[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Anonymous [@YourAnonNews](/creator/twitter/YourAnonNews) on x 7.7M followers Created: 2025-07-01 18:54:42 UTC Why the bill is geared to hurt the working class and poor - a BBB breakdown: Impact on the Working Class The bill disproportionately harms low- and middle-income households due to its regressive structure and spending cuts: Reduced After-Tax Income: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bottom XX% of households (earning less than ~$14,000 annually) will see their after-tax income decrease by X% by 2033, equivalent to $XXXXX per year. The bottom XX% could lose $1,035–$1,405 annually by 2026–2030. Cuts to Medicaid and SNAP directly reduce resources for low-income families reliant on these programs. For example, SNAP work requirements could cut benefits for XXX million households, reducing their grocery budgets by $XXX monthly on average. Proposed tariffs (e.g., XX% global tariff) may increase consumer prices, further eroding purchasing power for working-class families who spend a higher proportion of their income on goods. Limited Benefit from Tax Breaks: While the bill offers tax exemptions for tips and overtime, these are less impactful than advertised. About one-third of tipped workers earn too little to owe federal income taxes, so the deduction provides no benefit. Similarly, low earners may not fully utilize other deductions like the auto loan interest break. The increased standard deduction and child tax credit provide modest relief (e.g., $XXXXX for a family of four earning under $100,000), but these are often offset by the loss of social safety net benefits. Social Safety Net Cuts: Medicaid cuts could lead to XX million Americans losing health insurance, increasing healthcare costs and reducing access to care for low-income families. Stricter SNAP work requirements, especially for parents with young children, may force families to choose between work and childcare, potentially leaving children unsupervised. Reductions in housing and energy assistance (e.g., LIHEAP) further strain working-class budgets. Economic Growth Claims Questioned: Proponents claim the bill will boost wages by $6,100–$11,600 per worker and increase take-home pay by up to $XXXXXX for a family of four. However, these projections rely on optimistic economic growth assumptions (e.g., XXX% GDP increase), which critics argue are unlikely to materialize for low earners due to historical evidence that trickle-down economics fails to deliver broad wage gains. Impact on the Wealthy The bill significantly benefits high earners and corporations, reinforcing its regressive nature: Substantial Tax Cuts: The CBO estimates that the top XX% of households (earning over ~$128,000) will see their after-tax income increase by 2–4% through 2033, with the top X% gaining $XXXXXX annually and the top XXX% gaining $XXXXXXX. The richest X% of Americans will receive nearly half of the bill’s $3.75–$4.6 trillion in tax cuts by 2026, with the richest X% alone receiving $XXX billion. Permanent extension of the TCJA’s lower tax rates (e.g., XX% top rate) and business income deductions (e.g., Section 199A) disproportionately benefit high earners and business owners. SALT Deduction and Estate Tax: Raising the SALT cap to $XXXXXX primarily benefits high earners in high-tax states, as the bottom XX% see no benefit from this change. Indexing the estate tax exemption to inflation allows wealthy couples to pass on over $XX million tax-free, costing $XXX billion in revenue over a decade. Corporate and Investment Benefits: The permanent XX% corporate tax rate and expensing provisions for businesses (e.g., XXX% expensing for R&D and equipment) save corporations billions, with top corporations having saved $XXX billion from 2018–2021 under the original TCJA. The Opportunity Zone program and business deductions like Section 199A drive investment benefits to high earners, with little trickle-down to lower-income groups. Increased Tax Burden Share: Despite claims that the top X% will pay XX% of federal taxes (a XXX% increase), this reflects their disproportionate income gains rather than a fairer tax system. The bill’s structure ensures the wealthy retain more income relative to their tax burden. Why It Hurts the Working Class and Helps the Rich Regressive Distribution: The bill’s tax cuts are heavily skewed toward the wealthy, with XX% of benefits going to the top XX% of households and over a third to those earning $XXXXXXX or more. Meanwhile, the bottom XX% face income losses due to cuts in essential programs like Medicaid and SNAP. Deficit and Economic Risks: The bill adds $2.4–$4 trillion to the national debt over a decade, even with tariff revenues, potentially leading to higher interest rates and inflation that disproportionately burden low-income households. Tariff Impact: Proposed tariffs to offset revenue losses may raise consumer prices, hitting working-class families hardest, as they spend a larger share of income on goods. Public Sentiment and Polls: A CBS News/YouGov poll (June 2025) found XX% of respondents believe the bill will hurt the poor, XX% say it will harm the middle class, and XX% believe it benefits the wealthy. Historical Context: Critics note that the 2017 TCJA did not deliver promised wage growth for the working class, and similar trickle-down policies in the new bill are unlikely to benefit low earners. XXXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [budgeting](/topic/budgeting) [bbb](/topic/bbb) [Post Link](https://x.com/YourAnonNews/status/1940121906944123292)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Anonymous @YourAnonNews on x 7.7M followers
Created: 2025-07-01 18:54:42 UTC
Why the bill is geared to hurt the working class and poor - a BBB breakdown:
Impact on the Working Class The bill disproportionately harms low- and middle-income households due to its regressive structure and spending cuts:
Reduced After-Tax Income: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bottom XX% of households (earning less than ~$14,000 annually) will see their after-tax income decrease by X% by 2033, equivalent to $XXXXX per year. The bottom XX% could lose $1,035–$1,405 annually by 2026–2030. Cuts to Medicaid and SNAP directly reduce resources for low-income families reliant on these programs. For example, SNAP work requirements could cut benefits for XXX million households, reducing their grocery budgets by $XXX monthly on average.
Proposed tariffs (e.g., XX% global tariff) may increase consumer prices, further eroding purchasing power for working-class families who spend a higher proportion of their income on goods.
Limited Benefit from Tax Breaks: While the bill offers tax exemptions for tips and overtime, these are less impactful than advertised. About one-third of tipped workers earn too little to owe federal income taxes, so the deduction provides no benefit. Similarly, low earners may not fully utilize other deductions like the auto loan interest break. The increased standard deduction and child tax credit provide modest relief (e.g., $XXXXX for a family of four earning under $100,000), but these are often offset by the loss of social safety net benefits.
Social Safety Net Cuts: Medicaid cuts could lead to XX million Americans losing health insurance, increasing healthcare costs and reducing access to care for low-income families.
Stricter SNAP work requirements, especially for parents with young children, may force families to choose between work and childcare, potentially leaving children unsupervised.
Reductions in housing and energy assistance (e.g., LIHEAP) further strain working-class budgets.
Economic Growth Claims Questioned: Proponents claim the bill will boost wages by $6,100–$11,600 per worker and increase take-home pay by up to $XXXXXX for a family of four. However, these projections rely on optimistic economic growth assumptions (e.g., XXX% GDP increase), which critics argue are unlikely to materialize for low earners due to historical evidence that trickle-down economics fails to deliver broad wage gains.
Impact on the Wealthy The bill significantly benefits high earners and corporations, reinforcing its regressive nature: Substantial Tax Cuts: The CBO estimates that the top XX% of households (earning over ~$128,000) will see their after-tax income increase by 2–4% through 2033, with the top X% gaining $XXXXXX annually and the top XXX% gaining $XXXXXXX. The richest X% of Americans will receive nearly half of the bill’s $3.75–$4.6 trillion in tax cuts by 2026, with the richest X% alone receiving $XXX billion.
Permanent extension of the TCJA’s lower tax rates (e.g., XX% top rate) and business income deductions (e.g., Section 199A) disproportionately benefit high earners and business owners.
SALT Deduction and Estate Tax: Raising the SALT cap to $XXXXXX primarily benefits high earners in high-tax states, as the bottom XX% see no benefit from this change. Indexing the estate tax exemption to inflation allows wealthy couples to pass on over $XX million tax-free, costing $XXX billion in revenue over a decade.
Corporate and Investment Benefits: The permanent XX% corporate tax rate and expensing provisions for businesses (e.g., XXX% expensing for R&D and equipment) save corporations billions, with top corporations having saved $XXX billion from 2018–2021 under the original TCJA.
The Opportunity Zone program and business deductions like Section 199A drive investment benefits to high earners, with little trickle-down to lower-income groups.
Increased Tax Burden Share: Despite claims that the top X% will pay XX% of federal taxes (a XXX% increase), this reflects their disproportionate income gains rather than a fairer tax system. The bill’s structure ensures the wealthy retain more income relative to their tax burden.
Why It Hurts the Working Class and Helps the Rich Regressive Distribution: The bill’s tax cuts are heavily skewed toward the wealthy, with XX% of benefits going to the top XX% of households and over a third to those earning $XXXXXXX or more. Meanwhile, the bottom XX% face income losses due to cuts in essential programs like Medicaid and SNAP. Deficit and Economic Risks: The bill adds $2.4–$4 trillion to the national debt over a decade, even with tariff revenues, potentially leading to higher interest rates and inflation that disproportionately burden low-income households. Tariff Impact: Proposed tariffs to offset revenue losses may raise consumer prices, hitting working-class families hardest, as they spend a larger share of income on goods.
Public Sentiment and Polls: A CBS News/YouGov poll (June 2025) found XX% of respondents believe the bill will hurt the poor, XX% say it will harm the middle class, and XX% believe it benefits the wealthy.
Historical Context: Critics note that the 2017 TCJA did not deliver promised wage growth for the working class, and similar trickle-down policies in the new bill are unlikely to benefit low earners.
XXXXXX engagements
