That is 100% unequivocally false! Quit listening to MSNBC and Joe Madison. Do some research and learn who pays the vast majority of federal taxes. It aint hard.
Going after Trump......again
- Thread starter Boiler Buck
- Start date
I'm 99.99% sure you're probably taking the Voo Doo economics quote out of context, but that doesn't really matter. Every time taxes have been cut, tax revenues have increased.
So I looked it up. Bush said that because he was running against Reagan for office. He said this before Reagan implemented his tax cuts. Tax cuts have been done so few times that Bush had little to nothing to base his comment on.
Facts don't matter to BNI once he has an opinion someone on talk radio or/& lib TV has confirmed with their opinion. He hangs onto those like a dog with a new bone.... just won't let go of it. That's why you see him post the same wrong ideas over & over. Can't help himself, regardless of how much true documentation you hit him with.
And that is your story and you are sticking with it? Yeah, you are a Chumper all right. Blame something else.
Still Three questions as your time allows.....
1. How much paying is enough %?
2. Why do you believe the rich have a greater responsibility to help the poor than someone else....if you believe in equality?
3. Why do you believe the US Govt is entitled to just spend at will and over tax the public, which is what they are doing, both parties?
Of course you looked it up because you are probably not old enough to remember. Yeah he did say that during the race for president. I remember it like it was yesterday. He did not have to have any precedence. He just was taken aback by the ignorant concept of it as well as everyone else. Then after 1988 when Bush became president he promised in a fiery speech "No new taxes". What does he do in the following months, the raised taxes on everyone.
1. The tax rate of the 1950s would do just fine.
2. Because that's the social contract.
3. The 16th amendment.
Hope this helps!
The liberal mind is just fascinating. The always believe the other guy should bend over for Govt
In my independent mind the Govt deserves nothing and should annually make a case (you know a budget) for how they are spending OUR money.
I don't know how much is enough %. What I do know is that the loopholes that the rich folks have needs to be closed. As opposed to raising my taxes along with the other middle and lower class folks.
I never said that the rich have a greater responsibility to help the poor. Paying taxes is not just for the poor. There are state and federal taxes that pay for roads, public schools, parks, roads, rail, federal and state employees, and yes the entitlement programs. Y'all as usual conflate the amount of taxes that the rich are projected to pay with how much the rich are actually paying. After all of their deductions, some pay very little to no taxes.
The lower and middle classes are overly taxed. The rich are under taxed.
Not as fascinating as the conservative mind with all this voodoo economics talk.
I guess the ONLY thing we agree on is that the middle class is over taxed.
In my opinion the Govt deserves no more than 10% from ANYONE. Govt needs to budget annually and be accountable for what they spend. Afterall it's our money ....Not theirs.
The poor barely pay any tax. And given they are the high users of Govt services that hardly seems fair. Everyone needs to pay. Many poor pay nothing.
Finally Govt is too big, does too much and does NOTHING well. The USA Govt and it's agencies need slashed to the bone. All Govt employees make too much, and need pay cuts or eliminated. The riches counties in US around WDC....should bug even you.
As far as helping the poor and disabled all for that. But 80 programs....come on. Rediculous. Most of those programs should be eliminated after evaluation. With the very best that work, given even more money.
Get the heck out of Healthcare. Should not be a Govt function.
The conservative mind isn't fascinating at all. It's just sad.
Don't be sad and discouraged, Ted. With years of study and education, your mind just may be able to grow and mature enough to become conservative.
It will be a long haul for you, obviously, but worth the try.
You have far to much faith in Govt, ran by two corrupt parties....that does nothing well, except waste money.
With most of your responses, it sounds like you already had a stroke.
No, it's not my "story" it's the facts. You know, those things you like to ignore.
The Numbers Are In: Trump’s Tax Cuts Paid Off
The Congressional Budget Office’s May 2022 forecast shows that the government now expects to bring in more tax revenue in the decade following the 2017 “Trump tax cuts” than it had projected prior to the December 2017 passage of tax reform.
www.heritage.org
You call it an ignorant concept but I just showed you above that it works. I'm not the one being ignorant here.
The rich didn't create those loopholes you know. Don't be mad at them for taking advantage of the law.
The bolded statement is just patently false. You have no fukking clue what you're talking about. You only think that because of what you've been told (I see a trend here). The numbers do not back that statement one bit.
BNI has always struggled with facts, statistics, etc. He often times flat out refuses to believe them if it doesn't fit his narrative.
For example, he's repeatedly stated that he doesn't believe the fact that more unarmed white people are killed by police than unarmed blacks. He just won't acknowledge this cold hard truth.
I imagine it's the same with his misunderstanding of the tax situation. Despite what the data and statistics say, he parrots liberal tag lines from people like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders (or what he hears on black talk radio).
That's fine and dandy. For the sake of the argument, the tax revenue increased like you say, fine. I want to know if voodoo economics increased jobs, wages, etc. for the lower and middle classes. Or did the rich and corporations pocket their savings as profit?No, it's not my "story" it's the facts. You know, those things you like to ignore.
The Numbers Are In: Trump’s Tax Cuts Paid Off
The Congressional Budget Office’s May 2022 forecast shows that the government now expects to bring in more tax revenue in the decade following the 2017 “Trump tax cuts” than it had projected prior to the December 2017 passage of tax reform.
FYI in the scenario you are proposing....
when Corp have good profit reports often their stock goes UP.
I am middle class. I have $ in the stock market. I assume you also have money in the stock market.
Why does everything in your mind assume when Corporate America does well.....the middle class gets screwed????? ....when in reality Corporate success often is a mutually beneficial situation to the middle class because of retirement accounts or IRAs a majority of the middle class posses.
I never assumed anything, particularly if corporations do well the middle class gets screwed. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of voodoo/trickle-down economics. Since Reagan, the republicans have always promoted tax breaks for the rich in hopes that the money that they saved will magically "trickle" down to the middle and lower classes with more jobs, higher wages, cheaper products for consumers, etc. It may sound good but it didn't work in the 80s, doesn't work now, and will never work.
Under Trump, do you know which demographic saw the largest increase in wages and biggest decreased in unemployment?.........I'll give you one guess.
Here's a serious question:
Who do you think is better at job creation: The govt or private companies?
If under YOUR scenario, IT DOESN'T WORK......means Corporate is in fact doing well.....as you say they kept the profits in your scenario. -->Then the middle class does well via Ret. Accts & IRAs.
So if what you say is true. Then the middle class DOES get a trickle down via ret. accts. or IRAs.
So either way....
Trickle down leads to help for MC like Reagan said.
OR it doesn't, & Corp Profits up......which leads to trickle down for MC Ret. accts. or IRAs.
Either way MC wins!
Kinda a bummer for your narrative. LOL
Last edited:
Informative read for all the non-lawyers.
Trump's indictment is not the slam dunk case liberal media believes it is
The case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents is not open and shut. The Presidential Records Act is at the heart of Trump's potential defense.
Informative read for all the non-lawyers.
Trump's indictment is not the slam dunk case liberal media believes it is
The case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents is not open and shut. The Presidential Records Act is at the heart of Trump's potential defense.www.foxnews.com
The PRA did not apply to Hillary & Biden's handling & possession of Govt records.....thus the non prosecution of HC & Biden for possession of records look EVEN MORE biased than they already do.
You assumed the middle class pays 'most of the taxes, ' which is not remotely true.
Another example of you not knowing what you are talking about, but not man enough to admit it.
Try reading the indictment. Only 31 counts of “willful retention….”. Retention - use, existence or possession of something.
He is flawed is the understatement of the year. He is immoral, corrupt, dishonest, and lacks integrity. Other than that he would make a good president.
Yep, Greg Jarrett has an objective take but is selective in how he frames his arguments.Informative read for all the non-lawyers.
Trump's indictment is not the slam dunk case liberal media believes it is
The case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents is not open and shut. The Presidential Records Act is at the heart of Trump's potential defense.
I read the charges. I could have been more clear…….and you should take a better look.
He was not charged for willful retention of all the classified documents. He was charged for willful retention of classified “national defense” documents under the Espionage Act.
Remember record low unemployment under Trump? Or is that another fact you choose not to believe in.
It's a fallacy yet I've pointed out that it works. You're a trip.
This right here is PROOF that you don't know wtf you're talking about. Show me one Republican that calls it trickle down economics. It's just called supply side economics. Trickle down is a made up term by the left.
"Critics of the Reagan tax cuts today compare the 11.6% growth in federal revenue in 1980, the last year of the Carter administration, with the decline in revenue in 1983. They then declare that the Reagan tax cuts slashed federal revenue. Conveniently missing in that comparison is that the 1980-82 recession, with 10.8% unemployment, reduced federal revenue twice as much as the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated the Reagan tax cuts would in 1982 and 15% more than its estimate for 1983.
What’s more, the expectations of rising revenue during the early Reagan years were based on the assumption that inflation and bracket creep would not let up. In 1981, all public and private economic forecasts predicted continued high inflation. The opposite occurred. As inflation plummeted from the CBO’s projected average annual rate of 8.3% for 1982-86 to an average of 3.8%, revenue compared with projections tumbled $22 billion in 1982 and $70.4 billion in 1983 solely because of reduced inflation and bracket creep. The Joint Committee on Taxation’s static cost estimate of the Reagan tax cuts was $37.6 billion in 1982 and $92.7 billion in 1983. In other words, the collapse of inflation and bracket creep and the double-dip recession caused revenue losses more than twice as big as the projected static cost of the Reagan tax cuts.
The Reagan tax cuts were implemented in three installments, with the top marginal rate falling to 50% from 70%. When the reductions were fully in effect in 1983, the economy snapped out of the recession, and real growth averaged 4.6% for the remainder of the Reagan presidency—more than his much-maligned “rosy scenario” ever promised. In 1984, a final good-government tax provision—indexing individual brackets for inflation and thereby eliminating bracket creep—was implemented. Although indexing reduced revenue, it was overpowered by surging economic growth. Then the 1986 tax reform cut subsidies and special-interest provisions, lowered the top individual tax rate to 28%, dropped the top corporate tax rate to 34% from 46%, and provided additional incentives to work, save and invest.
When Reagan left office, real federal revenue was more than 19% higher than it was the day of his first inauguration. A major recession had been overcome, inflation had been broken, the tax code had been indexed to eliminate bracket creep, and the largest tax cut of the postwar era had been implemented. The Reagan tax cuts and the boom they created stand as the most successful policy initiative and recovery of the postwar era—the polar opposite of Mr. Obama’s program and economy.
The Reagan tax cuts laid the foundation for a quarter-century of strong, noninflationary growth, which, despite three subsequent recessions, averaged 3.4% until the beginning of the Obama administration. And tax revenue was generated by an expanding economy rather than pilfered through bracket creep."
Get over it.
You just described the majority of ALL politicians to some degree or another. Sure on the Rep Side there are better choices that fit your requirements..... several.
But whomever emerges for President.........
1. Who is lowering your taxes?
2. Who is helping the economy so that Middle & Poor Class can do well?
3. Who is helping retirement accounts grow via a robust economy?
4. Who is cutting these overblown Govt agencies down in size & expanse?
5. Who has the energy policy and spending policy to cut inflation for the people?
That's what's important in the end.
Biden is testimony that guys that APPEAR a good guy... Often are not. Corrupt even. And their policies drown America with inflation and poor retirement account returns.
Last edited:
You conveniently left out that Chump inherited a good economy from Obama. Obama got the economy down to just over 4.5% from almost 10%. Black unemployment was down to just under 7% from 14% or whatever it was. So, if under Chump, the unemployment dropped to 4% or just under, just do the math, a 5.5% decrease is better than a 0.5% or 1% decrease. What Obama did to the economy from what he inherited, which was a disaster, was miraculous. It was funny how the right wingers and Faux News spun the decrease in unemployment under Obama. They always said that the Obama administration cooked the numbers. Or they would say that the drop in unemployment was due to not counting the people who are not actively looking for work. Or something like that. Now when Chump is in office, the same folks were saying that the meager 1% drop is the best in history. Keep in mind that it's the same department, the Department of Labor & Statistics, that present the numbers under all administrations. Even you are saying that it was the record low under Chump. Sure any drop in employment is good but Obama gets most of the credit. The current unemployment rate is even better yet under Biden.
