Politics
Out of context: Reply #31998
- Started
- Last post
- 33,770 Responses
- zarkonite-1
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/…
"Trump Sends In the Economic Quacks.
Now he’s prescribing hydroxychloroquine to fight recession.As the U.S. economy careens toward disaster, congressional talks about what to do appear to have ground to a halt. So on Saturday President Trump — speaking at one of his golf courses, of course — announced four executive measures that, he claimed, would rescue the recovery.
Unfortunately, one of the measures was vacuous, one trivial and one unworkable. And the fourth may do substantial harm.
...
No reputable economist I know considers a payroll tax cut a good idea. Even if the money went to workers, which it almost certainly wouldn’t, it would go to precisely the wrong ones — workers who haven’t lost their jobs in the pandemic, not those who have. It wouldn’t encourage hiring, because what’s holding employers back isn’t cost, it’s the shutdown of activities with a high risk of infection (like indoor dining).
...
Just to be clear, Trump isn’t actually cutting the payroll tax, which would require legislation. Instead, he’s just deferring its collection; workers will still owe the money a few months later. And knowing this, many if not most employers won’t increase paychecks, they’ll just put the money in escrow on workers’ behalf. As far as most workers are concerned, this whole thing may be a nonevent.
- Just to be clear. In NO UNCERTAIN WAY he said he wanted them cut permanently and said he would try despite it going to congress. You’re wrong.monospaced
- Yes they are deferring them now. But he wants them eliminated entirely.monospaced
- Tell that to the author of the piece... but only congress can cut taxes and they've already said they wouldn't for fear of losing the old folks' votes.zarkonite
- but I take your point, he says he wants to cut social security so let's assume he'll try until he sees a poll that says otherwise.zarkonite
- Trump literally said it though.monospaced