Utopia Talk / Politics / Trump doesn't want any deal

FoxNEWS Member	Tue Nov 28 14:25:12 So there was a meeting to serve the people, Dems meeting with Trump, however, Trump decided to act like a child and went ahead and declared that no deal would be reached. Dems pulled out, now Trump whines about them backing out of the meeting when he was the one responsible for discounting it in the first place. Trumpicans rejoice.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 14:30:36 Republicans don't need Democrats to pass a tax bill, they just need shitheads like Songbird McCain to not pass "No" protest votes.
Cold Rod Member	Tue Nov 28 14:32:38 lol you want the tax bill to pass that will hurt the economy. awesome.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 14:50:54 Forwyn's so stupid; he thinks this tax bill might actually help him. Rand Paul, after basically screaming about the deficit and debt as the centerpiece of his libertarianism, will also vote for this shit tax bill. LOL. Even the virtue-signalling libertarians (who claim to be different from normal cuckservatives) are 100% full of shit. Fuck all of you.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 15:07:57 I didn't say one way or the other about my opinion of the bill - just that Pelosi and Reid are not needed if the Majority Whips do their jobs. @Cuckhat: the standard libertarian position is that deficits should be cut through spending cuts, not tax increases. There is nothing contradictory here.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 15:20:51 "standard" You're argument is almost as stupid as Rand Paul's op ed. Libertarians are for small government and small debt. Exploding the debt to give billionaires a tax cut is absolutely fucking retarded and decreases individual freedom because of a myriad of reasons. If you had the brains to think things through, you'd be able to understand that. But you're not really a libertarian. You're just a cuckservative virtue-signalling that you're not a Trumpite when you support literally everything he does.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 15:28:28 Your* "small government" Yes. Less taxes AND less spending. Naturally, spending needs to be cut drastically as well, and Trump is a wild card. But increasing the debt so people can keep more of their money isn't any worse than increasing debt by $9 trillion in two terms for ARRA and handing gobs of cash to military contractors around the world.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 15:29:55 You're such a fucking ignoramus about the way the global economy works. Seriously, just fucking kill yourself.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 15:30:20 Can't even fall back to your principles either with this debt-exploding bill. Fuck you.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 15:32:01 But since you brought it up: "he thinks this tax bill might actually help him." Yeah, I'd save a bit over $2k a year under the Senate plan. http://taxplancalculator.com
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 15:36:49 "You're such a fucking ignoramus about the way the global economy works. Can't even fall back to your principles either with this debt-exploding bill." Excellent rebuttal.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 15:37:23 lol. From a Fox News producer. You really are beyond fucking stupid.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 15:47:06 I knew the first thing you would do is google the creator and REEEE. So fucking laughable, Cuckhat. http://www...tor-what-do-you-owe-2017-10-26
Trolly McSerious Member	Tue Nov 28 15:54:55 What is laughable that you think this tax plan will benefit significantly. Less likely and most economists agree. http://www...-home-pay-75000-salary-2017-11 http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2017/11/08/disastrous-trump-tax-plan/#1cdea9574dd3 http://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/the-good-the-bad-and-the-money-what-the-gop-tax-plan-means-for-you.html http://www.thisisinsider.com/trump-tax-plan-pay-more-average-difference-2017-9 I lulz at those who think this new tax plan is as beneficial as it is made out by Trump and the GOP.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 16:03:28 "1. The tax cuts must not be offset by spending cuts (or tax increases elsewhere)." Lol, Keynesian economics.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 16:04:42 Basic math of the Debt bill is simple. Trump wants a 15% corporate tax-cut. That alone already costs 1.5 trillion dollars over 10 years. The results of this tax-cut are simple and easy to understand. Corporations get a one-time payoff from Congress that they did not get. This effect is muted as markets have already been expecting a cut. The gains go almost entirely to the super rich increasing their power relative to everyone else even more. Corporations may pay out the gains as dividends or re-invest ... but they probably won't as evidenced by the fact most are sitting on loads of cash already. The main effect is the Kochs and Mercers of the world have more money to keep buying off Republican politicans and idiots and pass policies that mainly help a tiny sliver of the 1% while Forwyn, who has already been hurt by them, eats it up and blames Dems instead because he is a dumbass partisan. These are issues like environmental protection, the cost of healthcare, and access to education and services. But that's ok, because the free market will provide better than the government does amirite? To not make this bill as undeeply unpopular; Republicans have permanent tax increases on the working middle class (targeted slightly more at blue-state rich but red-state rich are still affected) to pay for tax-cuts to some of lower-middle class in red states (i.e. Forwyn). What's more pathetic is that these tax cuts are TEMPORARY. So for a pittance, you have Forwyn's vote. And because marginal tax rates are PERMANENTLY in favor of corporations and those already with money; they have a competitive advantage over individuals who have the same tax rate (because the new cuts are temporary). The Ayn Rand cartoony ideal of the hard-worker pushing society upward becomes even more difficult since the odds are so stacked in favor of idiots that already have money like Trump. TLDR; we increase the debt by 1.5 trillion dollars to help the Koch brothers buy more politicians off. To at least gain some semblance of popular support.; tiny, temporary tax-cuts are given to neckbeards like Forwyn, paid for by taxing the middle class in other parts of the country. I don't even know why I bothered to present a skeleton of an argument (I would bother to cite and flesh out arguments more if I was arguing with someone of intellect acting in good faith). Forwyn is just the smartest of the dumb (not a compliment). Being the least stupid cuckservative neckbeard in Trump's America still makes you a fucking retard.
Trolly McSerious Member	Tue Nov 28 16:05:39 Forwyn thinking he knows something about economics, this is going to be delicious for me....
hood Member	Tue Nov 28 16:34:12 "Republicans don't need Democrats to pass a tax bill, they just need shitheads like Songbird McCain to not pass "No" protest votes." This wasn't about need. It was about Trump wanting to score a win. Passing a bill without democrat support would not score a win. So when he couldn't get it, he threw a hissy fit and blamed somebody else.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 16:47:10 "The results of this tax-cut are simple and easy to understand. Corporations get a one-time payoff from Congress that they did not get." Short term effects. Why are corporations flocking to Ireland? 12.5% corporate tax rate. Other short-term tax incentives. Why are corporations flocking from California to Texas? 9% vs. 1%. "Corporations may pay out the gains as dividends or re-invest..." Ultimately irrelevant. The goal of corporate tax cuts isn't to get them to benevolently spend more money domestically; it's an incentive to stay. For foreign firms, the incentive is to join us. We are competing against 192 other nations in a global economy, and we have the #1 corporate tax rate. Bump it up to 50%; China and Russia will be happy to pick up the slack. "Republicans have permanent tax increases on the working middle class" False. What you have is a separate individual tax that expires in 2025, and fake news organizations use this to point fingers and screech that the middle class will see taxes go up in eight years. Maybe if Pocahontas takes charge and kills the renewal. "(targeted slightly more at blue-state rich but red-state rich are still affected) to pay for tax-cuts to some of lower-middle class in red states (i.e. Forwyn)." Yes, delicious. I have zero reason to subsidize shitholes like Illinois. "TLDR; we increase the debt by 1.5 trillion dollars to help the Koch brothers buy more politicians off." Don't worry, Google will spend some savings on more AI to control the flow of information to cultivate a new generation of Shill Stein donors. "tiny, temporary tax-cuts are given to neckbeards like Forwyn, paid for by taxing the middle class in other parts of the country." i.e. the middle class in low-tax states stop handing deductions to the middle class in high-tax states. Yes, I'm fine with that. And perhaps, after saving $16,000 over the next eight years, Democrats and beltway Republicans will torpedo the individual tax cuts, and I'll break even again.
hood Member	Tue Nov 28 17:08:38 "Yes, delicious. I have zero reason to subsidize shitholes like Illinois." Illinois pays more federal tax than it receives. You must be thinking of shitholes like Indiana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Alabama. https://www.usaspending.gov/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=StateFunding&fiscalyear=2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state ^ data sources. Simple math will point out that shitholes like Arkansas, while net negative (paying more than receiving), isn't on the level of Illinois (5th most net negative state, behind Cali, Texas, NY and NJ). About 9x more of my money subsidizes shitholes than your money does.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 17:24:44 Much of it undoubtedly mandatory spending or qualified under the welfare basket. Feel free to cut those, too.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 28 17:31:31 I would also venture to guess that tax deductions are not counted, here.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 19:00:36 You dumbfuck Fox News viewer. Everything you said was either completely fucking wrong or so slanted that it might as well be completely fucking wrong. You would know if you were intellectually honest about challenging your own assumptions instead of a dumbfuck neckbeard. Am I going to waste time refuting you? No because fuck you for bringing in your fake news bullshit. At least you're young so you'll suffer like the rest of us when things get bad again and we have to deal with a completely unnecessary tax cut in the middle of a recovery that increases the deficit.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 19:05:56 You're so stupid. You really think you'll save 16,000 over the time of the tax cut. The savings will only certainly be offset by premiums that are increasing higher than they would otherwise because of Trump's shennanigans. And they will be more than completely offset by the higher borrowing costs and deficit spending that will be necessary to fight off the next recession because we didn't save up enough during good times. The only thing that Forwyn learned during the Bush years was, "DURRR WAR BAD." The economic lessons completely flew over his tiny fucking head.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 19:10:47 Anyways, your ignorance of the small petty issues aside; what's really laughable is that you threw away your so-called principles aside for a laughably small tax-cut. The libertarian argument is always to promote the pull-em-up-by-the-bootstraps hard-working man. A tax cut where 90% of the benefits go to corporations and where those benefits are paid for by debt (paid for by the middle class) is a complete betrayal of that. For someone who acknowledges that there is massive income inequality; there's a shit-ton of cognitive dissonance inside your tiny nogging about how that will help most people become more successful. Don't lie about being a libertarian like Rand Paul does. You're both just virtue-signalling Trumpkins.
Dukhat Member	Tue Nov 28 19:42:40 Fuck it, I’ll respond to your stupidity anyways for posterity so you can’t go, “Muh liberals” you stupid fuck. “Short term effects. Why are corporations flocking to Ireland? 12.5% corporate tax rate. Other short-term tax incentives. Why are corporations flocking from California to Texas? 9% vs. 1%. “ Ireland has been an economic laggard in Europe for much of the last decade and has only recently recovered. It was parts of the PIIGS countries that suffered the most during the great recession and it’s current economic recovery is still unstable. The EU’s 2016 huge fine on Apple’s sweetheart deal on Ireland has given pause to many investors. Ireland’s economy is precariously dependent on a low corporate tax rate and they are trying to move away from it because they know how vulnerable. Corporations “flocking” to Texas from California is an exaggeration. Some move, but they lose a lot given how California has all the talent and non-compete agreements. And it’s important to get more from corporations than you are giving up otherwise you become a wasteland like these other tax havens: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/tax-haven-curse/491411/ … or just Kansas if you were paying fucking attention. “goal of corporate tax cuts isn't to get them to benevolently spend more money domestically; it's an incentive to stay. For foreign firms, the incentive is to join us. We are competing against 192 other nations in a global economy, and we have the #1 corporate tax rate. Bump it up to 50%; China and Russia will be happy to pick up the slack. “ Wrong in every way. Companies are motivated by tons of incentives of which the corporate tax rate is only one. America is attractive because it is a huge market, has an educated workforce, has high respect for property rights; all of which is maintained by a properly functioning government. You also literally know nothing about the corporate tax rate other than platitudes. The effective tax rates of corporations is about 27% which is in line with most first-world countries. Obama proposed a slight decrease in the corporate tax rate along with more incentives for them to repatriate money when he was president. This was the best policy agreed to by both liberal and conservative economists of getting the most bang for our buck. The Republicans refused this because they needed to pretend he was a communists and idiots like you bought it. Congratulations imbecile. “False. What you have is a separate individual tax that expires in 2025, and fake news organizations use this to point fingers and screech that the middle class will see taxes go up in eight years. Maybe if Pocahontas takes charge and kills the renewal. “ Fuck you for using the term fake news you dumb inbred hillbilly. You’re the stupid fuck who kept bringing up Seth Rich and all these other fake news stories. Stupid cuckservatives always love to throw stones while living in a glass house. The bill is not done but to make it “balance” the budget; the personal tax cuts are temporary. Sure they can be renewed in which case they will bust the budget by even more than $1.5 trillion. “Yes, delicious. I have zero reason to subsidize shitholes like Illinois. “ Wrong in almost every way. Blue states subsidize red states despite your creative accounting. I’m sure you want to use fancy, Fox News creative accounting to say that you subsidize black people in the cities but it’s still wrong. “Don't worry, Google will spend some savings on more AI to control the flow of information to cultivate a new generation of Shill Stein donors. “ You really have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about at all. You just literally made something completely up that is 100% wrong and stupid. You fucking imbecile. “i.e. the middle class in low-tax states stop handing deductions to the middle class in high-tax states. Yes, I'm fine with that. And perhaps, after saving $16,000 over the next eight years, Democrats and beltway Republicans will torpedo the individual tax cuts, and I'll break even again.” Love how you completely shirk personal responsibility at the end. Even Republicans are to blame. The rest of the world can burn as long as you get a tiny-ass tax cut. It proves you’re so-called libertarianism is a farce. “Fuck future generations with higher debt and lower opportunity too as long as I get mine.” From the thinking people of the world, “FUCK YOU.” The show will be on the other foot soon enough. There aren’t enough dumb white men alive to keep up this charade for much longer.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Wed Nov 29 00:22:15 LOL. Chuck and Nancy ran away like a couple of crybabies and it is Trump that doesn't want a deal? Well if the government shuts down this time it is all Chuckie and Nanc's fault this time. You people are so pathetic. I guess Nancy wanted to suck her favorite icon's dick. Lord only knows what Chuck needed to do that was more important than funding our military. Especially when it is estimated that the NK missile launch today can reach *****ANYWHERE*****in the world.
Forwyn Member	Wed Nov 29 00:59:04 "The savings will only certainly be offset by premiums that are increasing higher" Senate plan includes mandate repeal. House plan doesn't. Twitter ramblings are not cause for rising premiums. In any case, Obamacare didn't lower any premiums for me. "And they will be more than completely offset by the higher borrowing costs and deficit spending" We haven't had rampant deficit spending for the entirety of our lives? Fucking lol. 'The only thing that Forwyn learned during the Bush years was, "DURRR WAR BAD."' You seem to have gathered very little of my actual stances. War can be justifiable, just not by the inane rants of Songbird McCain or "We came, we saw, he died" jihadi-lover Clinton. The economic lessons completely flew over his tiny fucking head. "The economic lessons completely flew over his tiny fucking head." Which, according to Cuckhat, are: "hurrrrr lowering muh corporate taxes will cause a recession!" "The libertarian argument is always to promote the pull-em-up-by-the-bootstraps hard-working man. A tax cut where 90% of the benefits go to corporations and where those benefits are paid for by debt (paid for by the middle class) is a complete betrayal of that." I'm sorry, what part of a Bernie Sanders platform is libertarian? There will always be winners and losers. The libertarian argument is not about determining those winners and losers via government intervention, or wealth redistribution. What an asinine assertion. Your jimmies are rustled. Slashing taxes is a good thing by any libertarian metric, regardless of debt incurred - debt should be cut by cutting spending. In fact, more radical libertarians vocally cheering skyrocketing debt, because a credit crash seems to be the only realistic scenario in which the Fed is uprooted and a fundamentally sick environment of intrinsic inflationary policy, glued together by ever-increasing QE and lax fractional-reserve banking ends, ends. Perhaps they'll finally be able to put their canned food and silver stockpiles to use. "You're both just virtue-signalling Trumpkins." As I am not a politician, I don't have to worry about pragmatism. I can vote for Johnson despite his idiotic gun-grabbing VP and catering to Bake-that-cake SJWs, because I'm not worried about falling out of Twitterman's graces and losing the chance to repeal the mandate. I also know that Trump will sign whatever tax plan Republicans hand him, because he's eager for a legislative victory. Ergo, Trump is irrelevant in this conversation. ------ Moving on: "Ireland has been an economic laggard in Europe for much of the last decade and has only recently recovered." Irish household debt outgrew Irish expansion, certainly you're not proposing that a higher corporate tax rate would have helped? People got used to a couple decades of meteoric growth, and topping the world charts for QoL. They weren't financially prepared as an aggregate for a downturn and they suffered for it. Nothing special. "The EU’s 2016 huge fine on Apple’s sweetheart deal on Ireland has given pause to many investors." You realize this is a note in my favor, yes? EU nations got salty that Ireland was snatching an inordinate amount of foreign investment. Ireland has to avoid being labeled a shady tax haven by bureaucrats on the taxpayer tit, but a low tax rate on it's own isn't a troubling matter - moreso, it's an issue of allowing companies to offload their profits to 0% Caribbean locales. "Corporations “flocking” to Texas from California is an exaggeration." False. "California’s costly tax and regulatory policies prompted more than 10,000 businesses to leave the state, reduce their operations or curtail plans to locate here between 2008 and 2015, according to a report from Spectrum Location Solutions." "Some move, but they lose a lot given how California has all the talent and non-compete agreements." Right. The manufacturing industry is really missing out on coders and apple pickers. Free movement of illegal workers for agriculture giants; not for white-collar talent! Lol, Cuckhat. "… or just Kansas if you were paying fucking attention." Look at Cuckhat, eating more fake news from LA Times. Kansas is doing fine. A small dip in revenues in 2014, still higher than 2011 before the cuts took effect - same year as fiscal cliff and commodities crash. Record revenues in '15 and '16. Revenue growth and household income growth exceeded their neighbors over the past half-decade. http://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/KSTOTLTAX "Wrong in every way. Companies are motivated by tons of incentives of which the corporate tax rate is only one." Incredibly strawman, Cuckhat. Stating the policy goal of tax cuts is not the same as stating the goal of corporations. "America is attractive because it is a huge market, has an educated workforce, has high respect for property rights; all of which is maintained by a properly functioning government." Then surely there's a reason companies spent years flocking to shitholes like Sierra Leone? Must be the scenery. The number of industries that operate in cutting-edge environments and need highly-educated innovators can be counted on one hand. Most are perfectly happy to dip out to Indonesia if the relocation and transportation costs, alongside political fallout, is mitigated by lower labor and regulatory costs. As with California, certain segments will always flock to the business capital, purely out of an interest driven by density - programmers aren't flocking to San Jose because of non-compete agreements or astronomical regulatory and CoL environments; they're going because that's where the programming jobs are. Plenty of others have and will continue abstaining. "The effective tax rates of corporations is about 27% which is in line with most first-world countries." i.e. loopholes and subsidies. Eliminate them. Statutory rate is the statutory rate. Penny stock corps won't be getting nearly the tax breaks as F500s. "Obama proposed a slight decrease in the corporate tax rate along with more incentives for them to repatriate money when he was president." i.e. he realized that an increasingly globalized economy is seeing increased competition and our #1 OECD corporate tax rate isn't helping. When's the last fucking time a Democrat proposed a tax cut? Rofl. Things have to be pretty bad. "Fuck you for using the term fake news you dumb inbred hillbilly." lawl @ rustled jimmies. Buys into NYT hysteria that reducing corporate taxes will "destroy middle class", apoplectic when called out on it. "kept bringing up Seth Rich and all these other fake news stories." I pointed out that Fake News critiques of "debunked theories" are not "debunked" when perpetrators have not been found - in a thread started by someone else, asking about the topic. Not incredibly controversial, unless your jimmies are rustled. But please, feel free to open about "all these other[s]". "Sure they can be renewed in which case they will bust the budget by even more than $1.5 trillion." $1.5 trillion over 10 years. 10 years after Reagan tax cuts the US went through one of the most incredible economic booms in the history of the nation. And yes, it started before the .com bubble. Not particularly worried. "You really have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about at all. You just literally made something completely up that is 100% wrong and stupid. You fucking imbecile." I.e. the same as you bleating about the Kochs like a tinfoil hat Shill Stein supporter. Jimmies. Rustled. "Love how you completely shirk personal responsibility at the end. Even Republicans are to blame." What part of "I voted against both Democrats and Republicans" are you not getting? Of course they're both to blame. Am I to blame for Congressional legislation? Not unless I have a corner office I don't know about. "The rest of the world can burn as long as you get a tiny-ass tax cut." "Forwyn's so stupid; he thinks this tax bill might actually help him." $16k into the mutual fund doesn't hurt. Cuckhat debunked. "Fuck future generations with higher debt" Children born in '08 called, they want their $9 trillion back.
Forwyn Member	Wed Nov 29 01:01:04 http://www...port-claims-to-have-an-answer/
Trolly McSerious Member	Wed Nov 29 05:23:04 "$1.5 trillion over 10 years. 10 years after Reagan tax cuts the US went through one of the most incredible economic booms in the history of the nation. And yes, it started before the .com bubble. Not particularly worried. " You mean for the rich as the majority of americans didn't benefit from it; By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen. The rich got much richer and there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. This all comes back to wages which was lagging behind inflations. You want to sit there and basically have revisionism attached to the '81 tax cut by Reagan, much of the economic development didn't happened until 15 years or so. This big misconception of this, which you have displayed in your rantings along with your rantings is that you are negating that fact that any tax cut by this magnitude needs to be supported by population growth -- which this administration is in the works of stagnating the growth with various policies that will ultimately retard it. In turn, the current tax proposal which is contrary to idiotic belief, is a big cut for corporations and the ultra rich and again plays of the theory that this will give them the confidence to invest in their companies, hire more workforce while increasing their wages. History has show that has not been the case. History has show that the economy has slowed to the point of recession. See; Reagan, Bush I, Bush II. Income inequality ballooned; the rich got their tax cuts as for the middle class and lower class took on much of the burden and did not reap from major benefits. Why do you think the retirement age gap is so much more prevalent. Or do you think in your fantasy world that it just happens because how we are evolving as a society? Or could it be that the middle and lower classes are so far lagging behind in regards to CEOs and corporations; which are supposed to assist the workforce creating more jobs (in their defense they do with mediocre salaries) that do not keep up with the cost of living, or any marginal raises that mitigates. Sure, feel free to continue to live in that fantasy world, but, most economists and those with an objectionable view and a brain will stick with reality. If Trump gets his tax cuts, this will only expedite the recession that looms as they ignore what is currently working at a steady pace. The impatient fervor that indeed is attaching itself that the "economy needs to be here at this level right now." are always fundamentally clueless how economy works. It is a ripple effect and something that causes waves ultimately causes a regression. http://www...r-education-gap-10-february-12 Oh and your reference to yourself in regards to your 'success' does not equate for the entirety of the economy and nation. "Hey I benefit means it is a success." What a very short-sighted mentality and attitude to have.
Dukhat Member	Wed Nov 29 16:01:06 “Senate plan includes mandate repeal. House plan doesn't. Twitter ramblings are not cause for rising premiums. In any case, Obamacare didn't lower any premiums for me. “ No, but cutting the mandated subsidies increased premiums by at least 10% in many if not most states. That is all on Trump. And Obamacare did lower premiums relative to their previous growth rate. Premiums rises started matching inflation after exceeding it for most of the 90’s and 2000’s. You sound like the GM who blames the football coach who just went 9 and 7 even thought he last 3 seasons, the team went 0 and 16. “We haven't had rampant deficit spending for the entirety of our lives? Fucking lol. “ The Clinton years converted a deficit to a surplus. How convenient for you to forgot that. “You seem to have gathered very little of my actual stances. War can be justifiable, just not by the inane rants of Songbird McCain or "We came, we saw, he died" jihadi-lover Clinton. “ Ripped right from the soundbites of T_D. Both sides rattle the saber to increase the negotiating position of the US in conflicts. Only Dubya was dumb enough to actually go to war. At any rate, neither became president so to claim that they would’ve taken us to war is a falsehood. “Which, according to Cuckhat, are: "hurrrrr lowering muh corporate taxes will cause a recession!" No, my argument is that they are a f*cking waste of taxpayer money when the economy is growing strongly, companies are sitting on huge piles of cash, and we still have a structural deficit. I know it’s hard for your brain to think outside your little far-right box; but grow a fucking brain you so-called “libertarian. "I'm sorry, what part of a Bernie Sanders platform is libertarian? There will always be winners and losers. The libertarian argument is not about determining those winners and losers via government intervention, or wealth redistribution. What an asinine assertion. “ Really flew over your head huh? Nowhere did I advocate Bernie Sanderism. The libertarian argument is to give everyone an equal playing field with government out of the picture. This often comes down to property rights and ensuring everyone has the same marginal tax-rate. The best will rise to the top under these assumptions. When you lower the corporate tax rate to 15% and pass-throughs to the same; you give all the advantages to people who already have money. The working middle-class have an effective higher marginal tax rate. It’s a complete betrayal of libertarianism. But you’re not really a libertarian anyways you closeted Trumpkin. “Slashing taxes is a good thing by any libertarian metric, regardless of debt incurred - debt should be cut by cutting spending. In fact, more radical libertarians vocally cheering skyrocketing debt, because a credit crash seems to be the only realistic scenario in which the Fed is uprooted and a fundamentally sick environment of intrinsic inflationary policy, glued together by ever-increasing QE and lax fractional-reserve banking ends, ends. Perhaps they'll finally be able to put their canned food and silver stockpiles to use. “ LoL, that’s just the new position of the Federalist because they know dumbasses like you will buy it up. No supply-side economist actually advocates that. They want to pay off debt to increase the available funds for private citizens to do the investing and work instead and they want government small. That you somehow twisted this libertarian plank shows how much you’ve been manipulated by far-right media. Get out of your bubble. And as flawed as fiat money is, the gold standard (which Ron Paul always harps on and on about) was definitively worse being one of the primary reasons of the great depression. It altered incentives for countries to stockpile gold instead of seek full employment. “Irish household debt outgrew Irish expansion, certainly you're not proposing that a higher corporate tax rate would have helped? People got used to a couple decades of meteoric growth, and topping the world charts for QoL. They weren't financially prepared as an aggregate for a downturn and they suffered for it. Nothing special. “ Their economic niche was always vulnerable as they didn’t take the short-term gains of companies relocating for corporate taxes and reinvest it into diversifying it’s economy. Your low-corporate-tax meme also paints an incomplete picture of Ireland or companies would all just relocate to tiny pacific island nations. Ireland offered a relatively educated English-speaking population and access to the EU. It actually could’ve had a higher corporate tax rate and gotten more bang for it’s buck in terms of tax windfalls to reinvest. You seem to think that the low corporate-tax rate actually increased employment in Ireland. It created short-term jobs and nothing more as evidenced by the big downturn. The real benefit is being able to tax the corporation and reinvest in more durable jobs. “You realize this is a note in my favor, yes? EU nations got salty that Ireland was snatching an inordinate amount of foreign investment. Ireland has to avoid being labeled a shady tax haven by bureaucrats on the taxpayer tit, but a low tax rate on it's own isn't a troubling matter - moreso, it's an issue of allowing companies to offload their profits to 0% Caribbean locales. “ And the EU has been aggressive in punishing companies for this. The EU and US for that matter has every right to limit access to our markets for tax avoidance. This is not activity that is economically beneficial and lifts every man up like Ayn Rand’s ideal suggests. "California’s costly tax and regulatory policies prompted more than 10,000 businesses to leave the state, reduce their operations or curtail plans to locate here between 2008 and 2015, according to a report from Spectrum Location Solutions." Bad googling. A one-sided report that doesn’t look in aggregate at what businesses did move to California and what the general business environment did. Even in the article, it states that job growth was more or less in line with Texas and California. Not sure how any individual would really care about companies leaving as long as employment is good. That's the normal churn of markets. “Look at Cuckhat, eating more fake news from LA Times. Kansas is doing fine. A small dip in revenues in 2014, still higher than 2011 before the cuts took effect - same year as fiscal cliff and commodities crash. Record revenues in '15 and '16. Revenue growth and household income growth exceeded their neighbors over the past half-decade. “ Some shitty graph is your proof? You’re in T_D territory. It’s so great that’s why republicans joined with Dems to repeal the massive income-tax cuts that cut school hours and services and made Kansas life miserable huh. http://www...to-veto-budget-fixing-tax-hike They did this to meet their obligations to the state’s school system. I feel sorry for your kids when you’re so libertarian you don’t even think kids should get a decent shot at an education. Or maybe you think it’s only for your own kids. Or you have some other idiotic justification that only stands up to scrutiny in T_D. “Incredibly strawman, Cuckhat. Stating the policy goal of tax cuts is not the same as stating the goal of corporations. “ How is it a strawman. If California taxes are so awful why do so many of the most profitable and lucrative businesses out there still have giant offices there. They make more than they lose in taxes; often times much, much more. I’m not saying California’s taxes are great; they should be lower; but the real strawman argument is that lower taxes is good all the time. If public services perform better than their private alternative, then an appropriate amount of taxes to pay for those services is economically efficient. This is why the Nordic countries function so well despite a large government (and yes I know you should probably ignore Norway because their oil makes them look better). “Then surely there's a reason companies spent years flocking to shitholes like Sierra Leone? Must be the scenery. “ Yes, we should lower our corporate tax rate by 15% so as to stop the exodus of a small number of companies going to Sierra Leone. What a fantastic argument. “The number of industries that operate in cutting-edge environments and need highly-educated innovators can be counted on one hand. Most are perfectly happy to dip out to Indonesia if the relocation and transportation costs, alongside political fallout, is mitigated by lower labor and regulatory costs. As with California, certain segments will always flock to the business capital, purely out of an interest driven by density - programmers aren't flocking to San Jose because of non-compete agreements or astronomical regulatory and CoL environments; they're going because that's where the programming jobs are. Plenty of others have and will continue abstaining. “ Even if they are counted on one hand, these are the businesses with the highest margins and growth opportunities right now. What companies are we losing to Indonesia? Shitty manufacturing companies that have margins in the pennies? That will happen no matter what our corporate tax rate is. I know many programmers and yes, a big reason they put up with the shitty COL is because of non-compete which lets them make as much money as their talent lets them in 5 years. There’s a reason other states have not been able to emulate California’s success in tech. The non-compete regulation of California is one of the main reasons they get away with high taxes. Who cares if I get taxed another 10% when I can make easily 50% more by leapfrogging from Apple to Google? For people that have growing careers, their tax burden is a marginal consideration. This same analysis occurs in many blue states and yes, many red suburbs as well. People often pay more taxes in the suburbs of rich states as long as they feel the services go to them. Your "durr low taxes always good" is a fallacy. “i.e. loopholes and subsidies. Eliminate them. Statutory rate is the statutory rate. Penny stock corps won't be getting nearly the tax breaks as F500s. “ I agree, but we should get the most bang for buck possible. Removal of complexity and a flat 27% rate along with incentives to repatriate gets the most bang for buck. Unless you absolutely hate government for no reason and don’t think debt matters at all in which case you support this shit bill. “i.e. he realized that an increasingly globalized economy is seeing increased competition and our #1 OECD corporate tax rate isn't helping. When's the last fucking time a Democrat proposed a tax cut? Rofl. Things have to be pretty bad. “ The first thing Obama did was like pass the stimulus which was about 1/3 tax cuts which many Keynesians were pissed about because they didn’t feel it was efficient. “lawl @ rustled jimmies. Buys into NYT hysteria that reducing corporate taxes will "destroy middle class", apoplectic when called out on it. “ What I don’t get is why you’re so happy to receive literally like 10% of the cost of the bill as a tax cut. Literally 90% of this bill goes to corporations and the super rich to pass off their wealth to their children. This plan would be way more popular if it was like the Bush Tax cuts which was a flat across-the-board tax cut for everyone. It would also be actually more efficient in terms of stimulus as well and closer to libertarian ideal even if still fatally flawed given we are in the midst of a recovery. What made you a whore for corporations that the tiny scraps they throw at you make you happy? You stupid cuck. “$1.5 trillion over 10 years. 10 years after Reagan tax cuts the US went through one of the most incredible economic booms in the history of the nation. And yes, it started before the .com bubble. Not particularly worried. “ Let’s see a bank has a person who applies for a loan with 0 debt and a sterling credit history … vs a person with a 100% debt load and a spotty credit history due to brinksmanship by the GOP in congress. Hmmm … I wonder if the situations are the same at all. “I.e. the same as you bleating about the Kochs like a tinfoil hat Shill Stein supporter.” You’re so f*cking so stupid. It’s sad. “I don’t like what I hear so I just ignore it.” The Kochs have hijacked the party with their fake libertarianism. You willingly gave up any semblance of having principles because you bought all their paid-for propaganda about the Democrats being demons. It’s so sad being an uneducated, white, male Trumpkin. “$16k into the mutual fund doesn't hurt. “ And all you had to do is spread your legs like a whore and take in the ass in other ways. Congrats you cuck. “Children born in '08 called, they want their $9 trillion back.” If you think Obama was responsible for anything more than maybe 10% of that, you are a retard. What did he have to do with the continuation of Bush’s huge deficits and the great recession? But then again you bought all the other far-right shit. Not a surprise you repeat their dumbest talking points.
Forwyn Member	Wed Nov 29 21:14:13 "By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen." Not really true. Late 70s saw a 6% crash in median income, but it had recovered by 1985: http://ass...ploads/sites/3/2008/04/527.gif This was followed by another short crash, and years of growth immediately following NAFTA: http://www.epi.org/files/page/-/old/webfeatures/snapshots/archive/2008/0827/20080827snap750.gif It is true that poverty did not decrease, and by some measures increased, alongside a decrease in manufacturing and demand for unskilled labor. Meanwhile, computer use became more widespread, and pretty clearly delineated along racial lines. http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/14/business/economic-scene-puzzling-poverty-of-the-80-s-boom.html "any tax cut by this magnitude needs to be supported by population growth" Doubling of child tax credit. Low-income immigration is not going to support revenues for at least a generation. "History has show that has not been the case. History has show that the economy has slowed to the point of recession. See; Reagan, Bush I, Bush II." Reagan: comparable to Obama, sluggish growth following a recession. Bush 1: comparable to Carter, a crash following high-growth. Different prescriptions, same outcome, at least in the short term. That really only leaves Bush, and partial blame can easily be assigned to Jimmy Carter and Clinton for the CRA(77) and GLBA(99), ushering in the sub-prime housing bubble. But he was a fucking idiot and deserved his fair share of blame as well. "Every American should own a home." Well, if they can afford it. "Income inequality ballooned; the rich got their tax cuts as for the middle class and lower class took on much of the burden and did not reap from major benefits." Please explain how they're "taking the burden". This makes sense if the tax bracket raises for the middle class. Deficit spending is kicking the can down the road. The middle class of the eighties isn't paying more because the top quintile is paying less. "Oh and your reference to yourself in regards to your 'success' does not equate for the entirety of the economy and nation. "Hey I benefit means it is a success." What a very short-sighted mentality and attitude to have." Don't be silly like Cuckhat. He made an idiotic rant because I made a simple statement: the majority party can pass a tax bill with the help of the minority party if they keep theirs in line. "Forwyn's so stupid; he thinks this tax bill might actually help him." So yeah, I responded. The doubled standard deduction and doubled child credits will create a net gain for me.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: