• dx1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I hate the language around the federal budget. First, how budget figures are reporting in 10 year intervals, when everything else is reported in 1 year intervals. So everything sounds 10 times bigger. When like only 5% of the population ever looks at the federal budget, this creates a TON of confusion.

    Second, how reductions in tax (like to the rich) are reported as “giveaways”. Taxes go in, not out. That’s a reduction in revenue, not an expenditure or liability. You can say, “shift the tax burden even more onto the lower and middle classes”. Then it’s actually accurate. Getting fired from your job is not an expense, it’s a loss of income. Same thing.

    • Franklin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It might be semantically incorrect but it is still a decrease in tax for the rich which given the current disparity in wealth frankly is barely a distinction at all.

    • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      This. It’s not as if they are printing literal money to give them.

      Many companies benefit from tax deductions which give incentives to hiring new employees, investing in particular geographic areas of developing a sensitive industry