The low rates in 2018 were merely the continuation of a trend going back to the post crisis period, with no noticeable impact in 2018/2019 varying from the prior trend line.
And low unemployment eventually produces wage growth, so again itís hard to draw any causal connection to the tax cut.
Youíre taking credit for cumulative outcomes from 10 years of growth, for a tax cut that was put in place for the last couple of years. But the fact that the cut was passed towards the end of a long period of growth is what made it such a bad idea. It was pro-cyclical rather than counter-cyclical and was coming at a specific time when there was no macroeconomic need for or result from a big capital infusion to drive investment.
And that is borne out when looking for evidence of any broad economic stimulus. GDP growth again stayed on trend in the same narrow band it had been hovering in since 2010, with no noticeable boost from the large tax cut.
Edit: And this lack of broader impact is consistent with studies showing that the largest use companies made of the capital boost from lower tax rates wasnít investment in the business, but stock buybacks and dividends, transferring the money out of the business and to individual shareholders.
First, the unemployment rate hit historic lows 2018 to 2020, particularly among minorities.
Second, the ten years before the GOP tax plan saw zero months of wage growth above 3.0%. Starting in 2018 wages started to grow, particularly for low end earners, and that growth stayed above 3.0%, the best growth in years.