The GOP Plan is the Biggest Tax INCREASE in American History, By Far

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MrTLegal, Dec 1, 2017.

  1. jay runner

    jay runner Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2017
    Messages:
    16,319
    Likes Received:
    10,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Tell it to me in eight years. For now at the least I have a common man's eight year's respite for which I am very grateful.

    I would have been paying more, likely much more, under Hillary.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2017
  2. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    To avoid the sunset provision they needed Democrats to vote with them, not one did go complain to them.

    How many times to you have to be told the Democrats took control of budgetary and fiscal policy January of 2007 for FY2008. That fact is undeniable. Bush able to hold down some of their increase for FY2008 but was cut out in FY2009. That is ALL Democrat with President Obama signing in their bill which was delayed until he could get his spending included.

    You reallly want to keep asserting that when Reid and Pelosi and the Democrats took control in 2007 they merely did Bush's bidding, how laughable.


    Why would you expect someone making $50,000 and paying about $4,000 in taxes to get the same tax cut as someone making $1,000,000 and paying about $200,000 in taxes? And the WE in the SLAM them will be you and your fellow Democrats unless you have an epiphany and start voting for Republicans to make the tax rates permanent.

    And BTW you do a lousy job of assigning motives to the Republicans and then arguing them.
     
    jay runner likes this.
  3. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'll agree to two.
     
  4. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Soaking those rich blue state bastards and those big University endowments, for sure!

    Trump Tax Reform.

    Their deep reduction in the corporate tax rate, from the highest in the developed world to below average, obviously incentivized both U.S.- and foreign-based firms to invest here. Trump’s rejection of the Trans Pacific Partnership and renegotiation of NAFTA, in Cowen’s view, will make lesser-developed Asian nations and Mexico less attractive alternatives to the U.S. for investors.

    Trump critics are right to say that this upends—the regnant cliché—the thrust of American policy since the years just after World War II. Then there was bipartisan agreement on encouraging free trade and foreign investment, as economist Douglas Irwin writes in Clashing Over Commerce. Europe was in ruins and voters thought its revival was in our interest.

    But that was 70 years ago, and economic situations seldom remain static so long. A revived Europe has turned sluggish, while low-wage nations in Asia, Latin America, and even Africa are open for investment. First Japan, then China, now others will be moving up as competitors.

    America has proved competitive at the top levels. But a country whose labor force is always going to include many low-skill workers may have some continuing interest in incentivizing low-skill employment. That’s not Cowen’s view or mine, but it’s apparently President Trump’s. Maybe it’s not just dismissible as crazy ranting.

    Something similar may be said for the Trump foreign policy, considered as a perhaps unstable amalgam of his sober drafted national security Strategy and his sometimes impulsive tweets. This view explicated by David P. Goldman, writing this month in the Asia Times.

    Trump’s view, Goldman argues, is of an America that is more competitive than cooperative, not necessarily hostile to others but not willing to rely on assertions of abstract common interests. “Competition does not always mean hostility, nor does it inevitably lead to conflict—although none should doubt our commitment to defend our interests.”

    The national security strategy has a tough enough approach to Russia to disabuse all but the most dogmatic believers of the notion that Trump is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Manchurian candidate. It is sharply critical of some actions by President Xi Jinping’s China. It drops former President George W. Bush’s earnest promotion of democracy in the Middle East and former President Barack Obama’s gauzy faith that Iran will abandon its nuclear weapons program and become a normal constructive power in the region.
     
  5. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You should really study up, on the Republican History of Deficit spending. The HARD REALITY is that they have been totally dysfunctional:
    [​IMG]
    Look at that huge GW Bush deficit increase, afer starting with a GREEN-level deficit, leading up to his departure in 2008. Look at the massive drop, under Obama. Look at the beginnning of huge deficits in the modern era, in the '80s, under Reagan. And then look at what Clinton/Gore did - brought the deficit into the GREEN! There is no FACT behind your statements.
     
  6. Professor Peabody

    Professor Peabody Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    94,819
    Likes Received:
    15,788
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was Microsoft, Apple, Cisco and Adobe that brought the deficit into the green despite Clinton not because of him. Companies went from IBM Selectric typewriters and adding machines to computer networks with Windows 95 and Office suites.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2017

Share This Page