Crazy Bernie Shakes And Stutters Against Ted Cruz

[NYcarbineer]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

 

[westwall]

Yes, because the doctors don't have to pay exorbitant malpractice insurance costs for one. They also get to make sweetheart deals to buy drugs developed in the USA at great cost that we taxpayers pay the ultra high costs for. When their doctors are sued the loser pays so frivolous lawsuits don't happen. Etc. etc. etc. You really aren't good at this.

Bernie Sanders had a bill to get drugs at cheaper costs, and even buy them from Canada... Congress rejected it. Fuck them, they are just tools for pharmaceutical lobbyist.

I agree with you on this. Congress is bought and paid for. That's why trump is doing what he is doing. Allowing people to buy health insurance across State lines will be one of the best things any one has done to reduce costs.

Total fantasy. You seriously have to be cluess about the insurance industry and how they operate in state regulatory frameworks and local provider networks to say that.

ACA provides for pacts between states to sell across state lines - ZERO takers.

There are also 3 states that permit buying across state lines - again ZERO takers.

I see you neglected to provide links to support what you claim. Please provide them.

No what you see is me not giving a crap. You can look this up or not, but sooner or later you’ll know anyway as none of this across-the-state-lines canard will pan out.

So in other words you lied. Go figure.

 

[westwall]

That Danish citizen torpedoed poor Bernie with one sentence "You want to be able to spend like Denmark without taxing like Denmark". You want free college? OK after handing over 70% of your pay, then hand over another 20% in consumption tax on the 30% you have left over. Sound good?

I think the Danish guy torpedoed Ted. He made it pretty clear Denmark has a better healthcare system and it's half the cost.

And most of the government funding comes from State owned oil production. Add to that the fact the country has less people than Nevada and New Mexico combined and it is pretty easy to see why they can afford what they have.

But we have more money.

Yeah? So? We also have bazillion more people, and hep bazillion more land to take care of. You remind me of the german generals in WWII who when planning the invasion of russia looked at the maps and proclaimed, "that's not too far" not realizing that a centimeter was 200 kilometers. It is that fundamental inability to comprehend what you are saying that makes me question your sanity.

 

[westwall]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

They have in the past.

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

then show me an example. I have showed you proof positive they do. Now show your proof!

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

WE ARE WAITING, head with antlers, and nothing between them!

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

Can't do it, can you-)

Phony-baloney-)

 

[basquebromance]

Lyin Ted dominated Crazy Bernie at this debate

 

[nat4900]

Ted Cruz won the debate against Crazy Bernie within five minutes.

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

It is easy NY CAREBEAR---------> find me an instance, when the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT cut taxes for citizens and corporations, where the federal revenue did NOT grow! We are waiting with baited breath-)

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

They have in the past.

Ted Cruz won the debate against Crazy Bernie within five minutes.

OK, OK, I will HEEEEEEELLLLLLLLPPPPPP you----------------->

Calling all lefties, calling all lefties, please help CAREBEAR; AKA antlers with nothing between them...................to find an instance he can put forth, lol. The CAREBEAR is losing his cred quickly, and I don't want him to be embarrassed today, so he is around long enough for me to embarrass him more-)

 

[oreo]

Well that was a good debate on this, and I am glad CNN is doing this and hopefully they'll continue to bring proposed bills on their news network to inform people.

While I understand trickle down economics--I don't understand the need to cut taxes when we have a 21 trillion dollar deficit. There's got to be revenue coming in to pay down the deficit.

Now if Sanders is right and Republicans plan to cut Medicade/Medicare programs, (which Cruz did not deny) to pay for a tax cut that no one needs--then what's the purpose of this bill?

Not sure if you noticed, Reagan cut taxes initially, but two years later he raised taxes, and then continued to raise taxes tow more times.

Past Presidents--JFK, Reagan, G.W. Bush cut taxes to stimulate the economy. Today we have a fairly good economy--there's no need to cut taxes. I just don't see the sense in this. As before the middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. So this cut will go to large corporations on the pretense, (according to Cruz) that they'll keep jobs in this country. They won't it will still be much cheaper to manufacture overseas than in the U.S. because of our wages and payroll taxes.

This tax cut doesn't make any sense, especially if they're having to cut billions out of Medicade/Medicare to pay for it. Did everyone forget about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit?

If Trump were to keep his word, he wouldn't sign off on cutting Medicaid and Medicare... But who expects him to keep his word on anything?

This bill just doesn't make any sense at all. All Presidents in the past cut taxes to stimulate the economy. We don't need it. The middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. Corporations aren't going to stay in the U.S. over a tax cut. The biggest expense to them is payroll, and payroll taxes--and that's why they go overseas.

But to cut billions out of Medicare/Medicade programs to pay for tax cuts for large corporations is to much too take. No talk at all about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit. It's like it doesn't exist.

I dunno... but why would the country have such a high life expectancy if everyone is offing themselves?

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

That's a really terrible analogy. Killing yourself is the ultimate act. I think there is a problem with how the "experts" measure "happiness". Every place they claim is "happy" is also prone to self oblivion. The two don't compute.

So let me get this straight...Cruz that wants to hand out tax cuts to corporations that outsourced, offshored and screw over the American worker is somehow right in your mind? lol...Apple and GE paid next to nothing the past few years and you think they should pay less or maybe get paid for screwing over America?

Cruz wants to turn America into a third world shit hole and let the robbers run away with the loot. Ted cruz is the liar and fool here.

But it isn't more expensive. It is half the cost of our system.

Yes, because the doctors don't have to pay exorbitant malpractice insurance costs for one. They also get to make sweetheart deals to buy drugs developed in the USA at great cost that we taxpayers pay the ultra high costs for. When their doctors are sued the loser pays so frivolous lawsuits don't happen. Etc. etc. etc. You really aren't good at this.

Bernie Sanders had a bill to get drugs at cheaper costs, and even buy them from Canada... Congress rejected it. Fuck them, they are just tools for pharmaceutical lobbyist.

I agree with you on this. Congress is bought and paid for. That's why trump is doing what he is doing. Allowing people to buy health insurance across State lines will be one of the best things any one has done to reduce costs.

Total fantasy. You seriously have to be cluess about the insurance industry and how they operate in state regulatory frameworks and local provider networks to say that.

ACA provides for pacts between states to sell across state lines - ZERO takers.

There are also 3 states that permit buying across state lines - again ZERO takers.

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

You can research it yourself, (and they all say the same thing) or you can go with this one----->Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Now, I do not one lefty to come here and start talking about the DEFICIT; not one of you! The deficit has NOTHING to do with how much revenue INCREASED, it has to do with how much politicians spent. You need to compare apples to apples, and NOT oranges!

Look at the Kennedy cuts, look at the Regan cuts, then look at the GW cuts.............and remember, LOOK when the GW legislation was passed, not his Presidency. And if you don't like these and want to try your luck with another, look back at Coolidge, which is not in this chart.

So do not EVER again come up with poppycock like cuts COST the government monies. That is a FALSE statement! The GROWTH from them eats up the loss, proven by these examples.

And so, you have 3 examples of CUTS from this chart, and if you want to go back to Coolidge, do that also for 4 total examples. Now go ahead, produce ONE from the archives that support your nonsense! We dare you!

No this is nothing more than a large tax break for large corporations. 1. Small business are sub-S corporations--meaning they are taxed at the individual rate, not the large corporation rate, so a tax cut like this isn't going to do diddly sqwat for them 2. The economy is already doing well--it doesn't need any stimulation. 3. Middle class will get a tax cut that amounts to an extra loaf of bread and gallon of milk a week. 4. Cutting billions out of Medicare/Medicade to pay for this tax cut is BULLSHIT. 5. Large Corporations move overseas to avoid payroll and payroll taxes, and giving them a Federal tax break of 15% is not going to keep jobs here. 6. They're ignoring that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit.

This is another campaign promise that they want to pass so they can look good going into the mid term election cycle--since they haven't been able to pass anything else. That's all this is about.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

They have in the past.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

then show me an example. I have showed you proof positive they do. Now show your proof!

Proof positive? lol

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

They have in the past.

Ok, let's pretend that's true.

At what point, though, do tax cuts stop increasing revenue?

 

[westwall]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

They have in the past.

Ok, let's pretend that's true.

At what point, though, do tax cuts stop increasing revenue?

I don't know where that point is. It definitely exists as a point, but the progressive ideals don't allow for even that possibility. At some point when does the government hunger begin killing the host? According to progressives that point is never.

 

[Lewdog]

Well that was a good debate on this, and I am glad CNN is doing this and hopefully they'll continue to bring proposed bills on their news network to inform people.

While I understand trickle down economics--I don't understand the need to cut taxes when we have a 21 trillion dollar deficit. There's got to be revenue coming in to pay down the deficit.

Now if Sanders is right and Republicans plan to cut Medicade/Medicare programs, (which Cruz did not deny) to pay for a tax cut that no one needs--then what's the purpose of this bill?

Not sure if you noticed, Reagan cut taxes initially, but two years later he raised taxes, and then continued to raise taxes tow more times.

Past Presidents--JFK, Reagan, G.W. Bush cut taxes to stimulate the economy. Today we have a fairly good economy--there's no need to cut taxes. I just don't see the sense in this. As before the middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. So this cut will go to large corporations on the pretense, (according to Cruz) that they'll keep jobs in this country. They won't it will still be much cheaper to manufacture overseas than in the U.S. because of our wages and payroll taxes.

This tax cut doesn't make any sense, especially if they're having to cut billions out of Medicade/Medicare to pay for it. Did everyone forget about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit?

If Trump were to keep his word, he wouldn't sign off on cutting Medicaid and Medicare... But who expects him to keep his word on anything?

This bill just doesn't make any sense at all. All Presidents in the past cut taxes to stimulate the economy. We don't need it. The middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. Corporations aren't going to stay in the U.S. over a tax cut. The biggest expense to them is payroll, and payroll taxes--and that's why they go overseas.

But to cut billions out of Medicare/Medicade programs to pay for tax cuts for large corporations is to much too take. No talk at all about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit. It's like it doesn't exist.

I dunno... but why would the country have such a high life expectancy if everyone is offing themselves?

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

That's a really terrible analogy. Killing yourself is the ultimate act. I think there is a problem with how the "experts" measure "happiness". Every place they claim is "happy" is also prone to self oblivion. The two don't compute.

So let me get this straight...Cruz that wants to hand out tax cuts to corporations that outsourced, offshored and screw over the American worker is somehow right in your mind? lol...Apple and GE paid next to nothing the past few years and you think they should pay less or maybe get paid for screwing over America?

Cruz wants to turn America into a third world shit hole and let the robbers run away with the loot. Ted cruz is the liar and fool here.

But it isn't more expensive. It is half the cost of our system.

Yes, because the doctors don't have to pay exorbitant malpractice insurance costs for one. They also get to make sweetheart deals to buy drugs developed in the USA at great cost that we taxpayers pay the ultra high costs for. When their doctors are sued the loser pays so frivolous lawsuits don't happen. Etc. etc. etc. You really aren't good at this.

Bernie Sanders had a bill to get drugs at cheaper costs, and even buy them from Canada... Congress rejected it. Fuck them, they are just tools for pharmaceutical lobbyist.

I agree with you on this. Congress is bought and paid for. That's why trump is doing what he is doing. Allowing people to buy health insurance across State lines will be one of the best things any one has done to reduce costs.

Total fantasy. You seriously have to be cluess about the insurance industry and how they operate in state regulatory frameworks and local provider networks to say that.

ACA provides for pacts between states to sell across state lines - ZERO takers.

There are also 3 states that permit buying across state lines - again ZERO takers.

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

You can research it yourself, (and they all say the same thing) or you can go with this one----->Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Now, I do not one lefty to come here and start talking about the DEFICIT; not one of you! The deficit has NOTHING to do with how much revenue INCREASED, it has to do with how much politicians spent. You need to compare apples to apples, and NOT oranges!

Look at the Kennedy cuts, look at the Regan cuts, then look at the GW cuts.............and remember, LOOK when the GW legislation was passed, not his Presidency. And if you don't like these and want to try your luck with another, look back at Coolidge, which is not in this chart.

So do not EVER again come up with poppycock like cuts COST the government monies. That is a FALSE statement! The GROWTH from them eats up the loss, proven by these examples.

And so, you have 3 examples of CUTS from this chart, and if you want to go back to Coolidge, do that also for 4 total examples. Now go ahead, produce ONE from the archives that support your nonsense! We dare you!

I hate to tell you this, but despite the fact Reagan lowered taxes once as his part of the idea of "trickle down economics," it failed and he raised taxes in '82, '84, '85, '86, and '87.

"Two bills passed in 1982 and 1984 together "constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime," Thorndike said."

Taxes: What people forget about Reagan - Sep. 8, 2010

""Many Republicans decried the use of additional revenue to help offset any increase in national debt," Connolly said. "Apparently, they forgot that when faced with rising deficits, Ronald Reagan looked to revenue increases, broadening the tax base, closing loopholes and raising taxes. Yes, he raised taxes in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987.""

Rep. Gerry Connolly says Reagan raised taxes during five years of presidency

Now with that said, taxes overall may have been down as a whole during Reagan's 8 years, it was nothing like he promised, because after making huge tax cuts, he eventually kept adding taxes back including the highest one at the time during any peace time period.

 

[imawhosure]

Not sure if you noticed, Reagan cut taxes initially, but two years later he raised taxes, and then continued to raise taxes tow more times.

Past Presidents--JFK, Reagan, G.W. Bush cut taxes to stimulate the economy. Today we have a fairly good economy--there's no need to cut taxes. I just don't see the sense in this. As before the middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. So this cut will go to large corporations on the pretense, (according to Cruz) that they'll keep jobs in this country. They won't it will still be much cheaper to manufacture overseas than in the U.S. because of our wages and payroll taxes.

This tax cut doesn't make any sense, especially if they're having to cut billions out of Medicade/Medicare to pay for it. Did everyone forget about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit?

If Trump were to keep his word, he wouldn't sign off on cutting Medicaid and Medicare... But who expects him to keep his word on anything?

This bill just doesn't make any sense at all. All Presidents in the past cut taxes to stimulate the economy. We don't need it. The middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. Corporations aren't going to stay in the U.S. over a tax cut. The biggest expense to them is payroll, and payroll taxes--and that's why they go overseas.

But to cut billions out of Medicare/Medicade programs to pay for tax cuts for large corporations is to much too take. No talk at all about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit. It's like it doesn't exist.

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

That's a really terrible analogy. Killing yourself is the ultimate act. I think there is a problem with how the "experts" measure "happiness". Every place they claim is "happy" is also prone to self oblivion. The two don't compute.

So let me get this straight...Cruz that wants to hand out tax cuts to corporations that outsourced, offshored and screw over the American worker is somehow right in your mind? lol...Apple and GE paid next to nothing the past few years and you think they should pay less or maybe get paid for screwing over America?

Cruz wants to turn America into a third world shit hole and let the robbers run away with the loot. Ted cruz is the liar and fool here.

Yes, because the doctors don't have to pay exorbitant malpractice insurance costs for one. They also get to make sweetheart deals to buy drugs developed in the USA at great cost that we taxpayers pay the ultra high costs for. When their doctors are sued the loser pays so frivolous lawsuits don't happen. Etc. etc. etc. You really aren't good at this.

Bernie Sanders had a bill to get drugs at cheaper costs, and even buy them from Canada... Congress rejected it. Fuck them, they are just tools for pharmaceutical lobbyist.

I agree with you on this. Congress is bought and paid for. That's why trump is doing what he is doing. Allowing people to buy health insurance across State lines will be one of the best things any one has done to reduce costs.

Total fantasy. You seriously have to be cluess about the insurance industry and how they operate in state regulatory frameworks and local provider networks to say that.

ACA provides for pacts between states to sell across state lines - ZERO takers.

There are also 3 states that permit buying across state lines - again ZERO takers.

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

You can research it yourself, (and they all say the same thing) or you can go with this one----->Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Now, I do not one lefty to come here and start talking about the DEFICIT; not one of you! The deficit has NOTHING to do with how much revenue INCREASED, it has to do with how much politicians spent. You need to compare apples to apples, and NOT oranges!

Look at the Kennedy cuts, look at the Regan cuts, then look at the GW cuts.............and remember, LOOK when the GW legislation was passed, not his Presidency. And if you don't like these and want to try your luck with another, look back at Coolidge, which is not in this chart.

So do not EVER again come up with poppycock like cuts COST the government monies. That is a FALSE statement! The GROWTH from them eats up the loss, proven by these examples.

And so, you have 3 examples of CUTS from this chart, and if you want to go back to Coolidge, do that also for 4 total examples. Now go ahead, produce ONE from the archives that support your nonsense! We dare you!

No this is nothing more than a large tax break for large corporations. 1. Small business are sub-S corporations--meaning they are taxed at the individual rate, not the large corporation rate, so a tax cut like this isn't going to do diddly sqwat for them 2. The economy is already doing well--it doesn't need any stimulation. 3. Middle class will get a tax cut that amounts to an extra loaf of bread and gallon of milk a week. 4. Cutting billions out of Medicare/Medicade to pay for this tax cut is BULLSHIT. 5. Large Corporations move overseas to avoid payroll and payroll taxes, and giving them a Federal tax break of 15% is not going to keep jobs here. 6. They're ignoring that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit.

This is another campaign promise that they want to pass so they can look good going into the mid term election cycle--since they haven't been able to pass anything else. That's all this is about.

LOL, phony answer, you didn't even address what I said. Come back when you have a clue instead of a narrative!

 

[imawhosure]

[

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

Tax cuts will not increase revenue.

then show me an example. I have showed you proof positive they do. Now show your proof!

Proof positive? lol

Is that all you have, really? When faced with facts, you have NOTHING!

 

[imawhosure]

Not sure if you noticed, Reagan cut taxes initially, but two years later he raised taxes, and then continued to raise taxes tow more times.

Past Presidents--JFK, Reagan, G.W. Bush cut taxes to stimulate the economy. Today we have a fairly good economy--there's no need to cut taxes. I just don't see the sense in this. As before the middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. So this cut will go to large corporations on the pretense, (according to Cruz) that they'll keep jobs in this country. They won't it will still be much cheaper to manufacture overseas than in the U.S. because of our wages and payroll taxes.

This tax cut doesn't make any sense, especially if they're having to cut billions out of Medicade/Medicare to pay for it. Did everyone forget about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit?

If Trump were to keep his word, he wouldn't sign off on cutting Medicaid and Medicare... But who expects him to keep his word on anything?

This bill just doesn't make any sense at all. All Presidents in the past cut taxes to stimulate the economy. We don't need it. The middle class isn't going to get a huge tax cut, they never have. Corporations aren't going to stay in the U.S. over a tax cut. The biggest expense to them is payroll, and payroll taxes--and that's why they go overseas.

But to cut billions out of Medicare/Medicade programs to pay for tax cuts for large corporations is to much too take. No talk at all about that 21 TRILLION dollar deficit. It's like it doesn't exist.

Ask them. They are killing themselves at extremely high rates. Higher even than Japan in some years and that's hard to do. Maybe the metrics used to determine "happiness" aren't all that accurate?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

Or it could be that suicide there is not as frowned upon as it is here?

"71% of Denmark's population is in favor of legalizing assisted suicide."

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia

Which doesn't address the question if you are so happy why do you want to kill yourself. It's a pretty straight forward question don't you think?

It's not about the happy people killing themselves. Just because the all around group is happy, doesn't mean there aren't people within them that are unhappy.

This year the Cincinnati Reds had a .253 team batting average, does that mean they don't have a player on their team that his under .225?

That's a really terrible analogy. Killing yourself is the ultimate act. I think there is a problem with how the "experts" measure "happiness". Every place they claim is "happy" is also prone to self oblivion. The two don't compute.

So let me get this straight...Cruz that wants to hand out tax cuts to corporations that outsourced, offshored and screw over the American worker is somehow right in your mind? lol...Apple and GE paid next to nothing the past few years and you think they should pay less or maybe get paid for screwing over America?

Cruz wants to turn America into a third world shit hole and let the robbers run away with the loot. Ted cruz is the liar and fool here.

Yes, because the doctors don't have to pay exorbitant malpractice insurance costs for one. They also get to make sweetheart deals to buy drugs developed in the USA at great cost that we taxpayers pay the ultra high costs for. When their doctors are sued the loser pays so frivolous lawsuits don't happen. Etc. etc. etc. You really aren't good at this.

Bernie Sanders had a bill to get drugs at cheaper costs, and even buy them from Canada... Congress rejected it. Fuck them, they are just tools for pharmaceutical lobbyist.

I agree with you on this. Congress is bought and paid for. That's why trump is doing what he is doing. Allowing people to buy health insurance across State lines will be one of the best things any one has done to reduce costs.

Total fantasy. You seriously have to be cluess about the insurance industry and how they operate in state regulatory frameworks and local provider networks to say that.

ACA provides for pacts between states to sell across state lines - ZERO takers.

There are also 3 states that permit buying across state lines - again ZERO takers.

The reason we need tax cuts, is to INCREASE revenue with a growing economy. To many people use counter-intuitive logic to come to the conclusion, that it COSTS us REVENUE!

You can research it yourself, (and they all say the same thing) or you can go with this one----->Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Now, I do not one lefty to come here and start talking about the DEFICIT; not one of you! The deficit has NOTHING to do with how much revenue INCREASED, it has to do with how much politicians spent. You need to compare apples to apples, and NOT oranges!

Look at the Kennedy cuts, look at the Regan cuts, then look at the GW cuts.............and remember, LOOK when the GW legislation was passed, not his Presidency. And if you don't like these and want to try your luck with another, look back at Coolidge, which is not in this chart.

So do not EVER again come up with poppycock like cuts COST the government monies. That is a FALSE statement! The GROWTH from them eats up the loss, proven by these examples.

And so, you have 3 examples of CUTS from this chart, and if you want to go back to Coolidge, do that also for 4 total examples. Now go ahead, produce ONE from the archives that support your nonsense! We dare you!

I hate to tell you this, but despite the fact Reagan lowered taxes once as his part of the idea of "trickle down economics," it failed and he raised taxes in '82, '84, '85, '86, and '87.

"Two bills passed in 1982 and 1984 together "constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime," Thorndike said."

Taxes: What people forget about Reagan - Sep. 8, 2010

""Many Republicans decried the use of additional revenue to help offset any increase in national debt," Connolly said. "Apparently, they forgot that when faced with rising deficits, Ronald Reagan looked to revenue increases, broadening the tax base, closing loopholes and raising taxes. Yes, he raised taxes in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987.""

Rep. Gerry Connolly says Reagan raised taxes during five years of presidency

Now with that said, taxes overall may have been down as a whole during Reagan's 8 years, it was nothing like he promised, because after making huge tax cuts, he eventually kept adding taxes back including the highest one at the time during any peace time period.

LOL, good point! Now answer WHY he did it! It wasn't because of revenue shortfall, it was because he had to cut a DEAL with the Democratic congress. They held him hostage.

But, you have honesty, and I applaud that. Even with his rise in taxes which he was FORCED into, the tax rate was far LOWER than when he took office.