Statistics I've read show that over 50% of the US population owns at least one share, so this could stand to benefit more than half the population. Granted, it would only kick in on dividend-paying stocks but it's not like it's targeted to the 14% of the US that owns stocks or some other low number like that. I'm in favor of the whole flat-tax system though, so my opinions of taxes are biased towards any current tax cut across the board as it's one step closer to the government not wasting money. I'm sure you're under no false impression that the government is beyond highly wasteful in its tax revenue spending (the $250 hammers, etc) and instead of auditing themselves to clean up wasteful practices just prefers to increase taxes. I'm just as cynical as you are as to the intent but I don't know that a tax cut focused on businesses wouldn't help the economy nor would it be solely for businesses. Now corporate greed is another whole level of cynical for me and way too much for this post. I guess I'm just happy to see the government give back some of the money they've taken from us because they can't seem to manage their own purse strings better and therefore shift the burden to us.
Still, if the goal, as advertised, is economic stimulus, few programs can approach the multiplier effect of expenditures on public health - or, even better, education.
This isn't one of them.
So, even from a strict bang-for-the-buck perspective, this ought not to be one of our nation's top priorities. Not that the idea is entirely without merit ... just that there are a multitude of places where we'd do better to put our money.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re:
no subject
Re:
no subject
This isn't one of them.
So, even from a strict bang-for-the-buck perspective, this ought not to be one of our nation's top priorities. Not that the idea is entirely without merit ... just that there are a multitude of places where we'd do better to put our money.