It's Official: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by MolonLabe2009, Apr 11, 2018.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,043
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Look, a large part of the "spending" has simply been for the monstrous Debt Bill that the US has. The thinking goes that "because we are such a great economy people will continue to buy our debt". Yeah, except when it dives into the second Great Recession!

    Can't happen? OH YES IT CAN!

    Nobody foresaw the Great Depression that resulted from a massively overpriced stock-market crash. Nobody saw the Great Recession that derived from the SubPrime Mess (brought about by banksters who were selling subprime mortgages into an inflated housing market that bust).

    Time and time again, the massive rush-to-riches that drives the American economy in general stumbles. And one helluva-lotta people get hurt.

    Except for some - and that some are the Truly Rich billionaires. Who can lose millions and not wink, because there are still millions left ... !
     
    gnoib likes this.
  2. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Over 60% of the total Federal spending is spent on social programs (SS, Medicare, welfare, ObamaCare, Medicaid, etc.).
     
  3. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes it would. Cutting taxes, cutting regulations and cutting spending even more works every time its tried.
     
  4. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It wouldn’t. Government spending had a stimulus effect. If they slashed revenue, and spending st the same time it would have the opposite effect that you intend.

    It doesn’t.
     
  5. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We are $22 trillion in debt. We don't have any money for stimulus

    Stimulus spending is a fraud.
     
  6. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course we do.

    Lol, ok
     
  7. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    13,128
    Likes Received:
    5,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Won't see this info on CNN but nobody watches them anyway so no big deal.
     
  8. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No we don't. You want to borrow more money from China?
     
  9. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    <Rule 3>

    In the world in which we live in, there is no "pure" form of socialism on the planet in industrialized nations....as we can see below from two different dictionary definitions:

    Socialism:
    - a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


    - A form of government in which instead of individual people and companies owning industries, they are controlled by the government itself.

    <Rule 3> you should note the following as a primer to how the word applies to American economy and social workings: https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/268947-a-democracy-lost-to-corporate-socialism

    History, in spite of your somewhat skewed take, shows a government that is bought & paid for by the inherent wealthy and their sycophants, and only changes in favor of those not lucky enough to be born of wealth and privilege when they organize and resist (look up Civil Rights Acts, the creation of unions).

    Those not drinking Reagan kool-aide know of the stone wall tactics that the right wing employed against Obama for 8 years, and the successes he had in spite of that.

    What you don't seem to get is that essentially we are in agreement as to the lies of the Trump economy...and that (gasp!) you are NOT the Bible truth of definition and economic/social history of America. <Rule 2/3>
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2019
  10. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    • Insulting or personally attacking other posters (Rule 2/3)
    Prove it, <Rule 2> We've had 30 years of 3 different versions of reaganomics that upped the ante on spending cuts…..ALL resulting in a near depression state of the economy. I heard all his BS during the Shrub's reign about the "job creators", yet when examined, the "jobs" were nowhere near what was promised in number or stature. In fact, thanks to the Shrub's blowing our surplus on a bogus invasion/occupation and then deregulating/rescinding any good Clinton did, the country was in economic free fall. Like it or not, Obama STOPPED that crap, despite GOP stonewalling.

    <Rule 2/3>
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2019
  11. kungfuliberal

    kungfuliberal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,523
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Which is NOT what he and others drummed during the campaign and when they put this crap into effect:

    When Republican lawmakers passed $1.5 trillion tax cuts in 2017, they promised the package would pay for itself. But a year and a half later, a key GOP congressman who helped craft the sweeping legislation has walked back that claim.

    "We will know in year 8, 9, or 10 what revenues it brought in to the government over time," Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas said at the Peterson Foundation's fiscal summit in Washington on Tuesday. "So it's way too early to tell."

    The remarks were a departure from a central assertion Republican lawmakers have made since the early days of the legislation: that the tax cuts would lift the economy enough that revenue from growth would make up for the loss in tax receipts.
    Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was enacted last year, government revenue has fallen at the same time that spending has increased. The federal deficit increased about 38% in the first seven months of the fiscal year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.


    The CBO estimates that tax cuts and interest on that debt will cost $1.9 trillion over the next decade. Meanwhile, the rate of growth Republicans had projected remains elusive.

    So much for rock steady assurances. Deal with it.
     
  12. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Prove it? Slash spending! That will prove it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2019
  13. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, I want to restore taxes to a reasonable level, and cut spending.
     
  14. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, you want to steal more of peoples money?

    Why do some people think they are entitled to other people's money?
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, I want to raise taxes to an appropriate level. Taxes are not theft.

    Why do righties think they can live in a society but not pay for it?
     
  16. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Taxes are more than at an appropriate level. It's spending that is at an inappropriate level. Slash spending!
    The definition of society is...."the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community"

    Nowhere in that definition does it say anything about a huge centralized government taxing, regulating and controlling every aspect of one's life from cradle to grave.
     
  17. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Spending needs cut. But taxes need raised to pay down the debt.


    Dictionary definition is irrelevant. The constitution is the legal framework for this society. And in that legal framework, lies the power of the government to collect taxes. Don’t want to pay taxes? You are free to leave society.
     
  18. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If spending is slashed, then you don't need to raise taxes to pay down the debt.
    The U.S. Constitution is based on limited government, not a huge bloated centralized government that taxes, regulates and controls every aspect of one's life from cradle to grave.
     
  19. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course you do. We are a trillion dollars over budget in 2019. To break even we would have to slash a trillion dollars. Taxes need raised pay down debt.


    The constitution clearly lays out the governments powers of taxation and spending.
     
  20. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No you don't. If spending is cut enough so that it's expenditures are less than its revenues, then you have a surplus.
    The U.S. Constitution is based on limited government, not a huge bloated centralized government that taxes, regulates and controls every aspect of one's life from cradle to grave.
     
  21. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    53,559
    Likes Received:
    4,820
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That can’t and won’t happen. We might be able to cut spending by the current deficit amount but any further cuts just aren’t going to happen.


    Well, it’s in the document that they can. It’s why they do.
     
  22. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,043
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You're choosing your numbers delicately.

    About half the Discretionary Budget (see here) is spent on only one agency, the DoD.

    And what do we get for that effort? Kids that go to war-zones to "fight for America" and if they survive when they get home the DoD will fund their college degree.

    Which should free, gratis and for nothing from the very beginning ... !
     
  23. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It doesn't matter if it's discretionary or non-discretionary. The government confiscates money from my paycheck for SS and Medicare. I have no choice in the matter. They are nothing more than mandatory taxes.

    Again, more than 60% of total federal spending is spent on social programs. Only 16% of total federal spending is spent on military.
     
  24. MB74

    MB74 Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
  25. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    28,013
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it doesn't. Your link only takes into account discretionary spending.

    My figures were for TOTAL federal spending.

    Again, more than 60% of TOTAL federal spending is spent on social programs. Only 16% of total federal spending is spent on military.
     

Share This Page