America At the Crossroads Economically with the Tariffs Case Heard Today by SCOTUS

[leftwinger]

There’s no national emergency.

$38T, Congress shut the GOVT, out of control fraud, waste....yeah its an emergency. $29T since the purple-lipped jug-eared muzxlim put GOVT corruption, over-spending on Auto-Pilot you worthless sack of human bile.

 

[Marener]

How often would you like to see unrealized capital gains taxed?

I don’t favor the plan. I’m just recognizing the fact that there is an intellectual argument to be made in favor of doing so.

Annually would make the most sense.

How and why will investors be incentivized to purchase equities?

To benefit from the gain in value from owning those equities.

A big reason as to why investors buy, hold (long term) and sell equities is price and value.

That wouldn’t change.

 

[Marener]

$38T, Congress shut the GOVT, out of control fraud, waste....yeah it’s an emergency. $29T since the purple-lipped jug-eared muzxlim put GOVT corruption, over-spending on Auto-Pilot you worthless sack of human bile.

You seem to be emotionally unstable.

 

[leftwinger]

You seem to be emotionally unstable.

SHUP loon. 12 yrs Obiden and you raised not one Tax on high income or Capital games you rotten DEM stooge.

 

[Marener]

SHUP loon. Q2 yrs Obiden and you raised not one Tax on high income or capital games you rotten DEM stooge.

This post is barely coherent.

 

[leftwinger]

This post is barely coherent.

Fixed it pole smoking jock sniffer.

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[Care4all]

He met all of them...

Is that what you got out of the Supreme court case today when you listened to it all?

It's not what I heard, and I watched all the hours of questions and arguments!

 

[Care4all]

So did Biden, so did Obama, so did Bush, Clinton .....

Those Presidents were given limited authority by a vote in congress. Trump was not.

Trump issued wide spread tariffs on every country, even ones we didn't trade with....there is nothing limiting or giving authority for him to do that....it breaks the constitution and the limited laws congress wrote on tariffs for presidents to use....

There was nothing strategic or limited or an emergency in Trump's tariff proclamations and the reneging of tariff proclamations, and the rehashing even higher regurgitations of tariff rates imposed by him. Helter Skelter.

 

[wamose]

Many of Trump's successes are rooted in his use of tariffs. Holding country's toes to the economic fire has made our country a lot of money, reestablished our role as the leader of the free world and even stopped wars. Taking Trump's ability to tariff away would be suicidal for this country, but like with the government shutdown, TDSers want our country to fail.

 

[Marener]

Many of Trump's successes are rooted in his use of tariffs. Holding country's toes to the economic fire has made our country a lot of money, reestablished our role as the leader of the free world and even stopped wars. Taking Trump's ability to tariff away would be suicidal for this country, but like with the government shutdown, TDSers want our country to fail.

That’s not a legal argument.

 

[wamose]

That’s not a legal argument.

No, it's not. That's called common sense and good judgement, which, unfortunately, our judicial system sometime disregards. It wouldn't make sense to destroy our country just to adhere to a rigid, narrow minded interpretation of the (law?).

 

[Marener]

No, it's not. That's called common sense and good judgement, which, unfortunately, our judicial system sometime disregards. It wouldn't make sense to destroy our country just to adhere to a rigid, narrow minded interpretation of the (law?).

Call it what you want, but it’s not a legal argument.

The president doesn’t get to violate the law because you think it’s a good idea.

 

[wamose]

Call it what you want, but it’s not a legal argument.

The president doesn’t get to violate the law because you think it’s a good idea.

Actually, it is a legal argument since it's being argued in the SC right now. America haters want Trump and our country to fail. I hope they fail.

 

[Marener]

Actually, it is a legal argument since it's being argued in the SC right now. America haters want Trump and our country to fail. I hope they fail.

It’s not. Trump’s solicitor general is making an actual legal argument, not your nonsense.

 

[wamose]

It’s not. Trump’s solicitor general is making an actual legal argument, not your nonsense.

National security IS common sense and it's also a legal argument in this case, Qdog. Democrats suck for closing our country and trying to make us weak. They're just a collection of commies, deep state slackers and robber barons. MAGA, America first.

 

[Marener]

National security IS common sense and it's also a legal argument in this case, Qdog.

Your belief that the answer is authoritarianism doesn’t show up in the oral argument.

 

[kyzr]

Is that what you got out of the Supreme court case today when you listened to it all?
It's not what I heard, and I watched all the hours of questions and arguments!

One point I heard is interpreting the word "regulate".
Does regulate include tariffs or not?
As Kavanaugh said, "the president can stop trade with any country, but he can't impose a 1% tariff?"

Plus there are other laws that are better regarding presidential tariff authority. Can they be considered?

 

[wamose]

Your belief that the answer is authoritarianism doesn’t show up in the oral argument.

Communists are authoritarian. That would be your party, not Republicans. Acting in the national interest to provide national security is not authoritarian at all, except maybe to a radical American hater.

 

[Marener]

Communists are authoritarian. That would be your party, not Republicans. Acting in the national interest to provide national security is not authoritarian at all, except maybe to a radical American hater.

Authoritarians often say they’re working in the national interest to protect people.

It’s happened again and again.