Senate Buys Lisa Murkowski's Vote

[struth]

Stilll peddling the trickle down fraud.

After all, fifty years on. It has never worked in real life.

But it did make the rich, a lot richer.

Actually it made a lot of people richer. The 80s gave us the upper middle class

what we know doesn’t work is the demafascit model of making more people poorer

Just look at the xiden 4 years where he left a majority of the country worse off

 

[TimFitz]

You can stop this if your party at the federal level would enact massive tax cuts for the lower classes. There is more than the federal income tax and social security taxes. You won't.

It has done so in the past. But to pay for it, they also proposed raising taxes on people making money off of investments rather than work.

But the right wing noise machines always tries to limit the discussion to income taxes only. Which obscures that fact that the wealthy do not get their earnings from taxable income (other than capital gains, which are taxed at significantly lower rates).

 

[TimFitz]

Actually it made a lot of people richer. The 80s gave us the upper middle class

what we know doesn’t work is the demafascit model of making more people poorer

Just look at the xiden 4 years where he left a majority of the country worse off

The top 5%. Middle and lower class wages and wealth declined steadily as a share of the nation's overall wealth and production throughout the period since Ronald Reagan began peddling trickle down.

That's very easy to document.

Why you cheer for more of the same is beyond me.

By contrast, Democratic Presidents and Congresses adopted tax policies that made the rich and industry pay a much higher tax burden than the middle class (the reverse of what is being done now).

During that time the American middle class emerged from the tenemants and into the new suburbs. Standards of living rose sharply. And its' principal architect dubbed the rising postwar middle class "The Affluent Society", a catch phrase one heard throughout the 1960's.

But not in the last 50 years of "trickle down" tax policies.

Again, I do not understand why the poor and struggling middle right wing cheers policies that are advocated by Wall Street and the rich, policies that do make them poorer.

 

[struth]

The top 5%. Middle and lower class wages and wealth declined steadily as a share of the nation's overall wealth and production throughout the period since Ronald Reagan began peddling trickle down.

That's very easy to document.

Why you cheer for more of the same is beyond me.

um, why do you make things up? Real Median Income has grown drastically....https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/middle-class-income-looked-every-180036461.html

The reality is dem policies, in particular what we saw over the last four years, isn't to make more american richer, it's to make more americans poorer. Majority of Americans Feel Worse Off Than Four Years Ago

The reality is, without electing Xiden and the Demafascsit, folks would be even better off today

 

[Foxfyre]

‘In order to win Murkowski’s support, Republicans had added several provisions that would sweeten the deal for her state. But at the very last second, the Senate parliamentarian struck a carve-out that would’ve expanded federal funding for Medicaid in Alaska.

All 47 Democrats voted against the bill, and they were joined by Senators Rand Paul, Thom Tillis, and Susan Collins. Had Murkowski also voted “no,” the bill would have been defeated.

Murkowski told reporters that she hoped the House would send the bill back to the Senate so they could continue working on it. “My hope is that the House is gonna look at this and recognize that we’re not there yet,” Murkowski said, revealing just how misguided her support actually was.’

Senate Passes Trump Budget After Buying Lisa Murkowski’s Vote

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski’s last-minute “yes” vote proved pivotal for forcing Donald Trump’s budget through.

newrepublic.com

Voting for Trump was supposed to be the end of ‘business as usual politics,’ an end to career politicians making backroom deals, buying their votes in order to pass bad legislation.

It is called compromise and negotiation. Each legislator in both the House and Senate are there to represent their state. They are there to vote against what is bad for the citizens of their state or push for what will be good for the citizens of their state. That requires some wheeling and dealing in all major legislation. Ultimately everybody gets something they want. Nobody gets everything they want. But the finished product, if it is good for America and all Americans will be good legislation.

There was far more in the BBB that was beneficial to Alaskans and all Americans than anything remotely negative and Murkowski knew that but she did some wheeling and dealing to get a better deal for her people. And then she was able to set aside her strong TDS to make the right vote for Alaska and America. And good for her.

And there is plenty of time and room in the BBB to renegotiate and fix any of the potential negatives that a lot of GOP members in both the House and Senate didn't like. For instance a 'provider tax' to help offset government costs to provide Medicaid may turn out to be burdensome and will need to be tweaked or eliminated if it turns out to be unnecessary.

What the BBB did not include was a billions and billions of pork for unnecessary things that benefitted almost no one that the Democrats forced into legislation when they had control. I was very proud of the Republicans for that.

No the cuts weren't as deep as some MAGA people wanted. As Elon Musk wanted. But there were significant cuts in spending in that bill. And it was the end all by any means. It was just the beginning of necessary reforms and righting the ship if we can keep responsible GOP in the Congress and White House.

 

[TimFitz]

um, why do you make things up? Real Median Income has grown drastically....https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/middle-class-income-looked-every-180036461.html

The reality is dem policies, in particular what we saw over the last four years, isn't to make more american richer, it's to make more americans poorer. Majority of Americans Feel Worse Off Than Four Years Ago

The reality is, without electing Xiden and the Demafascsit, folks would be even better off today

I'm not making anything up.

Your citation is meaningless, as it says nothing about the purchasing power of wages, and ignores the share of wages to national GDP growth altogether. All your citation does is point out that inflation happened.

In fact, the tread to higher GDP growth and stagnant real wages has been consistant since the dawn of "trickle down economics".

Indeed, the real world effect of falling share of US wealth amongst the middle and working classes in the US is a major source of discontent, and comes up in EVERY election.

Trump's tax bill just exacerbates this long term pattern, and finances a gift to the rich with borrowed money (once again).

Why Wages Have Stagnated While GDP Has Grown: The Proximate Factors

A. Introduction A healthy debate appears to be developing in the run up to the 2016 elections, with politicians of all parties raising the issue of stagnant wages. Republicans have charged that t…

aneconomicsense.org

Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich | LSE Research

Trickle-down economic policies are destined to fail, research suggests. David Hope explains why the issue is so controversial.

www.lse.ac.uk

A huge study of 20 years of global wealth demolishes the myth of 'trickle-down' and shows the rich are taking most of the gains for themselves

The bottom 50% of the world holds 2% of wealth, while the top 10% holds 76%, according to a huge data set that leading economists compiled for years.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[g5000]

You can stop this if your party at the federal level would enact massive tax cuts for the lower classes. There is more than the federal income tax and social security taxes. You won't.

I have spent over a decade saying we need to ban all tax expenditures, raise the Social Security eligibility age to 70, and cut back on our defense spending.

This would allow Congress to lower tax rates on EVERYONE with enough to spare to pay down our debt.

This would also have the serendipitous effect of eliminating the incentive for special interests to bribe our politicians to put tax expenditures in the tax code, thus cutting way back on money in politics and giving challengers a fighting chance against incumbents.

So, basically, moron, you have committed the classic False Dichotomy logical fallacy and mistaken an actual fiscal conservative for someone else.

 

[TimFitz]

I have spent over a decade saying we need to ban all tax expenditures, raise the Social Security eligibility age to 70, and cut back on our defense spending.

This would allow Congress to lower tax rates on EVERYONE with enough to spare to pay down our debt.

This would also have the serendipitous effect of eliminating the incentive for special interests to bribe our politicians to put tax expenditures in the tax code, thus cutting way back on money in politics and giving challengers a fighting chance against incumbents.

So, basically, moron, you have committed the classic False Dichotomy logical fallacy and mistaken an actual fiscal conservative for someone else.

That does not make all that much sense.

Social Security is a separate fund.

Cutting Defense makes sense if the US is going to retreat back into 1920's isolationism, as seems to be Trump nation's desire. But Trump is doing the opposite.

Reducing it would go a long way to stabalizing US debt, and enable social spending.

His huge expenditures on ICE is nothing but an effort to create a national political police force, whose tactics are already an open issue. This happened in Germany in 1933 as well.

 

[g5000]

That does not make all that much sense.

Social Security is a separate fund.

You've heard the money is running out in a few years, haven't you? Where to you think the money is going to come from to make up for the shortfall? Either benefit cuts or the general fund.

Raise the Medicare and SS eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward...problem solved.

We are living longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer. Common sense.

Cutting Defense makes sense if the US is going to retreat back into 1920's isolationism, as seems to be Trump nation's desire. But Trump is doing the opposite.

This is one area where Trump and I align. Europe has always looked down their noses at us for not having the same social safety nets they have while they heavily depend on us for their defense.

They need to step up, and we need to step back.

Trump is an isolationist. By a not so funny coincidence his "America First" slogan is a rehash of another isolationist, Charles Lindbergh, who was also very popular.

Until December 7, 1941.

I am not an isolationist by any stretch of the imagination. For example, I believe Vladimir Putin is a global threat and should be met with as much force as we and our allies can muster.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Not surprising....She's as cheap as the come.

How ironic. Your other heroes sold out for a kind word from the fat rapist.

At least she got something for her state.

 

[TimFitz]

It is called compromise and negotiation. Each legislator in both the House and Senate are there to represent their state. They are there to vote against what is bad for the citizens of their state or push for what will be good for the citizens of their state. That requires some wheeling and dealing in all major legislation. Ultimately everybody gets something they want. Nobody gets everything they want. But the finished product, if it is good for America and all Americans will be good legislation.

There was far more in the BBB that was beneficial to Alaskans and all Americans than anything remotely negative and Murkowski knew that but she did some wheeling and dealing to get a better deal for her people. And then she was able to set aside her strong TDS to make the right vote for Alaska and America. And good for her.

And there is plenty of time and room in the BBB to renegotiate and fix any of the potential negatives that a lot of GOP members in both the House and Senate didn't like. For instance a 'provider tax' to help offset government costs to provide Medicaid may turn out to be burdensome and will need to be tweaked or eliminated if it turns out to be unnecessary.

What the BBB did not include was a billions and billions of pork for unnecessary things that benefitted almost no one that the Democrats forced into legislation when they had control. I was very proud of the Republicans for that.

No the cuts weren't as deep as some MAGA people wanted. As Elon Musk wanted. But there were significant cuts in spending in that bill. And it was the end all by any means. It was just the beginning of necessary reforms and righting the ship if we can keep responsible GOP in the Congress and White House.

The cuts went to a massive increase in Defense spending, dispite the fact that no war is going on, and the US has retreated from leadership on the world stage.

The rest of it went to Trump's efforts to set up an internal political police using ICE and the FBI.

Financial bottom line.

Trump borrowed and spent., Jost like he did the last time.

He took food out of people's mouths, attacked education, withdrew from foreign aid, made health care significantly more expensive for millions, and still had to borrow more money to do it.

I have little doubt that the supplemental bills the GOP is hinting out will be nothing more than a repeat of this dismal pattern.

 

[struth]

I'm not making anything up.

Your citation is meaningless, as it says nothing about the purchasing power of wages, and ignores the share of wages to national GDP growth altogether. All your citation does is point out that inflation happened.

In fact, the tread to higher GDP growth and stagnant real wages has been consistant since the dawn of "trickle down economics".

Indeed, the real world effect of falling share of US wealth amongst the middle and working classes in the US is a major source of discontent, and comes up in EVERY election.

Trump's tax bill just exacerbates this long term pattern, and finances a gift to the rich with borrowed money (once again).

Why Wages Have Stagnated While GDP Has Grown: The Proximate Factors

A. Introduction A healthy debate appears to be developing in the run up to the 2016 elections, with politicians of all parties raising the issue of stagnant wages. Republicans have charged that t…

aneconomicsense.org

Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich | LSE Research

Trickle-down economic policies are destined to fail, research suggests. David Hope explains why the issue is so controversial.

www.lse.ac.uk

A huge study of 20 years of global wealth demolishes the myth of 'trickle-down' and shows the rich are taking most of the gains for themselves

The bottom 50% of the world holds 2% of wealth, while the top 10% holds 76%, according to a huge data set that leading economists compiled for years.

www.businessinsider.com

Real wages have increased over inflation nearly 80 percent of the time since the 80s. Really not since the 2000s did we see it not, we recovered from that during the first trump admin, lost it during xiden

Your second link is meaningless

Same with your third, as we aren’t talking about the globe

 

[TimFitz]

Real wages have increased over inflation nearly 80 percent of the time since the 80s. Really not since the 2000s did we see it not, we recovered from that during the first trump admin, lost it during xiden

Your second link is meaningless

Same with your third, as we aren’t talking about the globe

I am talking about a political fraud masquerading as an economic theory. Which has global implications.

I had little trouble documenting that middle class earnings and share of the nation's wealth have signficantly declined as a share of overall GDP. I can bury you in more statistics if you ;like.

Trickle down is a fraud. One that the GOP has pushed for fifty years.

 

[Foxfyre]

The cuts went to a massive increase in Defense spending, dispite the fact that no war is going on, and the US has retreated from leadership on the world stage.

The rest of it went to Trump's efforts to set up an internal political police using ICE and the FBI.

Financial bottom line.

Trump borrowed and spent., Jost like he did the last time.

He took food out of people's mouths, attacked education, withdrew from foreign aid, made health care significantly more expensive for millions, and still had to borrow more money to do it.

I have little doubt that the supplemental bills the GOP is hinting out will be nothing more than a repeat of this dismal pattern.

Wow. You'll have a really tough time supporting that with any credible verifiable source.

 

[struth]

I am talking about a political fraud masquerading as an economic theory. Which has global implications.

I had little trouble documenting that middle class earnings and share of the nation's wealth have signficantly declined as a share of overall GDP. I can bury you in more statistics if you ;like.

Trickle down is a fraud. One that the GOP has pushed for fifty years.

It’s not a political fraud. It’s reality. You allow people to keep more of what they earn, they spend it and invest it and make more of it

This isn’t rocket science and the data shows it

I had little trouble showing that since the 80s the middle class has earned more and in fact an entire new class called the upper middle class was created

What you are upset about is some, have made even more massive wealth. That’s really your issue.

Your plan is to take more from those that make more and make everyone poorer

It’s a system that always fails