarter, much more than expected, delayed report shows

 

The U.S. economy grew at a much greater-than-expected pace in the third quarter, boosted by strong consumer spending, a delayed report released Tuesday showed.

U.S. gross domestic product, a sum of all goods and services produced in the sprawling U.S. economy, expanded by 4.3% in the July-September period, the Commerce Department said in its initial reading of third-quarter growth. Economists polled by Dow Jones expect a gain of 3.2%.  ...

 

The economy moved forward during the period despite persistent signs of inflation pressures.

The personal consumption expenditures price index, the Fed’s primary inflation gauge, rose 2.8% during the period, and 2.9% for core which excludes food and energy. Both were above prior respective readings of 2.1% and 2.6% and remain well above the Fed’s 2% inflation gauge. Also, the chain-weighted price index, which accounts for changes in consumer behavior such as switching to less expensive products for pricier items, rose 3.8%, a full percentage point above the forecast. ...

 As for the GDP report, even if you accept the rosy number as reported, it remains that . . .

Trump's real GDP since 2017 is growing at a compound annual rate which is 5% lower than the rate for 1984-2017; and

 

Trump's GDP since 2017 is growing at a compound annual rate 21% lower than the rate for 1947-2017.

 

Meanwhile GDP since 1984 is growing at a compound annual rate which is 28% lower than for 1947-1984.

 

And GDP since the Great Recession in 2007 is growing at a compound annual rate 42% lower than for 1947-2007.

 

The results of the era inaugurated by Reagan have been devastating. Real GDP today would be much higher had the previous long term trend continued.

 

3Q1984 Reagan real GDP of 8252.46 at the pre-Reagan rate of compound annual growth since 1947 would be 36213.94 today instead of 24024.95, 50% higher.

 

The Trump era is doubling down on stupid, not breaking with it. It is guaranteed to get us nowhere, faster.

Populist taxes to match Trump's populist rhetoric

 The original personal exemption from the income tax was $3,000 in 1913. The equivalent of that in September 2025 is $97,440.

For married filing jointly the personal exemption was $4,000 in 1913. The equivalent of that in September 2025 is $129,920. 

This personal exemption, which Trump eliminated in 2018, should be reinstated, and indexed to inflation in this way from here on out, and this income should be entirely federal-tax-free, except of course for Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, and state and local taxes.

About 83% of individual wage earners made $97k or less in 2023.

That's what actual populist taxation would look like.

Remember, the roughly top 20% would not pay taxes on their first $97k either, so they would be just like everybody else in respect of basic income. If they can't live on that, then neither can we.

Standard deductions and/or itemized deductions for the top 20% are for the debates over the rates they should pay progressively, and should be a moot point for the majority because the majority wouldn't be paying federal taxes anyway. 

Corporate income taxes and capital gains taxes muddy these waters, but those taxes were originally placed on Wall Street fat cats at a time when farmers all across this land faced punitive taxes on property which the Wall Streeters did not. Corporate income and capital gains taxes were meant to address that inequity.

The income tax was subsequently added, on the rich obviously, in part because those other taxes didn't really work to address the inequity. But now we have this Rube Goldberg machine of taxation which Trump has merely tweaked again but is not fundamentally reformed.

The fact is that today we still have horrible tax inequity where some income is more equal than others, with much lower tax rates on capital gains held more than one year.

This overwhelmingly benefits the top 20% by wealth, who own about 90% of the stock market's value*. The owners of this wealth routinely take their income from this source, not from W-2 income, but they are taxed at much lower long term capital gains tax rates of 0%, 15%, and 20%.

* the top 20% of households as measured by income own about 87% of directly-held equities

-- Michael Hiltzik, here 

Let's compare a person's taxes on next year's income of $97,000 under the Big Ugly Bill's ordinary income tax rates versus the capital gains tax rates.

Starting in 2026, a single filer will get a standard deduction of $16,100. If he makes $97,000 next year in ordinary income, his taxable income will be $80,900 and his federal income tax will be $12,510 ($5,800 plus 22% of the amount over $50,400). The effective tax rate is 12.89% on $97,000.

The same filer without W-2 income but with $97,000 of long term capital gains income instead comes out way ahead. His taxable income is the same because his standard deduction is the same: $80,900. However, on the first $49,450 of taxable income he pays 0% capital gains tax because he held it longer than one year. The remaining $31,450 is taxed at just 15%, which is $4,717.50. The effective tax rate is 4.86%, not 12.89%! That's 62% lower.

If we treated all income from every source the same way and taxed accordingly, the playing field would be more level.

If the people are taxed at ordinary income tax rates, arguably all entities should be. Corporations are people, they tell us, so there should be no story ever again about a profitable company escaping federal taxation in this country.

But Tesla and Meta, for example, paid no tax in 2023. About 25% of companies don't on average. 

As for individuals, the data about how many escape taxation is harder to come by, but an estimated 90,000 households making $200k or more in 2022 escaped taxation legally, and about 3,200 individuals making $1 million or more paid no federal tax.

There is nothing populist about a system which treats the income of rich people worthy of a privilege the income of the rest of us is not. 

Even Larry Kudlow recognizes that GDP hasn't been good since 1984

... The last time real GDP hit 5 percent for the entire year was Ronald Reagan’s 1984, where the number was 5.6 percent for that whole year. ...

Here.

If Larry were completely honest he'd recognize that real GDP growth has been in steady decline in the entire post-war.

The percent change peaks are plain as day, unless you're an ideologue.

We've gone from 8.69% in 1950, to 7.23% in 1984, to 6.15 in 2021 (COVID panic spending), and the dozen or so routine percent change years above 5% between 1950 and 1984 when the economy was still holding its own have disappeared.

click to expand

 

The Reagan Revolution didn't do one thing to stem the decline, the Trump Gimmickry even less. In fact, the Reagan Revolution made it worse.

The answer why is paradoxical.

The debt-based economy of the United States ran out of gas under Reagan because he cut the taxes which paid for that debt, too much and on the wrong people. It's still a debt-based economy, but we don't want to pay for it anymore.

This is the infantile cry of libertarianism. 

We all think the growth of debt has been the problem when paying for that growth has been the problem. We threw a tantrum and decided to stop paying for it, and its growth naturally contracted, and along with it GDP, in self-defense so to speak.  

Growth of TCMDO, the total universe of debt, which steadily climbed the ladder in the post-war, plunged after 1985, from percent change 15.36% to 11.11% in 2004 to 9.51% in 2020 (COVID panic spending).

 

Debt draws future prosperity into the present, but what you get if you don't pay for it sufficiently is less prosperity when you reach the future from which you borrowed.

And as you pay less, you then borrow even more less so to speak, and get even more less. Rinse and repeat. 

Welcome to the future. 

It's really that simple.

Taxes have been much too low on the rich, and for a long time, and reversing that is the sober reflection of an age which realizes it made a mistake, starting long before Reagan with JFK, the libertarian cad who bedded more women in the White House than the rest of them combined. His Revenue Act of 1964 passed under LBJ cut the top income tax bracket from 91% to 70%.

The question we have to ask ourselves now is, are we ready to give our system another try and tax everyone, but progressively, and practice fiscal and moral restraint for a change . . .

or are we going to say yes to the billionaires who were made by all this obscene excess and who want to impose an un-American system of feudalism with themselves at the top and the rest of us their humble serfs?

George Washington wouldn't kneel even in church.

I'm with that guy. 

Palmer Luckey and all his fellow billionaires have to be taxed punitively on their foreign investments and their ordinary income in order to reindustrialize America

Make sure you tell him when he complains that he has to stop measuring such things in dollars.

 

Palmer Luckey: Reindustrializing The U.S. Is About Realizing Your Destiny Can't Be Measured In Dollars

This article in liberal VOX is a great defense of the metric called Gross Domestic Product

 The only number that really matters

 ... GDP tells you how much resource-generating capacity you have by looking at how much you are doing right now. ...

 

And as you know if you read posts here labeled GDP, we aren't doing enough.

GDP today would be DOUBLE what it is if the compound annual growth rate of GDP from the Great Depression to 1984 had simply continued on its trajectory after 1984, but it didn't.

Meanwhile, the steady decline in capacity utilization in the post-war tells you why.

Reagan administration policy prescriptions were only temporarily successful at staving off the trend lower. 

Among its biggest mistakes was lowering ordinary income tax rates because those punitive rates had forced the wealthy to invest their money in American productive capacity in order to get preferential long term capital gains tax rewards from those investments.

Instead like FOOLS we gave them low tax bills on ordinary income, and they promptly took the surplus gains and invested them in low labor cost foreign lands.

Middle classes were created abroad in the millions where there were none before, at the expense of ours here in America.

Ronald Reagan wanted us to believe that it's our money and we know best what to do with it.

WE DON'T.

 

 

Trump is a phony populist and his tax code continues to make chumps of Americans who work

In 2026 a single filer making $97,000 in salary or wages will pay an effective tax rate of about 12.9%.

 

About 83% of the country earns no more than $97,000/year. 

 

The single filer who takes $97,000 in income exclusively from long term investments, however, will pay an effective tax rate of only about 4.9%, a rate 62% lower.

 

In 2021, 20% of tax filers did not report any wage or salary income.

 

In 2026, such people can receive income from long term capital gains up to $545,500 and pay an effective tax rate of only about 18% vs. a single filer earning that much in salary or wages who pays an effective rate of about 29.6%.

 

In 2Q2025 the top 10% by wealth in America owned 87.2% of the stocks and mutual funds.

 

 

One nutball era takes over where one left off: Trump's big ugly bill had no money in it to replenish the Strategic Oil Reserve gutted by Joe Biden, at a time when WTI is half the price it was in 2022

 US seeks 1 million barrels of oil for Strategic Petroleum Reserve

... The previous administration of former President Joe Biden sold record amounts of oil from the SPR, including a 180-million-barrel sale after Russia, one of the world's top oil producers, invaded Ukraine in 2022. The reserve, which has about a 700-million-barrel capacity, is now holding nearly 409 million barrels. ...

 

Trump's tax and spending bill included about $171 million for the SPR oil purchases and maintenance, much less than the $1.3 billion that had originally been in the legislation. Buying more oil for the SPR will likely require the passage of new legislation. ...

 

Buying a million barrels is a drop in the bucket. Maintenance costs are eating up most of the $171 million. Joe Biden reduced the reserve by 244 million barrels during his tenure.

 

A reserve of 600 million barrels would run the country for only 30 days in a real emergency, max. 

 

We are governed by imbeciles, who think we currently have about 50 national emergencies. 

 

 

 

The Uniparty: It will never not be funny how Trump insists that his tariffs are not new taxes same as Obama insisted fines for not having health insurance were not new taxes

 

People are right to doubt government data when Trump's Treasury Department under Scott Bessent leads off with this chart crime of September 2025 federal outlays

 You can access the Treasury's Monthly Treasury Statement here to see for yourself.

The OUTLAYS BY FUNCTION for September 2025 in the Figure 1 graphic DO NOT ADD UP TO $346 BILLION, as stated.

They add up to $560 billion.

The receipts DO ADD UP, almost, to $543 billion.

That the graphic indicates $544 billion, not $543 billion, is another clue that the entire thing is a tendentiously fabricated interpretation of the data from within the report, obviously. 

Well duh.

Meanwhile that "Other" category isn't a Red Flag for nothing!

"Hello! Hey! Yes, you! We're about to pull a fast one! Pay Attention!" 

In the end outlays of $560 billion minus receipts of $543 billion = a September DEFICIT of $17 billion, NOT A F^@KING SURPLUS OF $198 BILLION.

They are asking you to deny the evidence of your own eyes, and they know it. 

It's a total lie, as in Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

When you can't trust the U.S. Treasury Department, who can you trust?

 

The upshot is that Fiscal Year 2025 ends with a deficit of $1.973 trillion, far worse than FY 2024's $1.816 trillion . . . by 8.6%.

But the Trump Regime wants you to think the deficit is smaller than in 2024, at $1.775 trillion, that they're cutting spending by closing agencies and departments and firing federal employees, and increasing revenues through tariffs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, and that the Big Ugly Bill is working.

LIES, DAMN LIES, I tell you. 

 

Typical GOP wants to fight about spending . . . later

 GOP leaders say Obamacare tax credit fight can wait until after government shutdown is averted

You know, at this point I'd settle for billions and billions coming in

 

Can you spot the GDP?

 

The real GDP report is out and it looks better than a month ago: +3.3% seasonally-adjusted annual rate for the second estimate for 2Q2025, instead of +3.0% in the first estimate.

But the big picture changes only microscopically. 

From the second quarter of 2017, the year when Trump's tax reform became law on December 22nd, until now real GDP has grown at a compound annual rate of 2.466%, instead of 2.456% last month. For the seventy years before that, the compound annual rate of growth was 3.182%.

Trump's so-called pro-growth tax reform falls short of the previous seventy years this month by 22.5% vs. by 22.8% last month.

Now made permanent as of the Fourth of July, or so they say, the Trump tax reform is likely to continue to, shall we say, weigh on things.

The problem remains the lingering after effects of the Great Recession, the Great Financial Crisis, the Housing Bubble, whatever you want to call it.

The Trump tax reform of 2017 didn't do anything to address that meaningfully, just as Obama never addressed it meaningfully, nor Biden.

The rupture with the past occasioned by 2008 is the elephant in the living room, and the Uniparty just pretends it isn't there. 

From 2Q2008 to 2Q2025, the compound annual rate of real GDP growth has been 1.995% vs. 1.990% last month, vs. 3.421% for the sixty-one years prior to that, starting in 2Q1947.

America is still 41.68% behind that this month vs. 41.8% behind that last month.

It's . . . depressing.

Unaffordable Care Act to become more unaffordable for millions in 2026 due to Trump's reconciliation bill, just in time for the election

 

 Why 22 million people may see ‘sharp’ increase in health insurance premiums in 2026

... More than 22 million people — about 92% of ACA enrollees — received a federal subsidy this year that reduced their insurance premiums, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research group.

Those recipients would see “sharp premium increase” on Jan. 1, Cynthia Cox, the group’s ACA program director, said during a webinar on Wednesday.

The average marketplace enrollee saved $705 in 2024 — a 44% reduction in premium costs — because of the enhanced tax credits, according to a November analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Without the credits, average out-of-pocket premiums in 2026 would rise by more than 75%, Larry Levitt, KFF’s executive vice president for health policy, said during the webinar.

Additionally, 4.2 million Americans would become uninsured over the next decade if the enhanced subsidies lapse, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

That growth in the ranks of the uninsured is on top of the nearly 12 million people expected to lose health coverage from over $1 trillion in spending cuts Republicans made to health programs like Medicaid and the ACA to help offset the legislation’s cost. ... 

ACA enrollment has more than doubled, to roughly 24 million people in 2025 from about 11 million in 2020, according to data tracked by The Peterson Center on Healthcare and KFF. ...  

According to Google's AI, there are 22.8 million fewer uninsured 2010-2024, presumably because of Obamacare, but 26.7 million more on . . . Medicaid!

Because of that Rube Goldberg Machine known as Obamacare!

Push here, and it comes out there. And the kicker is Medicaid involves estate recovery for nursing home and other care costs at death, which varies by state.

You can run, but you cannot hide. 

 

 

$30 billion is not jet fuel for the economy

 

‘Big beautiful bill’ may help some seniors on Social Security. But it doesn’t eliminate taxes on benefits 

... The new additional senior deduction and other changes in Trump’s “big beautiful bill” may reduce taxation of Social Security benefits by approximately $30 billion per year, estimates the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. ...               

$30 billion is 0.10 percent of current GDP of $29,962.00 billion.

House Speaker Mike Johnson wants you to know this is jet fuel for the economy. 

 

 

If it hasn't been jet fuel since 2017, it won't be now

Real GDP has been 2.43% compound annual 1Q2017 through 1Q2025. And that includes all the obscene pandemic spending.

This isn't even close to the 2.8% Trump cheerleaders are promising, let alone the 3% The Speaker touts.

 

Speaker Johnson: We've Given Everybody A Tax Cut, That Will Be Jet Fuel For The Economy

 

There's no new tax cut. The Trump tax reform from his first term simply continues. There's no injection of new money on a permanent basis involving tax bracket changes, nothing substantively different for the average taxpayer.

 

There are short-term gimmicks for seniors, earners of tip income, earners of overtime pay, car-buyers, etc., but most of these are scattershot and most importantly, most of them expire in 2028.

 

The incremental adjustments which occur naturally to standard deduction amounts would occur anyway. 

More above average income filers will be able to itemize than previously, but only until 2030.

 

 

 

The GOP House bowed down and worshipped before the GOP Senate and voted for its reconciliation bill lock, stock, and barrel today at 2:30pm, including all the clowns of the House Freedom Caucus

The roll call vote is here.

The $36 trillion national debt will soar.

The interest payments on that debt were $639 billion fiscal year to date at the end of May, and they will soar, too.

The so-called fiscal conservatives of the House Freedom Caucus could have stopped this monstrosity, but they all backed down save for Massie and Fitzpatrick, and they aren't even members.

The entire House Freedom Caucus voted for it. 

 

 

Hakeem Jeffries has finished his speech in the US House, which took 8 hours and 44 minutes, a new record

 

Pressure on the House GOP reconciliation bill holdouts got them all, save one, to flip at 03:23 this morning, finally allowing the bill to come to the floor for debate

Thomas Massie was originally for bringing the bill to the floor for debate, then switched to against that after Trump got testy with him lol, and then switched back to for again after getting Trump to stop criticizing him, at least temporarily.

He'll still vote against this damn thing, and will probably be the only one. 

The debate phase started at 03:30 and is still ongoing.

Hakeem Jeffries is trying to outdo Kevin McCarthy with a marathon floor speech in opposition longer than eight hours and thirty-two minutes.