And so begins the official butthurt-Max Burns castigates the American People for voting in Trump

[Marener]

Its not free you dope. Did you read the link I posted? This theory of yours fell flat on its face in Trump's first term. Lowering taxes can most certainly spurn enough economic growth enough to cover and even exceed the lost tax revenues. Do you think most people stick the extra money under their mattress? Even if they did, would people having a larger nest egg potentially allow for cuts in government spending that was previously used to help people who didn't have a nest egg? You guys are not serious people.

That's exactly what you're claiming, a free lunch. Trump's tax cut sure as hell didn't create enough economic growth. He peaked at 2.9% growth? That's just not enough. Hell, in 2019 his GDP growth rate decreased and every year his deficits increased.

Most Americans got less than $1000 benefit from the tax cut. That's not exactly making anyone's nest egg dramatically bigger. The vast majority of cost in the tax bill was in corporate and high income earners, which has much less stimulatory effect. Supposedly corporations were going to use all this profit to invest in production but that never really happened. They mostly just bought stock back.

 

[Marener]

No he didn’t, hence why the people overwhelming elected him last night.

Did he increase or decrease deficits his first term?

 

[struth]

Did he increase or decrease deficits his first term?

The question was if he was effective or not.

Harris, xiden and the dems haven’t been effective, the american people found trump and the gop were, they look at the past four years with regret and a dark time.

 

[Marener]

The question was if he was effective or not.

Was he effective in reducing the deficit?

 

[Rogue AI]

Voters just demonstrated how dumb they are yesterday.

This is why you loons lose, you blame the voters and not your failed agenda and failed candidate. Everything is somebody else's fault. How sad.

 

[Marener]

This is why you loons lose, you blame the voters and not your failed agenda and failed candidate. Everything is somebody else's fault. How sad.

I mean, that’s what conservatives say every time they lose elections too. Careful about throwing stones when you live in a glass house.

 

[Rogue AI]

I mean, that’s what conservatives say every time they lose elections too. Careful about throwing stones when you live in a glass house.

Last time we said you folks cheated, the American people would never be stupid enough to elect Biden.

 

[SweetTea]

That's exactly what you're claiming, a free lunch. Trump's tax cut sure as hell didn't create enough economic growth. He peaked at 2.9% growth? That's just not enough. Hell, in 2019 his GDP growth rate decreased and every year his deficits increased.

Most Americans got less than $1000 benefit from the tax cut. That's not exactly making anyone's nest egg dramatically bigger. The vast majority of cost in the tax bill was in corporate and high income earners, which has much less stimulatory effect. Supposedly corporations were going to use all this profit to invest in production but that never really happened. They mostly just bought stock back.

Tax revenues, which is what we are discussing here, increased AFTER the tax cuts in 2017. What part of increased don't you understand? You are attempting to make the argument that cutting taxes decreases tax revenues, when it in fact increased them in 2017. That means that people got to keep more of the money they earned and the government actually made more. It is simple, but you are spinning and trying to make it something more complicated.

You have been sold a lie. Of course higher earners received a higher monetary cut because they pay more taxes. There is this neat little math trick called percentages that seems applicable here. The top rate fell by 2.6%. That is for people making over 578k/yr. The next bracket, for people making 231k-577k/yr wasn't cut at all. Yeah, that is a large portion of the "rich" according to Democrats. They received no cut. Granted, the top bracket got a 2.6% cut, but they still pay 5% more than the next bracket down and considerably more than other brackets. The upper middle-class bracket received a 4% cut while the middle and lower-middle both received at 3% cut. The lower class bracket received not cut, but then again, they are paying 270% less than the top bracket AFTER the cut. The Democratic narrative is that the richest Americans received the largest cut, which is factually incorrect, in fact, the top bracket received the smallest percentage cut of the brackets that were cut at all. The bracket that encompasses a portion of the "rich" as defined by Democrats received no cut at all as did those that pay the least percentage of all.

The top rate fell from 39.6% to 37%, while the 33% bracket dropped to 32%, the 28% bracket to 24%, the 25% bracket to 22%, and the 15% bracket to 12%. The lowest bracket remained at 10%, and the 35% was unchanged.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

I know it’s hard for you guys, but illegal actions should be met with consequences, right? You can’t just get away with things because you’re popular.

Square footage. Property assessments. Paperwork filed incorrectly.
You got used as a fool again.

 

[Marener]

Tax revenues, which is what we are discussing here, increased AFTER the tax cuts in 2017. What part of increased don't you understand? You are attempting to make the argument that cutting taxes decreases tax revenues, when it in fact increased them in 2017. That means that people got to keep more of the money they earned and the government actually made more. It is simple, but you are spinning and trying to make it something more complicated.

As I said earlier, which I believe you ignored, you're using a childishly simplistic metric. I never said tax revenues went down compared to the previous year, I said tax revenues were down compared to what they would have been if there had been no tax cut. Tax revenues go up almost every year because the economy grows, because population grows, because of inflation. It is not enough to say tax revenues went up because tax revenues almost always go up.

It's actually not that simple, but you wish it were.

You have been sold a lie. Of course higher earners received a higher monetary cut because they pay more taxes. There is this neat little math trick called percentages that seems applicable here. The top rate fell by 2.6%. That is for people making over 578k/yr. The next bracket, for people making 231k-577k/yr wasn't cut at all. Yeah, that is the "rich" according to Democrats. They received no cut. Granted, the top bracket got a 2.6% cut, but they still pay 5% more than the next bracket down and considerably more than other brackets. The upper middle-class bracket received a 4% cut while the middle and lower-middle both received at 3% cut. The lower class bracket received not cut, but then again, they are paying 270% less than the top bracket AFTER the cut. The Democratic narrative is that the richest Americans received the largest cut, which is factually incorrect, in fact, the top bracket received the smallest percentage cut of the brackets that were cut at all. The bracket that encompasses a portion of the "rich" as defined by Democrats received not cut at all as did those that pay the least percentage of all.

You forgot to point out what the lie was, instead you went on a long meaningless diatribe about something I didn't claim.

I never said who got the biggest cut. There's a lot of different and equally valid ways of measuring what is "big". You could do it by absolute terms, by percent of taxes paid, by percent of after tax income. Each method gives slightly different results and are all valid depending on how you want to define "largest cut".

But that's not the discussion we are having. I said the largest cost of the tax bill was in tax cuts to the wealthiest. That's absolutely true. The bill cost about $2-3 trillion over 10 years and most of that cost was due to the tax benefits for the high earners.

 

[Marener]

Square footage. Property assessments. Paperwork filed incorrectly.
You got used as a fool again.

Obstruction of justice, witness tampering, concealment of classified documents.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Abortion was a huge winner again. Just not enough

When Trump doesn’t install a national abortion ban like you’ve been lied to about, the dems have lost the abortion wedge issue forever. That scare tactic has worked on the useful idiots for decades.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

MAGA loves the turmoil as much as Trump does. They enjoy trolling the rest of the country. They enjoy seeing their anger.

It’s pretty screwed up.

Nope. Leftism is screwed up and it was soundly rejected last night.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Obstruction of justice, witness tampering, concealment of classified documents.

Fake fake and fake.

 

[Marener]

Nope. Leftism is screwed up and it was soundly rejected last night.

Funny how you didn’t disagree with what I said.

 

[Arlette]

When Trump doesn’t install a national abortion ban like you’ve been lied to about, the dems have lost the abortion wedge issue forever. That scare tactic has worked on the useful idiots for decades.

Nothing will be forgotten. Nothing will be forgiven.

 

[SweetTea]

As I said earlier, which I believe you ignored, you're using a childishly simplistic metric. I never said tax revenues went down compared to the previous year, I said tax revenues were down compared to what they would have been if there had been no tax cut. Tax revenues go up almost every year because the economy grows, because population grows, because of inflation. It is not enough to say tax revenues went up because tax revenues almost always go up.

How do you know what they tax revenues would have been had there been no cuts? You are simply speculating.

But that's not the discussion we are having. I said the largest cost of the tax bill was in tax cuts to the wealthiest. That's absolutely true. The bill cost about $2-3 trillion over 10 years and most of that cost was due to the tax benefits for the high earners.

And that cut spurned economic growth. GDP growth of 3% in 2018 was the highest since 2005.

Keep spinning.

 

[Robert W]

Zero merit. Trump isn't running against Biden and the election is over. Your claim is that Trump is going to prove his effectiveness, but he failed to do so last time around.

Reasons why. Obama opened the attacks against Trump. When he published the official document alleging Russia and Trump were in the election as a team. It started in Congress when Schiff worked to overturn the election. Notice the media never talked in those terms. As they later pulled on Trump vs Biden. Democrats vowed to get rid of Trump. And they tried two major times in Congress. Even when Trump was gone, Democrats furiously went against trump. We the public of the USA of course saw all of this happen. We the public kicked out Democrats and now this nation has a fine president in charge when sworn in.

 

[Robert W]

Nothing will be forgotten. Nothing will be forgiven.

That is fair. We have not forgiven Biden. We will put that creep in prison. Democrats started this and we will finish it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yep, I do. Why would Kamala suddenly get 17 million fewer votes than Biden AS HIS RUNNING MATE? Perhaps because millions of those votes were fake as fuck and we both know it.

It’s not 17 million fewer votes.