"#42 | Posted by Danforth"
Dude, you are lying. Grok called you a liar - hell, even Snoofy called you a liar. It is okay to just let this go. You were wrong - no shame in that. But, you perpetually lying after being informed is what makes this so sad for you.
""A common misconception arises from projections for 2027, where the Tax Policy Center noted that the top 1% could receive up to 82.8% of benefits..."
That's certainly where I got the 83% for the top 1% I've claimed. "At fruition" is the phrase I've always used.
1.) "That's certainly where I got the 83% for the top 1% I've claimed." - which is WRONG
2.) No - you never used the world 'at fruition' - link to your original comment where you stated this because you didn't. Lying is really becoming a habit for you. So, now you owe 2 links.
2.) The projections for 2027 ARE FOR ------- 2027 AND 2027 ONLY NOT IN TOTAL -------.
"...if individual tax cuts expire, leaving corporate cuts that favor high earners."
That's exactly what happened."
They would expire on Dec 31, 2025 -------. Aren't you supposed to be preparing taxes? One would think you would know something so basic for someone preparing taxes.
"However, this applies to the top 1%, not the top 0.1%, and is a future scenario, not a current reality"
That must be an old publication. The tax cuts for workers expired. The tax cuts for corporations were made permanent. EXACTLY what was warned."
It is already Dec 31, 2025? What, are you living in the future now -------? Again, you prepare taxes for a living - how can you not know this?
"No studies specifically claim over 50% for the top 0.1."
Okay, let's do the math. 83% for the top 1%."
Blah, blah, blah - maybe you need to tell Grok, ChatGPT and all the CBO staffers how to do math because you are the only ------- claiming these numbers.
"Here's a question for all to ponder: If you're running a deficit budget, and you either write new, or renew expiring tax cuts, does 100% of that represent newly borrowed money?
And since it does, is the total cost the upfront cost only, or the cost of the loan AND the interest to pay it back?"
This argument does not help your cause at the top .1% only own 25% of the total federal debt - thus, by including interest payments, THE NUMBER GOES DOWN. Taking any addition savings in which the top .1% owns less than 50% bring their percentage overall DOWN. But, with someone so math challenged, I should not surprised you don't get this.
"I stand by my math.
#42 | Posted by Danforth"
Of course you do - you have no issue lying even having been completely debunked. I think you owe Laura an apology - she is going to be heartbroken.