Letter: Trump's market boom has been great for the rich

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • UtahBlueDevil Alpine, UT
    May 24, 2019 6:58 a.m.

    "It's not our money. Stop coveting it."

    Mike, please, stop. People are not coveting "rich" peoples money. They just want as level of a playing field as possible. And there is no doubt that wealth provides privilege. That is a fact, not a covetous act.

    Example of how wealth can game the system. We'll pass on the most recent example via the University admissions. Let's take Trump's wealth, things we do know about it. Four times Trump has used the bankruptcy courts to get rid of debt for his projects. The most famous of these Trump Casino in Atlantic City. Trump's organization contracted with dozens of local contractors and vendors to build this monument to his name.

    "Hundreds of companies" have filed for bankruptcy, Trump said earlier in the debate. "I used the law four times and made a tremendous thing. I'm in business. I did a very good job."

    What he did a "very good job" of is walking away from having to pay these businesses for their services and products. Large creditors could protect themselves, smaller one just had to take it.

    That is the unfairness people are against... as should you.

  • UtahBlueDevil Alpine, UT
    May 24, 2019 6:36 a.m.

    2Bits.... really. The plan going forward is based on one rich man who one one year helped one class of students by paying off their student debt and one university? That is the hope and proof that the system is working? This happened at one university, one year. You do realize there are 4,360 Title IV degree-granting institutions in the US. That is one school out of 4,360.... and that is a sign that the system is working?

    And this was a university that was initially set up to serve a minority class of people...which still serves largely a minority.

    The great news is it is a story that people can rise up to a position where they are able to help people others out. You can't give what you don't have. But this man rose up in a time where there were programs to help him do exactly that. It was an overt act. It was not incidental.

    Democrats don't vilify the rich... that is a completely false argument. Many of the richest of the rich are democrats for crying out loud. That line of divisive debate is not based on truth. What many people - democrats and republicans alike - are against is greed that takes advantage of the poor to amass more wealth. Huge Difference.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    May 23, 2019 12:15 p.m.

    Nate

    You are forgetting a few things. Keeping the spending levels the same and also cutting taxes is a double stimulus.

    Next is the economy really better off with a close to trillion dollar deficit? It’s an illusion just like if I spent beyond my means. I might look successful but it is just debt.

    Next if spending is the problem then why cut taxes? That doesn’t make sense. If I have a spending problem do I work less so I have less money?

    Finally, republicans haven’t reduced spending at all. They want to get elected so they don’t want to make the hard choices. Tax cuts currently are worse than a spend and tax liberal because it is all an illusion. Would you vote for a tax and spend liberal and you know it will hurt your pocket or a tax cut and spend republican who is hiding the true cost of cut because you didn’t sacrifice anything. You got your cut and government services stayed the same.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 23, 2019 9:56 a.m.

    @Shaun

    Tax revenues are at an all-time high. You seem to think they would be even higher without the tax cuts, but that it not necessarily true. People make different economic decisions when they are allowed to keep more of their own money.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    May 21, 2019 7:03 p.m.

    2bits

    I am fine with tax cuts but they are being used to buy votes.

    The problem is conservatives have no political courage to cut spending and on top of that they make it worse by putting us further in debt with these tax cuts.

    If we have a spending problem the solution isn’t to cut revenue it is to cut spending but republicans keep on cutting revenue.

  • Matt in MI Saline, MI
    May 21, 2019 12:26 p.m.

    @Cougar_et al fan:

    "I'd genuinely be interested to hear your answer to your own question...."

    I think we'd do better overall if we simply allow government spending to grow no faster than the economy does.

    And until the debt is under control, I'd prefer government spending growth to be 0.5 percentage points less than GDP growth.

    Spending too much right now is like spending 15% of your retirement savings in the first year of retirement, and never reducing spending. Yeah, it allows a higher standard of living that first year, but you'll be broke by age 75.

    Well, what we're spending right now is not sustainable. There is also no tolerance for taxes high enough to meet that spending, at least not in this country. It's a slow moving train wreck, but a train wreck nonetheless.

    With any luck, the train won't hit the wall for another 50 years or so. But when it does, it will be the end of the country as we know it.

    ----

    That's not an answer to my own question. But it points to one. We're trading comfort today for misery tomorrow. Many people are better off today than they would be with lower government spending, but it comes at a cost to their kids and grandkids.

  • Cougar_Trojan_Spurs_Fan San Diego, CA
    May 21, 2019 10:59 a.m.

    @SC Matt - Saline, MI
    May 20, 2019 12:21 p.m.

    You wrote:
    "There's an even better question, but one that's harder to answer: "What do the poor have today, compared to what they *would have had today* if conditions (tax rates, poverty programs) were different?"

    That's an interesting question. As you've said a few things on here that I've both agreed and disagreed with, I'd genuinely be interested to hear your answer to your own question....

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 21, 2019 10:27 a.m.

    Nunn24
    Unfortunately, labor is a commodity. You may not like that, or agree. People are not, but the labor many provide is. Just like any commodity, there are a number of sources from which you can obtain it. Make you labor worth more than the next worker’s labor. Morality has nothing to do with it. Isn’t there a biblical injunction saying something to the effect that “he who provides not for his own is worse than the infidel”? Be moral, make the labor commodity you provide more valuable.

    What if the business owner cannot afford to pay the above market wages you suggest? Where is the morality in causing a business to fail and costing others their jobs?

    How do you know the rents charged are callous? How do you know it isn’t just enough to cover the mortgage on it?

  • Matt in MI Saline, MI
    May 21, 2019 10:05 a.m.

    @Unrepentant progressive:

    "Square that circle for us, please, please do so."

    Oh, goody, an easy question.

    But first, I'll pose a question to you: If you knew that there was going to be a tax law change but didn't know if the next change was going to be a tax increase, or a tax cut, and you also knew that the change would apply to everybody, would you want everybody's taxes to change by the same $$ amount or by the same % of taxes they already pay?

    The liberal's answer is a cop-out. "Just shift it further to the rich, no matter what."

    And I guess that's a kind of consistency. The consistency of not having to really think about the issue.

    But I *have* thought about the issue. And for me, the only way that ever makes sense is that those who already pay more, get more of a cut. And if taxes have to go up, those who already pay more will pay most of the burden of the tax increase as well.

    Same %, no matter what.

    So, a 5% tax cut will give a $50k benefit to somebody paying $1M, and a $5 benefit to somebody paying $100.

    And for a 5% tax increase, it is a $50k tax increase vs. $5.

    Or would you prefer a $10k tax increase for somebody who was only paying $100 before?

  • ConservativeCommonTater Salt Lake City, UT
    May 21, 2019 8:53 a.m.

    Mike Richards - South Jordan
    .
    "So now a booming economy is Trump's fault. A healthy stock market is the new scape goat. What total nonsense. Every American who has a 401K plan or an IRA owns stock."

    Not every American has a 401K or IRA, they pay the highest price for the tax cuts for the wealthy

    2 bits - Cottonwood Heights

    "RE: "market boom has been great for the rich"...
    ---
    True. But it has also been great for the unemployed. But since it also benefited another group (a group the Left hates)... it must be vilified, right?

    Remember the saying... "A rising tide lifts all boats"?"

    The boat of the wealthy rises faster.

    What in Tucket Provo

    "It is interesting the top three on the Forbes 400 are BIll Gates, Buffet and Bezos all Democrats."

    Don't forget George Soros. It must irritate the conservatives to see Dems create so many jobs, invent things and show great financial skills.

    Did you notice that the best educated and financially rewarded people are in the blue states?

    2 bits - Cottonwood Heights

    "Impartial7
    RE: "By the time they wake up, it'll be too late"...
    ---
    "Too late for what?"

    Sounds like you've already missed the boat.

    Now, about the deficit! Comments?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 21, 2019 8:30 a.m.

    While Democrats are Vilifying the "Rich" today (and always)... Something to think about...

    Last night I saw news of a guy asked to speak at a college graduation, and he made the surprise announcement that he was going to pay off the student loans for the whole graduating class! And he was a rich guy! The villain of the left.

    Google "Billionaire Robert F. Smith pledged to pay off student loans for every member of Morehouse College's graduating class - CBS News"...

    Was it a poor man who offered to pay off their student loans? Or a rich man?

    Have you ever heard of a poor person doing this? I haven't. Maybe rich people aren't scum who just want to hoard money after all?

    He gave $40 million to the students to help them get started. Can poor people do that? Nope.

    So maybe having rich people in our country isn't a totally bad thing?

    And just taking his money away from him when he earns it, in the form of super-high taxes (as many Democrats propose)... Doesn't help the poor. It doesn't go to the poor. It goes to the Government (who wastes it mostly). Very little of it makes it to the poor to make them richer. They get barely enough to survive from the government.

  • unrepentant progressive Bozeman, MT
    May 21, 2019 7:28 a.m.

    SCMatt

    "Where I come from, 20% and 12% are both bigger than 6.6%."

    Well, that is somewhat true, but playing with percentages is a tricky thing. When that 20% means only a few bucks to some, that 6.6% means hundreds of thousands to others. Square that circle for us, please, please do so.

    procuradorfiscal

    "America can only aspire to an 'equality' that amounts to all being made equally miserable"

    That's a little over the top isn't it? This is highly over speculative and downright nasty.

    No Names

    "Coveting is not the way to go"

    Are not the already wealthy and Corporate America "coveting" their wealth and privilege? I certainly concede that there is an element that is envious of those with great wealth and privilege. However, the greater sin is the covetousness of those who have already, not those who envy the person in possession.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 21, 2019 5:59 a.m.

    @Nunn24 "'command economy' isn't actually at issue -- no one is calling for that here."

    Have you thought about how the Green New Deal would be implemented? Here are a few of its features.

    "Medicare for all"
    Guaranteed employment
    Guaranteed college/trade school
    Housing as a human right
    Eliminate all fossil fuels
    Retrofit every building in America
    Overhaul transportation and agriculture

    This is the very definition of a command economy. If you support the Green New Deal, you are calling for a command economy. Nearly all of the Democratic presidential candidates have expressed support for the Green New Deal.

    I like your use of the word VOLUNTARY, and it is a most important distinction to make. But not everyone is making it.

  • SC Matt Saline, MI
    May 21, 2019 5:50 a.m.

    @Dart Thrower:

    "I have never heard a good explanation of why billionaire hedge fund managers only pay 20% on their hundreds of millions. Or why long-term capital gains are more sacred (also 20% top rate) than what a person earns with their labor."

    You won't like this explanation, so perhaps you will ignore it, but here goes:

    If you invest $100 and then 20 years later you sell that investment for $300, but $200 buys what $100 used to buy, should you be taxed on the $200 income that you made, or the $100 above inflation?

    I'd much prefer that the tax system indexed investment income to inflation, and that in the above scenario you're only taxed for the $100 that actually represents real earnings.

    However, some people think that method would be too complicated. So, a compromise was made, and instead of an inflation index, the tax rate was capped.

    However a laborer always earns current dollars, and therefore no inflation indexing is needed.

  • Nunn24 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:26 p.m.

    @lost in DC

    "Over the past year, low-wage workers have experienced the fastest pay increases"

    Not nearly enough. Housing costs have tripled and quadrupled.

    @Nate

    "command economy" isn't actually at issue -- no one is calling for that here.

    The problem rather is that Conservatives use that as a Straw Man to avoid the real issue: little sense of moral responsibility to VOLUNTARILY pay one's employee a fair wage (they are not slaves, nor inhuman "commodities") and to likewise voluntarily charge a housing rent that isn't callously and amorally based merely on "what the market will bear."

  • Utefan60 , 00
    May 20, 2019 8:15 p.m.

    The Market "boom" did not make the rich richer. It was the GOP tax plan.

    The market actually did much much better under President Obama when compared to Trump's supposed "great performance".

    The stock market increased 82.27% during this same time under President Obama.

    Under Trump, (who inherited a very healthy market) the increase to this point is 17.56%

    The rich got richer due, and only due to the GOP's massive tax give away to the ultra rich and corporations. That caued the deficit to soar over one trillion more.

    So don't tell us that it was the market that made the rich richer. It was the dishonest GOP give away of our taxes to the filthy rich and corporations already flush with cash.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    May 20, 2019 8:11 p.m.

    The rich get rich buddies elected for a reason.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    May 20, 2019 5:47 p.m.

    Im just waiting for that middle class tax cut.

  • Dart Thrower Ogden, UT
    May 20, 2019 3:51 p.m.

    My vote for fixing taxes to make them more equitable is to provide the same tax rates for "sweat of your brow" and "my money makes money for me". I have never heard a good explanation of why billionaire hedge fund managers only pay 20% on their hundreds of millions. Or why long-term capital gains are more sacred (also 20% top rate) than what a person earns with their labor. The US should honor the hard work of the average Joe and tax it at the same rate as money earning money. And don't tell me that if we don't kowtow to the rich they will leave. The US has by far the most generous tax rates for the wealthy.

  • one old man MSC, UT
    May 20, 2019 3:42 p.m.

    lost in DC - West Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:43 a.m.
    Imp7
    I know this may be asking a lot, but if you take an impartial and objective look at tax rates, you will see that they went down for the middle class. Please explain how having my tax rates go down shifts more burden to me.

    ===

    You seem to be forgetting -- or ignoring -- the fact that tax cuts for the middle class are limited to 5 years. But cuts for those at the top have no limit.

  • one old man MSC, UT
    May 20, 2019 3:34 p.m.

    It's sad that Americans who try to speak the truth are attacked so hard by those who ignore the truth for whatever reason they choose to do so.

    Hang in there, Donna. And thanks for a good letter.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 20, 2019 3:09 p.m.

    Nate,
    You have a good point. Nowhere in scripture does it say we should be Forced to do the things you listed. In fact... that was the opposite plan from the one we accepted (we believe we choose to have free will to do good, not be Forced to do good).

    The solution is obviously to:
    Impart our substance to the poor and the needy.
    Feed the hungry.
    Clothe the naked.
    Visit the sick and administer to their relief.
    Succor those that stand in need of succor.
    hold up the arms that hang down.
    Etc.

    But not by force. By choice. That would be the plan we accepted. Not being forced to do the above by anybody, even government, but choosing to do all of the above willingly.

    Do you give Fast Offerings to the poor?
    Does anybody force you to give them?
    Did you choose to give them?

    Good!

    Liberals will have to take the other route (Government forcing them to do good). Not God's plan, but another plan.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 20, 2019 2:39 p.m.

    @Kent C. DeForrest "No, but if you understand basic math, you also understand that the trajectory we are on is unsustainable."

    Cool, if it's unsustainable, it won't be sustained. The beauty of capitalism is that if you see something isn't working, you have the liberty to change your course.

    @Kent C. DeForrest "And in Utah, most of these capitalist apologists are Latter-day Saints, who have scriptures that speak specifically about the evils of wealth imbalances like we are seeing today."

    And what do the scriptures say we should do about it?

    Impart our substance to the poor and the needy.
    Feed the hungry.
    Clothe the naked.
    Visit the sick and administer to their relief.
    Succor those that stand in need of succor.
    Preach the word of God to them.

    These all appear to be individual, civic responsibilities. Nowhere do I see the scriptures calling for a command economy, or forcing these actions through taxation, or funding our own acts of charity out of the pockets of the rich. They can all be done inside a free economy, and in fact may best be done this way.

  • SC Matt Saline, MI
    May 20, 2019 1:45 p.m.

    @Impartial7:

    "For most Americans, making less than 600 K, the tax rate went down a small amount. "

    I'm trying to parse your statement. The tax rate for somebody who is in one of the lower brackets dropped 3 percentage points. (15% became 12%, and 25% became 22%.)

    3 percentage points out of 15 is a 20% drop in taxes. In the next bracket, it's 12%.

    For those making over $600k, the drop is from 39.6% to 37%. That's a 2.6 percentage point drop, or about a 6.6% drop in taxes paid.

    Where I come from, 20% and 12% are both bigger than 6.6%.

    "However, mortgage interest deductions and charitable contribution amounts went down as well as home equity loan interest went away for many. "

    That's because the standard deduction went up. Instead of itemizing because of $14k worth of deductions, the filer now deducts $24k without itemizing. It's kind of hard to count that as a burden.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 1:02 p.m.

    Impartial7
    Thank you for the reasoned and polite description.

    I do not know others’ tax situations, but mine improved.

    According to bankrate dot com, the mortgage interest deduction caps at interest paid on $1 million (married filing jointly). Those who lost some of their mortgage interest deductions are the wealthy. The middle and lower classes, with rare exception, are not carrying mortgage loans over $1MM. In this area at least it increased taxes on the wealthy, but had little to no impact on the middle and lower classes.

    The gas taxes and fees – are those federal taxes and fees you can ascribe to the trump tax plan, or local taxes and fees, over which he has no control?

    As for charitable deductions – yes, the threshold to take advantage of them increased, but the personal deductions also doubled. For many middle and lower income folks the net effect was to their advantage.

    You are correct about how huntsman, whose conservative credentials I question, really messed up Utah’s tax system.

  • SC Matt Saline, MI
    May 20, 2019 12:21 p.m.

    @NoNames:

    "The proper question to ask is what do the poor have today, compared to what they had 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 50 years ago, and 100 years ago."

    There's an even better question, but one that's harder to answer: "What do the poor have today, compared to what they *would have had today* if conditions (tax rates, poverty programs) were different?

    Economic growth is essential if we are to pay for things we've already promised, and even more growth is essential if we want to pay for things that we'd like to promise.

    There will always be people pushing for the proposition that we should sacrifice growth for more promises.

    As that side is more than sufficiently represented, I will always be the counter, and argue that we need more growth to pay for it all. Go slower. Let the economy get a little better, and then add on new promises.

    But that idea isn't exactly new. Somebody wrote a fable about it years ago. Something about a goose and some eggs.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    May 20, 2019 12:04 p.m.

    Re: ". . . a lot of middle class GOP voters won't look at the numbers, and believe the feel good rhetoric . . . ."

    At least that's what desperate leftist politicians hope, anyway.

    It remains to be seen whether the Left will be able to hoodwink America into voting for the ruin that will certainly befall the Nation if it drifts further to the left. Their approach seems to be suggesting that being better off is somehow bad, and that America can only aspire to an "equality" that amounts to all being made equally miserable -- except, of course, the Leftists in control.

    As demonstrated most recently by Venezuela, but also by every leftist regime in history -- the leftist oligarchs always come out on top.

    Here's hoping the capture by the Left of the Nation's political, educational, and entertainment industries hasn't left us so ignorant and foolish that we'd buy into such claptrap.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    May 20, 2019 11:52 a.m.

    @lost in DC - West Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:43 a.m.
    Imp7
    I know this may be asking a lot, but if you take an impartial and objective look at tax rates, you will see that they went down for the middle class. Please explain how having my tax rates go down shifts more burden to me."

    For most Americans, making less than 600 K, the tax rate went down a small amount. However, mortgage interest deductions and charitable contribution amounts went down as well as home equity loan interest went away for many. This is similar to Utah's plan. Slightly lower the tax rate, but eliminate deductions and start taxing things never taxed before. Also, start raising gas taxes and fees. It's the old GOP smoke and mirrors. Make the middle class think they're getting a little back, but take much more from them in other ways.. It seems to work on half the population.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    May 20, 2019 11:19 a.m.

    Anytime someone compares what the rich have to what the poor have they are on the wrong track. The proper question to ask is what do the poor have today, compared to what they had 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 50 years ago, and 100 years ago.

    I once toured a mansion built in about 1910. It had an elevator, indoor running hot and cold water, central heat, power, etc. My father's home of the same era lacked both indoor plumbing and electricity. The only heat was from a wood burning stove. The only "refrigeration" was a fruit box wrapped with a wet gunny sack in a tree in the back yard.

    I don't know how much lifestyle changes when a rich man acquires his 2nd private airplane or private yaght. But it is easy to understand how much things improve with power and indoor plumbing.

    As a child, I did not enjoy air conditioning. Today, even in mild Salt Lake central air is common.

    Computers were once the realm of business only. Today, everyone has one--with a mobile phone--in their pockets. Our people suffer not from hunger, but from obesity. Cars are safer and more comfortable than ever.

    Today's poor live better than most of yesterday's rich. Coveting is not the way to go.

  • RiDal Sandy, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:47 a.m.

    The Trump economy has been good for the rich....and good for the poor.
    The real standard of living has improved almost immeasurably even for low-income earners.

    "Inequality" is not a problem in itself. Whenever there is "success" that mean "inequality".
    Should I resent Bill Gates making billions? I voluntarily bought a computer with his software to make my life better! Should we penalize him for having helped so many people make their lives better ?
    Every corporation that makes money does so by supplying a product or service that people freely buy because they believe it makes their lives better.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:43 a.m.

    Imp7
    I know this may be asking a lot, but if you take an impartial and objective look at tax rates, you will see that they went down for the middle class. Please explain how having my tax rates go down shifts more burden to me.

    Patriotic
    I see you could not argue the facts, so you argued the source. Just because the WJS reported a fact it is no longer a fact? Thank you for conceding.

    But please tell me, what is your objection to the articles from the uber-liberal NYT, or CNBC?

    Where did all the checkers at your grocery store go? Minimum wage laws priced them out of their jobs, but with unemployment below 4% it’s easy to see they found better jobs elsewhere. Sample Byline reported on 2/13/19 that those switching jobs saw a 4.6% increase in pay.

    You blame interest rate hikes on trump? Don’t you know the Fed controls rates?

    I did benefit from not having to pay as much in taxes; I cannot help it if that offends you

    My 401k will benefit from market increases even after I start drawing on it. if yours does not, it may be unbalanced

    Kent
    Read the book yourself and tell us where it says that.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:31 a.m.

    @Impartial7 8:25
    RE: "By the time they wake up, it'll be too late"...
    ---
    Too late for what?

    Too late to enjoy higher unemployment (no excuse needed to not work there's no jobs even if you wanted to work)?

    Too late to vilify the rich, and extol the poor?

    Too late to tax families into oblivion (if they make more than you do)?

    Too late to turn America's economy around (and straight into the ground)?

    Too late for the Left to takeover America?
    (read "The Coming Insurrection" and "Rules For Radicals")

    Too late for what?

    Is more people working a bad thing?
    Is less people on food-stamps a bad thing?
    Is higher take-home for middle-class families a bad thing?

    What's the matter... worried about missing your opportunity here?

    What happens if we keep this trend, and unemployment gets even lower? Is it a bad thing?

    What if we don't punish people in the tax bracket above yours? Is that a crime? A missed opportunity?

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    May 20, 2019 10:30 a.m.

    "I hate to break it to you, but a corporation will always shift a tax burden, since it doesn't eat, doesn't sleep in a bed, doesn't wear clothes, or many other things a human does. And it will always shift a tax burden to either a worker (lower pay), a customer (higher prices) or a shareholder (lower returns.)"

    Funny how a lefty seems to grasp this concept when Trump raises tariffs, but goes way over their head when a lefty raises taxes.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    May 20, 2019 10:30 a.m.

    Conservatives believe that there are many winners in the game of monopoly, and keep trying to convince others to play their game.

    This is the economic plan of the GOP, that and as president Donald suggested, “We should just go borrow a lot of money, hold it, and then sell it to make money,” Cohn was “astounded” by the president’s response, which he reportedly said illustrated a “lack of basic understanding” about how federal debt works.

    Those who back up this president have that same “lack of basic understanding” about how federal debt works.

  • SC Matt Saline, MI
    May 20, 2019 9:43 a.m.

    @Partial7:

    "the wealthy and corporations shift more tax burden on them"

    I hate to break it to you, but a corporation will always shift a tax burden, since it doesn't eat, doesn't sleep in a bed, doesn't wear clothes, or many other things a human does. And it will always shift a tax burden to either a worker (lower pay), a customer (higher prices) or a shareholder (lower returns.)

    If you work you at least two of those things. Three if you invest in a 401k.

    No matter what, the tax burden that is nominally reported to the government on the corporate tax return is a tax on every worker, customer or investor of that corporation.

    The same is basically true of the wealthy, since they likely got wealth by doing the same sorts of things corporations do, like hire people and sell products.

    The middle class ultimately bears the burden of any tax. How could it be otherwise?

  • patrioticAMERICAN South Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:41 a.m.

    @Mike Richards, 2 bits, lost in DC:

    Trump's tax cuts & other economic policies have benefited the poor & middle class, just as much as denying climate change has benefited red states, such as Texas, Florida, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Georgia, the Carolinas, Alabama, etc. in the last few years--all of whom have been hit by deadly weather-related disasters.

    Having 401K's that are doing well now, doesn't benefit you unless you're actually retired & using them now. By the time many people who currently have 401K's, retire, the huge deficit increasingly racked up by Trump's tax cuts (unless it's fixed by Dems) will have caught up w/the economy, & it will most likely have collapsed. And don't expect rich CEO's & stock owners to care abt employees then, any more than they do now.

    The mentality of many stock holders, CEO's, brokers, hedge fund managers, bankers, etc., of today, (& those who mistakenly think everyone who benefits from welfare programs are just lazy freeloaders), is similar to the callous attitude of Louis XIV ("After me, the deluge") & the nobility he surrounded himself with, & we all know how that attitude benefitted his grandson, Loius XVI & his family & peers.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:34 a.m.

    "Wealth is not a zero sum game."

    No, but if you understand basic math, you also understand that the trajectory we are on is unsustainable. Plot it on a graph, you'll see where we're headed. It ain't pretty.

    I always find it interesting to see how conservatives (most of whom are in the income category whose wages have stagnated over the past 40 years) defend the rights of the wealthy to game the system to their own advantage. And in Utah, most of these capitalist apologists are Latter-day Saints, who have scriptures that speak specifically about the evils of wealth imbalances like we are seeing today. But it's easy to disregard these verses from almost 200 years ago. Those principles surely don't apply to a modern capitalist economy, do they? And doesn't GOP stand for God's Only Party? He's surely a capitalist. It's in the Book of Mormon somewhere, isn't it?

  • Diligent Dave Logan, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:17 a.m.

    So Donna, you're worried about losing the dole.

    We should get rid of the idea of a big sugar daddy (like Little Orphan Annie's 'Daddy Warbucks' picking up the tab for the 'po folk'. Such programs should never have become what government does.

    Ultimately, there is no 'free lunch'. It is all just a government sponsored Ponzi scheme, which currently consumes over 80% of ALL Fedrral Government spending. It will yet cause the ruin of our nation.

    Isaiah foresaw it over 2700 years ago--

    "And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbor..."

    --Isaiah 3:5 / 2 Nephi 13:5

    p.s. Although it would make Bernie Madoff proud!

  • What in Tucket Provo, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:06 a.m.

    It is interesting the top three on the Forbes 400 are BIll Gates, Buffet and Bezos all Democrats. When. not if. the economy goes down if we get a socialist president and Congress you will not be so happy unless you are a bureaucrat, crony capitalists, or government worker. It is guarranted to go down hill. I am not unsympathetic to the idea some are richer than they need to be. Taxing them is popular with Democrats, but as they already pay a huge per cent of taxes and if they move to a lower taxed state someone suffers.

  • patrioticAMERICAN South Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 9:02 a.m.

    @lost in DC:
    Sorry, quoting from the Wall Street Journal--a newspaper owned by Robert Murdoch, the very same person who owns the famously "unbiased & fact-based" Fox News & Entertainment--& which obviously tries to sell to the country that a strong stock market benefits the ave worker, just as much as it does those who actually own stock, because it creates jobs & raises wages a piddlin amt (so CEO's & bank execs can continue to earn their obscene salaries)--doesn't sell your claims one iota.

    Sure--wages have gone up a little for some people. Meanwhile, mega stores like Walmart have gotten rid of thousands of jobs & installed mostly self-serve check-out stations in stores across the country (My store used to always have 10-15 checkers--now it has 2). Where do all those former employees go to get similar jobs in an ever shrinking physical-retail environment?

    It's easy to read a biased article & ignore realities of today's economy, w/rising interest rates, house prices, medical/prescription costs, & thanks to Trump's ever expanding tariffs, increases in everything from food, clothing, & electronics to washers/dryers, automobiles, & just abt anything else made w/steel or aluminum.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 20, 2019 8:54 a.m.

    RE: "market boom has been great for the rich"...
    ---
    True. But it has also been great for the unemployed. But since it also benefited another group (a group the Left hates)... it must be vilified, right?

    Remember the saying... "A rising tide lifts all boats"?

    The unemployed can't be lifted without the rich also getting some benefit. They are the one's creating the jobs. And when they need to hire more people... they usually profit, as do the people they hire. That's how a "Free Economy" works.

    So what if "non-Hispanic white households" also benefit?

    How are you going to keep the "non-Hispanic white households" from profiting, while only allowing the demographic you like to prosper? Elect Bernie Sanders? Even he can't do that!

    How do you propose we punish the people who create the jobs. And at the same time motivate them to create more jobs? That makes no sense Bernie fans!

    If Occupy Wallstreet types got their way... America's economy would stall and jobs would go down the tubes. Do you WANT to be unemployed?

    So why vilify people for being "non-Hispanic whites" or 1%ers?

    Ever seen an economy grow without 1%ers? I haven't.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    May 20, 2019 8:25 a.m.

    Yeah, but a lot of middle class GOP voters won't look at the numbers, and believe the feel good rhetoric that they aren't going backward as the wealthy and corporations shift more tax burden on them. By the time they wake up, it'll be too late.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 8:19 a.m.

    So now a booming economy is Trump's fault. A healthy stock market is the new scape goat. What total nonsense. Every American who has a 401K plan or an IRA owns stock. A healthy stock market funnels dollars into their 401K and they IRA. Every American who has that type of retirement fund gains when the stock market is healthy. Every America who has a life insurance policy has money (indrectly) invested in the stock market. Those insurance companies invest the money they receive as premiums in the stock market. How do you think that they have money to pay death benefits. The premiums that they charge could never pay the total cost of the policies purchased. When I was an insurance agent, I was taught how insurance works. It's fascinating from an economic point of view.

    We are told to not covet. Why would we envy those whose dollars makes it possible for us to buy homes or start businesses? Why would we envy those whose dollars makes it possible for us to have a line of credit or credit cards? Why would we envy those whose dollars were earned by THEM taking risk when we were too timid?

    It's not our money. Stop coveting it.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 20, 2019 8:18 a.m.

    Donna,
    Here are some recent articles I suggest you read prior to making such comments:

    05/03/2019
    New York Times
    Over the past year, low-wage workers have experienced the fastest pay increases, a shift from earlier in the recovery, when wage growth was concentrated at the top.

    03/13/2019
    CNBC
    The recent jump in paychecks has come with an unusual characteristic, as workers at the lower end of the pay scale are getting the greater benefit.

    Average hourly earnings rose 3.4 percent in February from the same period a year ago, according to the BLS. That’s the biggest gain since April 2009 and seventh month in a row that compensation has been 3 percent or better.

    What has set this rise apart is that it’s the first time during an economic recovery that began in mid-2009 that the bottom half of earners are benefiting more than the top half — in fact, about twice as much, according to calculations by Goldman Sachs.

    Jobs for the Forgotten Man
    01/04/2019
    Wall Street Journal

    Manufacturing employment fell by 210,000 during Barack Obama’s two terms. It has risen by 473,000 jobs in Donald Trump’s first two years.

    Wealth is not a zero sum game.