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.
Meh......... The same old nutcases appear every time. They screech about the country being controlled by "The Elite" and if that nonsensical notion is challenged they just find another way to promote their anger.
I ain't buying it.
Most people are getting a tax cut, and that is far, far better than Washington sending out a trillion dollars to their selected entities and organizations thought to be sympathetic to the Democratic cause. And that's what Obama did.
If the tax law works out well and America thrives, two things are likely to happen:
1) Democrats who voted against the bill will be asked to explain themselves.
2) It will be renewed when the time comes.
It'll be fine.
Why do Republicans admit that they have to pass this tax bill in order to get the campaign funding they need from the ruling donor class?
Do you seriously deny that the billionaire class (the elite) dont have massive influence over policy?
If the tax law works out well and America thrives, two things are likely to happen:
1) Democrats who voted against the bill will be asked to explain themselves.
2) It will be renewed when the time comes.
It'll be fine.
And if the tax cut fails to produce much economic growth, and we are left with a massive hole in the deficit, then what is likely to happen?
If this tax bill is for working Americans, then why do a majority of Americans oppose it? And don't give me the "the polls could be wrong" nonsense because more people oppose it than support it even after accounting for a hefty margin of error.
And if the tax bill is so wonderful, why are most prominent economists not in favor of it?
But most people haven't done the right thing. 10,000 boomers retire every day and only a small % of them have more than $100,000 in savings. This is going to generate a fiscal crisis of epic proportions in the decades to come.
Well do you want the government to mandate the "right thing" for everyone to do? Lets start with making sure we are all on the same page and never push back against the government, right? I mean they know whats best for us. I propose that if anyone pushes back on the government, and they don't go along with whats "best for us" as they mandate, they get sent to a camp where they mine coal for our "energy program" or other national interests so we can all prosper together in whats "best for everyone" kind of like our dear friends in North Korea.
You don't want to fix the problem. You just need the leverage in class warfare, to get what you want.
If you really and seriously wanted to fix the problem, we would be talking in union about repealing the 16th Amendment and to restore the 10th Amendment. That would get Government out of our lives to some extent.
And totally end the collective Communist whining, about wanting and then taking other peoples money.
Class warfare against the working class has been going on for 40 years now. Deregulation of Wall Street, anti-worker trade deals, erosion of the minimum wage, weakening anti-trust legislation, destroying unions, no-bid government contracts to well connected elites, the list is endless of measures that benefit the super rich at the expense of working class folks.
But you are advocating for oligarchy because you are advocating for extreme income and wealth inequality. This leads to a huge disparity of power between the haves and the have-nots. Power is a zero sum game and the ruling class will thus be the well-heeled elites who can rig the courts and get the preferred policies they want. Why is the ruling donor class advocating for this tax cut for the rich? This is what they want as they have funded the campaigns of the puppets in DC. Working class folks dont have the power to sway these people. And the media is of course owned by the same ruling class. Who owns "far left liberal" MSNBC? General Electric. Not the "metal workers of America".
How am I advocating for extreme income" (whatever the hell that even means) and wealth inequality? The current tax code and the proposed one are both progressive as hell and as success increases, so too does the tax penalty. The proposed system places less of a tax barrier on moving upwards economically, that is true, but how is that a bad thing? Making everyone in America more economically mobile is a positive thing. What each individual chooses to do with that increased mobility is up to them, but having increased opportunity even if only by an extra dollar or two, is a good thing.
I am in the middle class and I am projected to get a pretty decent cut in my taxes. Why would I oppose my increase in retained income just because someone else who makes more than me will be seeing a slightly larger increase in theirs? Why would I oppose a cut in the corporate tax rate, which will (over time) result in lower prices, higher consumer confidence, and more resilient and stable GDP? Sure, the board members and corporate officers will see a lion's share of that particular cut compared to me, but so what? My personal situation improves across the board, and I have more financial "freedom" than I had before. No reason to oppose that which is better for me.
Many will see more money.
That's not the issue here. When the country can't pay it's debts, when programs are cut that leads to more crime, drug use, etc (has happened in the past), when the shat hits the fan because we're not getting enough funding for everything else we rely on.....let's see how "great" this country is.
But hey, you'll have a few extra bucks in your pockets, and you'll convince yourselves that liberals are mad because it somehow ends "liberalism" in this country.
in every single tax cutting event from JFK to present, tax RECIEPTS have risen.
its duplicitous to suggest cutting taxes cust actual dollars from government. History simply does not support that position.
And if the tax cut fails to produce much economic growth, and we are left with a massive hole in the deficit, then what is likely to happen?
If this tax bill is for working Americans, then why do a majority of Americans oppose it? And don't give me the "the polls could be wrong" nonsense because more people oppose it than support it even after accounting for a hefty margin of error.
And if the tax bill is so wonderful, why are most prominent economists not in favor of it?
non-biased folks know perfectly well that this isnt meant to promote economic growth. Thats not what the GOP is interested in. The ruling class is interested in increasing inequality and turning America more into Latin America to protect their status and power from any challenge. Thats whats going. The GOP is basically open about this. They dont listen to economists, they listen to their donors with their vested interests, harming America.
I use my money to invest to make more money... Ironically, the investment in America is what makes America so successful... when I start investing in OTHER COUNTRIES... its because you liberals ruined America... and I will still make money overseas and KEEP IT THERE...
How am I advocating for extreme income" (whatever the hell that even means) and wealth inequality? The current tax code and the proposed one are both progressive as hell and as success increases, so too does the tax penalty. The proposed system places less of a tax barrier on moving upwards economically, that is true, but how is that a bad thing? Making everyone in America more economically mobile is a positive thing. What each individual chooses to do with that increased mobility is up to them, but having increased opportunity even if only by an extra dollar or two, is a good thing.
I am in the middle class and I am projected to get a pretty decent cut in my taxes. Why would I oppose my increase in retained income just because someone else who makes more than me will be seeing a slightly larger increase in theirs? Why would I oppose a cut in the corporate tax rate, which will (over time) result in lower prices, higher consumer confidence, and more resilient and stable GDP? Sure, the board members and corporate officers will see a lion's share of that particular cut compared to me, but so what? My personal situation improves across the board, and I have more financial "freedom" than I had before. No reason to oppose that which is better for me.
Because when you dismiss inequality as irrelevant, as you clearly do, claiming that it doesnt matter that it increases, then you are dismissing how power functions. Power IS a zero-sum game. You WILL have less power to influence the society you live in when a tiny super rich elite control huge amounts of the wealth and income. Stable GDP? Stock buybacks and dividends will increase, inequality will increase, democracy will decline. Already, the vast majority of Americans feel that they have no real say in the political system as big money donors decide policy behind closed doors. Why do you want to accelerate that trend?
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.
