Zone1 The Number One Driver Of The Debt Is The Bush, And Trump Tax Cuts ForThe Rich

[Cellblock2429]

Trump did this country no favors.

God, I wish I could cus!

/——/ This is what Trump did, what had Dementia Joe done right?

 

[Billo_Really]

Trump was very favorable for us, highest growth in retirement accounts in our lifetimes, Biden is still negative

Trump inherited the Obsma economy then drove it into the ground with his tax cuts.

 

[Billo_Really]

/——/ This is what Trump did, what had Dementia Joe done right?
View attachment 830904

Half of that list is absolutely bullshit!

 

[Cellblock2429]

Trump inherited the Obsma economy then drove it into the ground with his tax cuts.

/——/ Prove how letting people keep more of their own money kills the economy. “Oh, look Mable, we got more money in our paychecks. Let’s go buy stuff to destroy the economy.” You moron.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Half of that list is absolutely bullshit!

/——/ Prove it. Your non-specific denial isn’t evidence, just frustration.

 

[Red Front]

Wait, are you talking about manufacturing being good for America or are you talking about manufacturing employment being what we want? My preference is having our manufacturing increase with fewer people and having the American salaries increase while being employed elsewhere.

otoh, if your goal is to have the American labor force take a cut in salaries so they can grind away in factories then we can part ways.

The "cut in salaries" is in the service retail sector, under a form of unproductive capitalism based on finance banking and Wall Street speculation. The American workforce is heavily in debt, and working harder than ever, without the higher pay and benefits/protections once afforded to American labor (about a third of the workforce before 1980 was unionized and that even made non-union workers earn more and have better benefits as well). We are now heading into advanced, intelligent, fully automated production, which hardly needs any wage labor, if any, hence the pleading for a "Universal Basic Income" by capitalists:

​

They want to keep capitalism on life-support for as long as possible through government intervention. Another name for that is SOCIALISM. They want socialism to bail them out again, but this time, it's with a monthly check to every American, to make sure the rich still have a market to sell their products and services despite not hiring enough human labor if any at all. No wages, no markets or capitalism. Paying consumers pay for what they consume with their wages (or credit cards which still require wages in order to make payments and maintain good credit). Get rid of jobs with robots and artificial intelligence, and capitalism crumbles. Society is forced by necessity to adopt a non-profit, marketless system of production a.k.a. socialism.

Advanced production technology inevitably leads to socialism/communism. Here in the West, especially in the US, that form of high-tech communism will be democratic. It will respect our liberties, including the Second Amendment (the right to keep and bear arms). The right to personal property, like our homes, our vehicles/s, our computer/s..etc.

 

[Billo_Really]

/——/ Prove how letting people keep more of their own money kills the economy. “Oh, look Mable, we got more money in our paychecks. Let’s go buy stuff to destroy the economy.” You moron.

Well, I did thank him for the extra $27.

 

[expat_panama]

The "cut in salaries" is in the service retail sector, under a form of unproductive capitalism based on finance banking and Wall Street speculation.

Not sure if we're both on the same page here. The service sector I'm talking about is now called the tertiary sector (from here):

The tertiary sector of the economy, generally known as the service sector, is the third of the three economic sectors in the three-sector model. The others are the primary sector and the secondary sector. The tertiary sector consists of the provision of services instead of end products. Services include attention, advice, access, experience and affective labour. ​

The idea being that just like early in the last century when someone in the manufacturing sector sold a tractor to a farmer, the farmer produced a lot more. Same goes now when some service sector guy tells the factories to organize more efficiently they end up manufacturing a lot more.

The American workforce is heavily in debt...

What I'm seeing is that private debt/assets is going down. There are hard numbers on this if ur interested but most folks just want to say "ain't it awful" and leave it at that. Let me know if you want share info.

 

[Woodznutz]

It is impossible for tax cuts to cause debt. Borrowing causes debt, not tax cuts.

But, tax cuts lead to government borrowing.

 

[Woodznutz]

The idea being that just like early in the last century when someone in the manufacturing sector sold a tractor to a farmer, the farmer produced a lot more. Same goes now when some service sector guy tells the factories to organize more efficiently they end up manufacturing a lot more.

Now we make so much stuff we are drowning in it.

 

[Muhammed]

Trump inherited the Obsma economy then drove it into the ground with his tax cuts.

Trump cut taxes, revenue went up, real wages went up, inflation was less than 2%, unemployment went to it's lowest since the Vietnam draft and the poverty rate went to it's all time record low in the history of the USA.

Trump made the economy great.

That's the exact opposite of driving the economy into the ground, you fucking moron.

 

[Cellblock2429]

But, tax cuts lead to government borrowing.

/——/ Over spending leads to borrowing. In your personal life do you live within your means, or are you swimming in debt?

 

[Woodznutz]

/——/ Over spending leads to borrowing. In your personal life do you live within your means, or are you swimming in debt?

The government has debts to pay and programs to finance. These costs are going up, thus any substantial reduction in revenue will lead to more borrowing. It has been reported that most who receive a tax cut use the money to pay off debts or put it into savings.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Certainly in the UK, government tend to do things, create a cost, that incurs a debt. They cover this by printing money.

In the private sector, people go by budgets, and if they don't work within budget, they go bust and get closed down.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The government has debts to pay and programs to finance. These costs are going up, thus any substantial reduction in revenue will lead to more borrowing. It has been reported that most who receive a tax cut use the money to pay off debts or put it into savings.

/——/ Here are a few debts:

1. The federal government made at least $72 billion in improper payments.
2. Washington spends $92 billion on corporate welfare (excluding TARP) versus $71 billion on homeland security.[2]
3. Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.[3]
4. Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them -- costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually -- fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.[4]
5. The Congressional Budget Office published a "Budget Options" series identifying more than $100 billion in potential spending cuts.[5]
6. Examples from multiple Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports of wasteful duplication include 342economic development programs; 130programs serving the disabled; 130programs serving at-risk youth; 90 early childhood development programs; 75programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities; and 72 safe water programs.[6]
7. Washington will spend $2.6 milliontraining Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job.[7]
8. A GAO audit classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled. Examples of taxpayer-funded purchases include gambling, mortgage payments, liquor, lingerie, iPods, Xboxes, jewelry, Internet dating services, and Hawaiian vacations. In one extraordinary example, the Postal Service spent $13,500 on one dinner at a Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, including "over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold." The 81 guests consumed an average of $167 worth of food and drink apiece.[8]
9. And plenty more

 

[peacefan]

The local and state governments "borrow", and the US Federal Government "prints" the money (types the amount into a keyboard) at the FED, our nation's central bank, under the authority of the US Congress. The only reason we have a federal income tax is to maintain the value of the dollar and control inflation. Taxes and all required government fees in general, whether, local, state, or federal, boost production, because you and I have to produce or generate a product or service (via our labor, business.. etc.), to pay our property taxes, our license, permit..etc in USD (not in Canadian dollars or Mexican pesos).

What the federal government can spend is based on our nation's GDP (our national production capacity). We don't want too much money chasing goods and services. Products and services have to be available to the consumer. This avoids true, genuine hyperinflation. This type of Inflation collapses the economy. As long as our federal budget remains under our GDP and government money is allocated to infrastructural projects, which includes providing labor with a social safety net, we are fine. When the government prioritizes the public good, rather than private profits, we get a robust economy.

View attachment 830813

View attachment 830814​

That's how the US economy was between the late 1940s and 1980. It was a stakeholder economy based on production capitalism, rather than the Wall Street finance capitalism we have today. The stakeholders in the 1950s weren't just wealthy investors but the working class. The American public. Capitalism for the public good. Not what we have today.

View attachment 830815

View attachment 830816

View attachment 830817

View attachment 830821

View attachment 830818

View attachment 830819
​

The so-called "national debt" is a myth, a paper tiger designed to scare you into thinking the government "can't pay for it". Right-wing politicians, in the pockets of the wealthy elites, want everything in the hands of the rich, not in the hands of the public through a democratic government (or a well-regulated capitalism that is more socially conscious and prioritizes the public good). If the government is proven to do it well or is proficient in doing anything, it undermines the power of the rich elites, the big-money capitalists. A democratic government that serves the public good is the strong arm of the people. It undermines the non-democratic power of the wealthy elites.

Ask yourself when was the last time your employer held an election? Do you vote in the workplace? No, the place is run like a tyranny. Your employer (exploiter) is the unaccountable king of the workplace. The master, as Adam Smith admitted in his book "The Wealth Of Nations". The employer exploits his employees/exploitees, for a profit (surplus value). You are a cog in the machine of production, commodified in a labor market and up for sale. Stakeholder capitalism was a better-regulated capitalism, which was based on production rather than finance or the Wall Street casino (unproductive capitalism). There were strong labor unions back then, protecting the rights of workers. That was the golden age of our capitalist economy.

View attachment 830830​

Treasury bonds are a vestigial remnant of the gold-back dollar and no longer a borrowing operation or instrument as it once was. Here is an explanation by top economists as to what and why treasury bonds still exist under a fiat USD:

The US Federal Government will never go insolvent or "go broke":

​

Notice how our politicians, especially right-wing Republicans, never ask "How are we going to pay for that", when it comes to war or or bailout money. There's always enough money for war and socialism for the rich (bailouts, subsidies, grants, non-interest loans, tax cuts..). It's socialism for the wealthy and pick yourself up by your bootstraps capitalism for the rest of us. The so-called national debt is a ploy to place everything in the hands of the rich. Privatize every single sector and industry of the economy, stripping Americans of their commonwealth and democracy.

​

i agree that trickle down economics hasn't worked one bit.
so i say : tax the rich.

 

[peacefan]

Our wealthy elites control our politicians and engineer our foreign policy to serve their vested interests, often to the point of hegemonic bullying and war.

View attachment 830808

FREE PDF - WAR IS A RACKET BY MARINE GENERAL SMEDLEY D BUTLER:

https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf

​

i totally agree that war is a racket; the US is even proud of it's status as the free world's arms supplier.
it's how we wield that influence that i wish to comment on (from time to time).

for instance : either we take out that naval base in Crimea, or we yield Ukranian territory to the Russians so that they can hold on to that base.

and as for Taiwan : i recommend we follow Ramaswamy's trial-balloon suggestion : withdraw our military support for Taiwan as soon as we have local microchip production capacity.

 

[Cellblock2429]

i agree that trickle down economics hasn't worked one bit.
so i say : tax the rich.

/——/ Folks, here’s another liberal economics major whose almost as bright as AOC.

 

[expat_panama]

Now we make so much stuff we are drowning in it.

Or rather we meet all our needs and export the rest.

The U.S. is such an amazingly rich nation that I personally take this debt talk as a distraction. Sure it has to be watched but the current debt service (what we're paying for the debt) is workable. We want some debt because it's either we tax more or we borrow.

I prefer borrow.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Or rather we meet all our needs and export the rest.

The U.S. is such an amazingly rich nation that I personally take this debt talk as a distraction. Sure it has to be watched but the current debt service (what we're paying for the debt) is workable. We want some debt because it's either we tax more or we borrow.

I prefer borrow.

/——/ Folks, here’s another liberal economics major whose almost as bright as AOC.