Fact Checking Trump’s Economic Advisor Gary Cohn

Filed in National by on September 30, 2017

Trump’s economic advisor Gary Cohn said Thursday that an American family could save $1,000 under the Republicans’ proposed tax reform plan, and that would be awesome for the economy because they could buy a new car with that money.

“If we allow a family to keep another thousand dollars of their income, what does that mean? They can renovate their kitchen, they can buy a new car, they can take their family on vacation, they can increase their lifestyle,”

Fact Check: More than half of American families make $60,000 a year or less, according to a report from The Hamilton Project.

The report breaks it down even further, noting that 40 percent of families earn $40,000 or less a year and a remarkable 15 percent earn somewhere between $1 and $20,000 a year.

Fact Check: You can’t buy a new car for $1,000. (Not since 1922 anyway.)

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (14)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. alby says:

    Just to cover the other bases, it takes a lot more than that to renovate a kitchen, too. I guess you could afford a modest vacation, but it won’t “increase their lifestyle” as much as free air travel would.

  2. bamboozer says:

    After almost 40 years of trickle down and “supply side” tax cuts for the rich you would think the American people would have woken up by now and call out the lies immediately. But the same fools that bought “the jobs are coming back!” will buy this lie and not blink an eye. The Dems need to pledge to undo any and all tax cuts for the rich and to return their rate to 50 percent where it belongs. And that goes double for the state where tax cuts for the rich have yet to “bring the millionaires back”. As foul and virulent lie as any Reagan ever spouted.

  3. jason330 says:

    How can the utter failure that is “trickle down and ‘supply side’ tax cuts” make the news when it is working for well for the people it is intended to work for?

    How can the utter failure that is “trickle down and ‘supply side’ tax cuts” enter the public awareness when that failure is treated as success by Democrats like John Carney?

  4. puck says:

    When people like John Carney and Jack Markell talk about “pro-growth” or “pro-business” policies, they mean trickle-down tax cuts for the rich.

  5. alby says:

    No, the Democrats don’t cut taxes much. They do, however, talk about “growing the pie,” which is Rockefeller Republican economics, and buy into the fiction that giving businesses what they want will do that.

  6. jason330 says:

    A very pernicious part of trickle down the Carney and many Democrats buy into is the language that frames “government” as bad a wasteful. Carney falls all over himself to agree with Republicans on this and to use this type of language.

    The net/net is tax cuts are viewed as “good” on two levels. It helps “job creators” while “starving the beast” (the beast being the out of control social welfare state that exists only in their mind.)

  7. puck says:

    Carney talks about “broadening the base” of taxation, which means the rich are paying too much and more of the tax burden needs to fall on Romney’s 47%.

    Carper practically wept when he the 2013 fiscal cliff deal didn’t include safety net cuts (which he referred to as “entitlement reforms”).

    Carper and Carney both repeat longingly the Republican talking point “corporate tax reform” (meaning cutting the corporate tax rate).

  8. alby says:

    I hadn’t heard the broadening the base line. What a tool.

  9. puck says:

    Carney to the Newark Post last year:

    For me, it’s not just a simple matter of saying, OK, we’re going to raise this tax or that tax,” he said. “I think we have to look at the mix of revenue that we have and structure it in such a way that we broaden the base, meaning maybe change some of the rules in terms of who pays and how much and try to match that with spending. At the same time, you have to rein in or cut spending to demonstrate that your intent is to run a government as efficiently as possible.”

    Translation: Tax cuts for the rich, austerity for the rest of us.

  10. RE Vanella says:

    The social and economic problems of poor and working class people can only be solved but funneling huge amounts of money to wealthy business owners. It’s very complicated apparently and it has to do with “jobs” and “growth” and then, well, it’s never very clear. But rich people will fix it if we just hand over “incentives”.

    It hasn’t worked yet anywhere, but I think it is because the incentives were not enough.

  11. mouse says:

    Bigger tax cuts for the 0.1 % now!

  12. RE Vanella says:

    Market solutions! Maybe Silicon Valley can code an app to solve poverty. They’ll need heavy tax breaks though.

  13. mouse says:

    At near the median, a 600 dollar tax cut is meaningless for me, especially in the context of how will this impact programs, infrastructure and debt for my kid’s generation so the big boys can get some real money they don’t need.

  14. alby says:

    @puck: That’s what a Dartmouth education buys you.

    Has anyone asked about concussions yet?