Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not a bloodbath but I'm expecting a small decline so I can buy. But in the long run, Trump is better for the economy. With Clinton, I don't know how the economy can be great if the tax rate is going to be increased.
Not sure how you can say Trump is better for the economy in the long run. He's proven he can't manage his own money and keep his businesses afloat without declaring bankruptcy, massive tax loss writeoffs, cheating vendors and clients, and illegal, unethical actions. I'm scared for what he'd try to do with other people's (the taxpayers) money.
Not sure how you can say Trump is better for the economy in the long run. He's proven he can't manage his own money and keep his businesses afloat without declaring bankruptcy, massive tax loss writeoffs, cheating vendors and clients, and illegal, unethical actions. I'm scared for what he'd try to do with other people's (the taxpayers) money.
Personal attacks as always. The fact that Hilary will raise tax on most people is the problem. Same with corporate tax. More regulations. On CNBC, Norquist the tax person said that most franchise will have problem with Hilary like McDonald. Uber drivers will be a problem, no more independent contractor.
Not sure how you can say Trump is better for the economy in the long run. He's proven he can't manage his own money and keep his businesses afloat without declaring bankruptcy, massive tax loss writeoffs, cheating vendors and clients, and illegal, unethical actions. I'm scared for what he'd try to do with other people's (the taxpayers) money.
Not to mention that almost all non-partisan experts have declared his economic plan an absolute disaster that would balloon the debt and wreck the economy for a generation, while they've found Clinton's economic plan sound.
Personal attacks as always. The fact that Hilary will raise tax on most people is the problem. Same with corporate tax. More regulations. On CNBC, Norquist the tax person said that most franchise will have problem with Hilary like McDonald. Uber drivers will be a problem, no more independent contractor.
Not quite sure where you saw a personal attack in there. And your first statement incorrect. She would raise taxes on only those in the top 20% or so percentile of income (over $143,000).
Granted, yes, Trump's plan would lower taxes more for everyone, but at the expense of losing healthcare for millions, dropping other services (not necessarily bad depending on what's cut), and further enhancing the already obscene budget deficit. Short term GDP growth would be positive, but 10-year outlooks under his plan are abysmal for government revenue, debt, and overall government financial health.
Corporate taxes WOULD go down significantly, but this is offset by the high trade tariffs Trump is looking to impose. Imposing 35% tariffs on Mexican and Chinese goods is going to severely hamper imports from countries (can you imagine what would happen to Walmart, the largest employer in the US when their prices suddenly shoot up on 3/4 of their goods?). Thousands of retailers would be decimated, especially those catering to the poorest individuals because countries like China and Mexico are the biggest providers of their goods. Not to mention that those countries are going to retaliate and impose similar tariffs on US goods, hindering exports of American goods to those markets. A great number of US companies would stand to lose a lot if they can't grow in some of the fastest growing consumption markets in the world. That's going to affect thousands if not millions of American jobs.
Finally, this isolationist economic policy is going to destroy the relative value of the US dollar. It's currently the global standard, but Trump policies will almost certainly accelerate a transition away from it being that standard. That will dramatically affect all markets and will essentially halt foreign investment in US companies and equities.
If you want to know why the market jumped up today after the news of the Clinton e-mail thing being dropped, now you know why. Because more investors see her higher chance of winning as a positive. If somehow Trump wins you can bet there will be a massive pullout from the markets, just like there was with Brexit but on a larger scale. The British pound is down 20% relative to the dollar since Brexit (as of end of October) and still generally falling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
Not to mention that almost all non-partisan experts have declared his economic plan an absolute disaster that would balloon the debt and wreck the economy for a generation, while they've found Clinton's economic plan sound.
Ah, that old anti-intellectualism argument: "Knowledge is bad; doing whatever gets our right-wing rocks off is good."
I've posted this Isaac Asimov quote before, but it seems to be more and more relevant with each passing day:
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"
Not quite sure where you saw a personal attack in there. And your first statement incorrect. She would raise taxes on only those in the top 20% or so percentile of income (over $143,000).
Granted, yes, Trump's plan would lower taxes more for everyone, but at the expense of losing healthcare for millions, dropping other services (not necessarily bad depending on what's cut), and further enhancing the already obscene budget deficit. Short term GDP growth would be positive, but 10-year outlooks under his plan are abysmal for government revenue, debt, and overall government financial health.
Corporate taxes WOULD go down significantly, but this is offset by the high trade tariffs Trump is looking to impose. Imposing 35% tariffs on Mexican and Chinese goods is going to severely hamper imports from countries (can you imagine what would happen to Walmart, the largest employer in the US when their prices suddenly shoot up on 3/4 of their goods?). Thousands of retailers would be decimated, especially those catering to the poorest individuals because countries like China and Mexico are the biggest providers of their goods. Not to mention that those countries are going to retaliate and impose similar tariffs on US goods, hindering exports of American goods to those markets. A great number of US companies would stand to lose a lot if they can't grow in some of the fastest growing consumption markets in the world. That's going to affect thousands if not millions of American jobs.
Finally, this isolationist economic policy is going to destroy the relative value of the US dollar. It's currently the global standard, but Trump policies will almost certainly accelerate a transition away from it being that standard. That will dramatically affect all markets and will essentially halt foreign investment in US companies and equities.
If you want to know why the market jumped up today after the news of the Clinton e-mail thing being dropped, now you know why. Because more investors see her higher chance of winning as a positive. If somehow Trump wins you can bet there will be a massive pullout from the markets, just like there was with Brexit but on a larger scale. The British pound is down 20% relative to the dollar since Brexit (as of end of October) and still generally falling.
This.
Surprisingly, Chinese prefer Donald Trump as president. You think with the thread of high tarrifs thread they would prefer Clinton. It was on CNBC, I didn't make it up.
Surprisingly, Chinese prefer Donald Trump as president. You think with the thread of high tarrifs thread they would prefer Clinton. It was on CNBC, I didn't make it up.
That was a misinterpretation of the available data. WaPo cleared it up about a week and a half ago: China's state-run newspapers mention Trump about five times as often as they mention Clinton. That was erroneously interpreted as support for Trump over Clinton. (It should be noted that since that disparity was noted, in June, the disparity has almost, but not completely, evaporated. Regardless...) However, you actually need to read and understand what they're saying in order to determine whom they "prefer". Clinton has pretty much all the way through maintained at least a 5% advantage over Trump in terms of the percentage of positive coverage in Chinese state-run media.
I'm not sure but I guess a lot of the excess coverage of Trump was about how much of a buffoon he is, and how dangerous he'd be to world security, rather than any kind of support for him. What seems to underlie Chinese preference for Clinton is the fact that China is more dependent on world economic security and they figure that a Trump presidency is far more likely to plunge the world into worldwide economic depression.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
