- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
He hasn’t.
Not that it matters, but the most profitable part of the Trump presidency is probably the result of deregulations and interpretations of agency rules that favor businesses and business owners.
Not tax cuts
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
He hasn’t.
Not that it matters, but the most profitable part of the Trump presidency is probably the result of deregulations and interpretations of agency rules that favor businesses and business owners.
Not tax cuts
- Oct 2, 2012
- 19,497
- 21,165
- Aug 11, 2012
- 55,515
- 147,138
And dudes said Democrats should just go on TV and explain to the public why Trump was wrong, instead of doing the wildly popular thing most of the country and the voting base wants....to impeach him
- Jul 18, 2013
- 32,879
- 81,649
DWalk defends sex offenders. Trump is a sex offender. DWalk defends Trump.
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
You still support him even though:
-You are not getting the main thing you wanted.
. -This is conjecture. If deregulation is such a great thing, why isn't it showing up in economic data. Private sector business spending is actually down.
-Yeah I agree, his tax cuts have been an abject failure. It accomplished done of it's economic goals.
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
I love how Trump Stans say they voted for Trump because of a specific reason. A reason they think will make their support of him look less vile. The Trump doesn't come through or does the opposite, and dudes still support him for insert "made up reason".
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,837
- 38,456
Surprise surprise, the Trump Org caught lying about how much they earn from the secret service. In a pretty bold lie, Eric Trump claimed they only charge housekeeping costs for government rooms. That's a lie. He also claimed that other hotels would charge $500/night whereas the Trump Org only charges "like 50 bucks", that's another lie.
The Trump Org claimed they charge only "minimal fees", also a lie.
In reality, it turns out they charge Secret Service up to $650/night.
The Trump Org claimed they charge only "minimal fees", also a lie.
In reality, it turns out they charge Secret Service up to $650/night.
Last edited:
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
You still support him even though:
-You are not getting the main thing you wanted.
-This is conjecture. If deregulation is such a great thing, why isn't it showing up in economic data. Private sector business spending is actually down.
-Yeah I agree, his tax cuts have been an abject failure. It accomplished done of it's economic goals.
Just because it’s something that is important to me doesn’t mean it is something that I thought was a policy initiative of the administration.
Deregulation and rule interpretation isn’t conjecture, at least in my field. But everyone’s situation is different.
Also, I wouldn’t classify decreased tax liability as an abject failure, but, like I said, everyone’s situation is different.
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
I’m not a single-issue voter. Are you?
And that wasn’t even an issue that went into my voting analysis.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,837
- 38,456
Those kind of tax cuts are an abject failure by default. It is inherent to trickle-down economics.
Yeah, this **** all happened like two years ago. He’s clearly trying to play the whole “all I did was standup for American justice and everyone just hates me ‘cause I support Trump!” **** gets old.Yeah, this thread moves so fast and depending on what's happening in my life I might not be in here for a week or two at a time. And then the waters are so muddied at this point that it's tough to even ascertain what exactly is being discussed sometimes. That's what I was trying to do in this recent exchange, is try to at least clarify how things have been muddied to try to cut through the bull****. Although I realize this is a rather Herculean task given the circumstances
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
I am not a single issue voter
And when you first popped into this thread you routinely cited that as your motivation for voting the way you do. So spare me the goal post move now he is making you look stupid
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
If the Democratic party’s mission is to convince people that spending less on taxes is a bad thing, I think they should rethink the strategy.
I’m no economist. I’m sure that Rusty is right on some academic theoretical level.
But voters see the numbers in accounts. So it’s a tough sell to try and use data and historical figures to tell people they are worse off.
You can be right with a losing strategy.
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
Your field doesn't represent the macroeconomy.
And they were a abject failure. Economic research and observable reality show it. Remember you always defer to me on economics, welp, I'm telling you they are clearly a failure. Especially against the promises and the GOP made.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,837
- 38,456
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
No, I gave it as a resort to issue that I find important related to black plight.
When you gave issues that affected lower-income black people.
I’m fully aware that revisionist history plays in your favor due to the tide of leanings in this thread.
What you and B boris proclaim happened in the past is taken as fact with little scrutiny.
But it simply isn’t the case.
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
I agree but my field represents my personal interests.
Do you think it unwise to vote, in part, based on personal interests?
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
You are moving the goal post buddy. Vote how you want but don't argue Trump's deregulation policy has his great positive impact generally when the macroeconomic data does show it .
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
Spare me your biscuit clutching troll.
You stay claiming one thing motivates your votes but with the slightest bit of inspection people can see your claims are nonsense.
- Mar 30, 2007
- 151,216
- 202,644
- Jul 18, 2013
- 32,879
- 81,649
Look at Virginia living up to its New Years Resolution of being less racist
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
When we see the increased approval ratings, job numbers, etc. I think it is unwise for the left to rely on some general macroeconomic theory to convince voters how awful the policies of this administration are.
But we will see how that logic plays out in November
But we will see how that logic plays out in November
- Jul 20, 2009
- 64,966
- 196,178
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,837
- 38,456
Trickle-down economics has literally never accomplished any of its alleged effects touted by its supporters. It has never 'paid for itself' or gotten anywhere remotely close to doing so. Nor does it provide anywhere near the claimed stimulus.
If you look at the US economy, you can see that the stimulus already fizzled out despite how steep those tax cuts were. The economy is already slowing back down. What these tax cuts did accomplish is a massive addition to the national debt. Just like every other time it was implemented.
In fact, Trump's tariffs almost wipe out the average American's tax savings. Middle earners saved an average of $930 under Trump's tax plan according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
A May 2019 report from the Federal Reserve found that Trump's tariffs in effect at that time cost average households $831.
Additional tariffs have been imposed since then, so those tax savings have been wiped out entirely for average earners. So what did the average American gain from these tax cuts? Trump fed them with the left hand while robbing them with his right.
- Dec 30, 2006
- 12,011
- 3,294
To be clear, you think paying higher taxes saves these same earners...more?
Also what does middle earner mean?
Similar threads
