LouderVol
Extra and Terrestrial
- Joined
- May 19, 2014
- Messages
- 54,947
- Likes
- 54,893
I oppose Trump on a lot of economic policies, but he's also going in the right direction with some things.
It's funny where this thread went, which reminds me of an all-out authoritarian in history who actually made things indisputably better for his country in the long run. Pinochet was a POS and a murderer, but he is the biggest reason why Chile is the strongest economy in Latin America.
Something that doesnt make things worse is somehow worse than something that does make things worse?
Lying is far less of a problem to me than doubling prices across the nation.That's Trump's plan? It's a little short on details isn't it? You seem to forget what he said:
“We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” Trump said in press conference Jan. 11. “We’re going to have a healthcare that is far less expensive and far better.”
“I am going to take care of everybody. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.”
Meanwhile, he tried to repeal the ACA without any replacement plan in place which would effectively kick millions of people off of Healthcare. Grifters gonna Grift!
Other than tax cuts that by far benefit the wealthiest and corporations, plus some deregulation, what exactly has Trump done that has spurred economic growth?
If HRC had won, I imagine we'd have seen a middle class tax cut and some economic benefit from that, too. Had any other Republican won, we'd have seen very similar tax cuts and deregulation as we have seen with Trump.
In other words, there is simply nothing special about what Trump has done that sets him significantly apart from what a Jeb Bush or a John Kasich would have done, and either of them would have been infinitely better at foreign policy.
Care to explain how corporate tax cuts benefit the company and not people who purchase their goods and services? Are you telling us that your rates don't cover taxes you have to pay? Costs are costs ... doesn't matter what category they fall into ... materials, labor, energy, taxes ... Or are you saying that in a capitalistic society that competition has no effect on consumer prices?
Whom.First, cutting taxes for who, exactly?
Second, its not just a question of the final GDP number. It is what is driving any growth that counts
Cutting corporate rates like we did creates a sugar high because it allows some to recapture overseas profits and to buy back stock, increasing stock prices. But that only lasts so long. Whirlpool may cut its outstanding shares by 10 milion bought back and thereby increase the value of the remaining 50 million shares. But if people don't buy new washers and dryers, that increased valuation is short lived.
How exactly would anybody benefit more from a tax cut than those that pay the most income tax to begin with?Its not either/or. Its a question of weight. And the fact is that the tax cuts have benefited the wealthy far more than the middle class. Some of that is direct, plenty is indirect by inflating stock prices based on lower corporate tax rates, etc.
This is right about where the headache sets in..The only thing I changed was fascist to authoritarian. Lie to yourself if it makes the topic more palatable. I used the word "ideological" from the beginning. If that strikes fear in you, fine. If you don't care because we have checks and balances, fine.
The fact that you think it's embarrassing that I walked back a word you guys were right about is all you need to know about your approach to discourse here.
The fact that he can't do what he wants to do does not refute my original point. Thanks for playing
Its not either/or. Its a question of weight. And the fact is that the tax cuts have benefited the wealthy far more than the middle class. Some of that is direct, plenty is indirect by inflating stock prices based on lower corporate tax rates, etc.
I ran the numbers for this year's income and 2017 laws. My taxes were cut. Significantly.First, cutting taxes for who, exactly?
Second, its not just a question of the final GDP number. It is what is driving any growth that counts
Cutting corporate rates like we did creates a sugar high because it allows some to recapture overseas profits and to buy back stock, increasing stock prices. But that only lasts so long. Whirlpool may cut its outstanding shares by 10 milion bought back and thereby increase the value of the remaining 50 million shares. But if people don't buy new washers and dryers, that increased valuation is short lived.
How exactly would anybody benefit more from a tax cut than those that pay the most income tax to begin with?
Other than tax cuts that by far benefit the wealthiest and corporations, plus some deregulation, what exactly has Trump done that has spurred economic growth?
If HRC had won, I imagine we'd have seen a middle class tax cut and some economic benefit from that, too. Had any other Republican won, we'd have seen very similar tax cuts and deregulation as we have seen with Trump.
In other words, there is simply nothing special about what Trump has done that sets him significantly apart from what a Jeb Bush or a John Kasich would have done, and either of them would have been infinitely better at foreign policy.
I say that precisely because it's NOT a profound observation. Terms like Targeted Middle Class Tax Cut are largely a myth.You say that as though you are making a profound observation. But, our system is based on those who have more paying more because it is less of a burden to their relative positions. You may not like that, but it's baked in to the system.