Tax breaks for the rich?

[June 7 2017]

I'm not young and I voted for Trump because of his stance on American First legislation.
So long as you admit your Democrats were in on the screwing of America.

If you think they were bad just wait until Trump does his damage. He'll make Obama look like the Second Coming. The Orange Menace made his money ripping off the little guy - he knows nothing (literally) else.

Tell me in detail what Obama achieved.
Long Island has a 35% Foreclosure Rate but there's plenty of minorities and trespassers serving food.
King Obama!

Obama was no king, probably why you didn't like him, he wasn't the dictator Trump longs to be. And what happened, mostly good, under Obama can be found in the Suffering Under Obama thread. Needless to say, Wall Street was not unhappy with him.

Been reading a little Marxism of late? Maybe of Kansas 100 years ago?

Are you living off your Investments?
Are you a knee-jerk Democrat?
Marxism vs Globalism? Both produce the same results in the end.
I bet you can't even define Marxism.

Living off my investments? No, I work for a living. And here are several economic systems.

Capitalism - making shit while not giving a shit.
Socialism - making shit while giving a shit.
Communism - making shit (there's a good chance no one wants) while giving an official nod to giving a shit.

And the very best (because people are selfish assholes) a Mixed Economy - making shit when you don't necessarily have to give a shit because we have that covered knowing that you most likely wouldn't give a shit unless forced to.)

And you reject a period of Protectionism because...?

 

[RightyTighty]

The fuck they don't. Learn what a bubble is, and a Ponzi scheme. They look fantastic on paper (until they implode).

ROFLMAO

Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Let's look at some numbers. President Reagan entered office in a period of high inflation which was stamped out by high interest rates that in turn led to the 1982 recession. His job-creation record after that may fairly be termed outstanding: nearly 20 million more Americans were employed when he left office than when the recession ended. Overall, including the recession on his watch, Reagan's net job growth over eight years was 16.1 million.

Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth


.

Never confuse brains with a bull market.

You must no be old enough to remember the Carter years.


.

Still have my sweater but now I turn the AC up. And still pissed at Reagan for removing the solar panels.

?


.

Had to be there.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Does tax breaks the rich really improve the economy or is it a GOP scam.

Well you can't really give tax breaks to those who earn under $50k because they don't pay taxes. The reality it can work sometimes. Especially when people are over taxed and that is hindering growth. My guess in this case it won't work at stimulating the economy anymore than the central bank printing money and low interest rate policy.

 

[RightyTighty]

If you think they were bad just wait until Trump does his damage. He'll make Obama look like the Second Coming. The Orange Menace made his money ripping off the little guy - he knows nothing (literally) else.

Tell me in detail what Obama achieved.
Long Island has a 35% Foreclosure Rate but there's plenty of minorities and trespassers serving food.
King Obama!

Obama was no king, probably why you didn't like him, he wasn't the dictator Trump longs to be. And what happened, mostly good, under Obama can be found in the Suffering Under Obama thread. Needless to say, Wall Street was not unhappy with him.

Been reading a little Marxism of late? Maybe of Kansas 100 years ago?

Are you living off your Investments?
Are you a knee-jerk Democrat?
Marxism vs Globalism? Both produce the same results in the end.
I bet you can't even define Marxism.

Living off my investments? No, I work for a living. And here are several economic systems.

Capitalism - making shit while not giving a shit.
Socialism - making shit while giving a shit.
Communism - making shit (there's a good chance no one wants) while giving an official nod to giving a shit.

And the very best (because people are selfish assholes) a Mixed Economy - making shit when you don't necessarily have to give a shit because we have that covered knowing that you most likely wouldn't give a shit unless forced to.)

And you reject a period of Protectionism because...?

I. It's fascist. 2. It doesn't work. Love the idea but it fails like virginity.

 

[BluesLegend]

Well let me think for a moment, keeping more of MY money vs government idiots pissing the money away by the billions, hell yes.

 

[June 7 2017]

Tell me in detail what Obama achieved.
Long Island has a 35% Foreclosure Rate but there's plenty of minorities and trespassers serving food.
King Obama!

Obama was no king, probably why you didn't like him, he wasn't the dictator Trump longs to be. And what happened, mostly good, under Obama can be found in the Suffering Under Obama thread. Needless to say, Wall Street was not unhappy with him.

Been reading a little Marxism of late? Maybe of Kansas 100 years ago?

Are you living off your Investments?
Are you a knee-jerk Democrat?
Marxism vs Globalism? Both produce the same results in the end.
I bet you can't even define Marxism.

Living off my investments? No, I work for a living. And here are several economic systems.

Capitalism - making shit while not giving a shit.
Socialism - making shit while giving a shit.
Communism - making shit (there's a good chance no one wants) while giving an official nod to giving a shit.

And the very best (because people are selfish assholes) a Mixed Economy - making shit when you don't necessarily have to give a shit because we have that covered knowing that you most likely wouldn't give a shit unless forced to.)

And you reject a period of Protectionism because...?

I. It's fascist. 2. It doesn't work. Love the idea but it fails like virginity.

Tell me the last time we tries it.
Tell me how well open borders have been working since 1980.
You bitch about what we have and then bitch that we can't have it any other way.

 

[RightyTighty]

Obama was no king, probably why you didn't like him, he wasn't the dictator Trump longs to be. And what happened, mostly good, under Obama can be found in the Suffering Under Obama thread. Needless to say, Wall Street was not unhappy with him.

Been reading a little Marxism of late? Maybe of Kansas 100 years ago?

Are you living off your Investments?
Are you a knee-jerk Democrat?
Marxism vs Globalism? Both produce the same results in the end.
I bet you can't even define Marxism.

Living off my investments? No, I work for a living. And here are several economic systems.

Capitalism - making shit while not giving a shit.
Socialism - making shit while giving a shit.
Communism - making shit (there's a good chance no one wants) while giving an official nod to giving a shit.

And the very best (because people are selfish assholes) a Mixed Economy - making shit when you don't necessarily have to give a shit because we have that covered knowing that you most likely wouldn't give a shit unless forced to.)

And you reject a period of Protectionism because...?

I. It's fascist. 2. It doesn't work. Love the idea but it fails like virginity.

Tell me the last time we tries it.
Tell me how well open borders have been working since 1980.
You bitch about what we have and then bitch that we can't have it any other way.

1. 1950 or so.
2, Great, for capitalism.
3. There are always options, just not any good ones.

 

[June 7 2017]

Are you living off your Investments?
Are you a knee-jerk Democrat?
Marxism vs Globalism? Both produce the same results in the end.
I bet you can't even define Marxism.

Living off my investments? No, I work for a living. And here are several economic systems.

Capitalism - making shit while not giving a shit.
Socialism - making shit while giving a shit.
Communism - making shit (there's a good chance no one wants) while giving an official nod to giving a shit.

And the very best (because people are selfish assholes) a Mixed Economy - making shit when you don't necessarily have to give a shit because we have that covered knowing that you most likely wouldn't give a shit unless forced to.)

And you reject a period of Protectionism because...?

I. It's fascist. 2. It doesn't work. Love the idea but it fails like virginity.

Tell me the last time we tries it.
Tell me how well open borders have been working since 1980.
You bitch about what we have and then bitch that we can't have it any other way.

1. 1950 or so.
2, Great, for capitalism.
3. There are always options, just not any good ones.

I disagree.
And I never said the Protectionism should be permanent.
In fact, I said quite the opposite.

 

[Chuz Life]

The poor pay no taxes so no form of tax relief can help them.

I have to disagree.

The poor (no matter how poor) have to buy things to survive. The good and services they buy result in profits for business owners. The owners (rich?) then use those profits to pay their own taxes, hire employees who also buy things and pay their own taxes,etc.

It's simple economics. . . yet, there are those who actually think that they can "tax the rich" and the rich will not recoup that loss by raising prices, cutting jobs, lowering their investments, etc....

All of which will negatively affect the poor.

That said, I do see the point you were trying to make. You can't directly give an income tax break to someone who doesn't have any income.

 

[Slyhunter]

Tax cuts for the rich are always a transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.

It is a scam as old as humankind.

How does taxing rich people less take money away from poor people?

 

[IsaacNewton]

Tax cuts for the rich are always a transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.

It is a scam as old as humankind.

How does taxing rich people less take money away from poor people?

Check Trump's budget, huge cuts to all programs that help the poor. It is a transfer of wealth. And Republicans have been doing this very vile thing forever. They have some eager manic disorder that makes them feel good when stomping on people that are struggling.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I am going to be honest…

I'll believe that when I see it. It hasn't happened yet, and I have no reason to suppose that it ever will.

 

[Crixus]

Does tax breaks the rich really improve the economy or is it a GOP scam.

Well, in my case yes. Rich guy has more money, he builds stuff that involves digging a hole. I have to go to the sight of said hole, locate and mark all the utility's under ground/ can't say for the guys doing all the building, but it works for me.

 

[Flopper]

Does tax breaks the rich really improve the economy or is it a GOP scam.

Well you can't really give tax breaks to those who earn under $50k because they don't pay taxes. The reality it can work sometimes. Especially when people are over taxed and that is hindering growth. My guess in this case it won't work at stimulating the economy anymore than the central bank printing money and low interest rate policy.

Taxes cuts can provide temporary economic stimulus but the effects on long term growth is not near as great as proponents of low taxes believe. Reducing taxes on low income workers that pay very little or no taxes will no real effect. Reducing taxes on the middle class with increase demand for goods and services and provide temporary stimulus. Decreasing taxes for the wealthy may or may not spur investments that increase available capital in the country. Corporate taxes cuts that bring rates lower than competing countries have the best chance of providing long term growth.

However the most important factor in economic growth is human resources. The quality and quantity of available human resource directly affect the long term growth of an economy. The quality of human resource is dependent on its skills, creative abilities, training, and education. This is where the nation needs to invest.

Investment in infrastructure provides both short and long term growth. Over the short term it provides jobs and over long term it increases efficiency in just about every area of the economy.

 

[Slyhunter]

Tax cuts for the rich are always a transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.

It is a scam as old as humankind.

How does taxing rich people less take money away from poor people?

Check Trump's budget, huge cuts to all programs that help the poor. It is a transfer of wealth. And Republicans have been doing this very vile thing forever. They have some eager manic disorder that makes them feel good when stomping on people that are struggling.

cutting welfare benefits does not take money away from the poor. It wasn't their money to begin with.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Tax cuts for the rich are always a transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.

It is a scam as old as humankind.

How does taxing rich people less take money away from poor people?

Check Trump's budget, huge cuts to all programs that help the poor. It is a transfer of wealth. And Republicans have been doing this very vile thing forever. They have some eager manic disorder that makes them feel good when stomping on people that are struggling.

cutting welfare benefits does not take money away from the poor. It wasn't their money to begin with.

Ah yes, the selfish gene makes it's appearance. This is what conservatism is, a never ending attempt to make selfishness noble. It is the impulse of animals to kill or be killed, to help no other except your klan.

70% of the defense budget is a welfare make-work program for defense contractors in GOP red states. Better though to put a jackboot on the throat of the poor who can't fight back. Modern conservatism is cowardly, it always seeks out the weak to fuck with and it cries like a 4 year old when college students fight back.

Buck up snowflakes, you get what you give out. Now just swallow it and ask for seconds.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

cutting welfare benefits does not take money away from the poor. It wasn't their money to begin with.

Ah yes, the selfish gene makes it's appearance. This is what conservatism is, a never ending attempt to make selfishness noble.

Selifishness may not be exactly noble, but it is certainly more ignoble to seek to take what is not rightfully yours, than to seek to keep what is rightfully yours.

And as a matter of established fact, conservatives, in general tend to be far more generous than liberals when it comes to contributing what is rightfully their own to charitable causes, to help others. LIberals seem to think that they can claim credit for charity and generosity, not based on giving what is rightfully their own to give, but on what they can get government to forcibly take from others.