> The previous administration also squandered a lot of debt on tax breaks for the ultra wealthy. That's a nice sound bite but it's not true as the majority of

> The previous administration also squandered a lot of debt on tax breaks for the ultra wealthy. That's a nice sound bite but it's not true as the majority of the tax breaks went to the middle class: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/584190-irs-data-prove-trump-tax-cuts-benefited-middle-working-class-americans-most/ https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/584190-irs-data-prove-tr... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/14/does-trump-tax-cut-give-percent-benefits-top-one-percent/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/14/does-trum... https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/26/politics/fact-check-sanders-town-hall-tax-cuts/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/26/politics/fact-check-sanders-t... Even if the majority of the tax cuts went to the wealthy, there's nothing inherently wrong with the people who are paying the most taxes getting the most out of a tax cut. The other end of the income spectrum makes that immediately apparent. Would you expect every tax cut to directly pay money who don't pay any taxes at all? Can we never lower taxes on people making more than some arbitrary income? Or do you mean that after some arbitrary income amount, it's never okay to ever get a tax cut?