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.
Now? It has been true for decades. The current $27 trillion worth of investments didn't appear in US workers'/retirees' pension/retirement accounts overnight.
Only the financially illiterate have no clue that the working class directly benefits tremendously when corporations prosper.
Whether or not they will prosper remains to be seen. It depends on what loopholes were removed. Until now the effective corporate tax rate has been 18%, so if loopholes were removed, it could remain around the same range. If nothing was removed, then the effective rate will be lower.
Wow. Lefties are really angry that Trump got something done. Even if something helps the middle class, like reducing their taxes, doesn't simultaneously play into the left's class warfare, identity politics agenda they will go crazy.
The GOP must cut spending to go along with these tax cuts to keep the national debt from ballooning even more.
I would caution you liberal whackadoos against counting on the Dems taking over congress next year. The economy is improving and if it continues to do so over the next year there is no way (except voter fraud which is the dems specialty) that the Dems regain control of Congress.
"for authorizing spending which will add $10 trillion to the debt?"
What are you going to say when that does NOT happen?
Keep in mind the left said the SAME thing for the W. Bush tax cuts and the debt went DOWN after it took affect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
So here is a question for any Republicans/Conservatives in this thread: Do you want to step up and defend Quick Enough's claim that the debt decreased under W? If so, please give some references for your source of information.
Also: do you think that the debt will not increase? I'd like to know which economists support your views, so please give references.
I think I can safely give up on hearing any conservatives defend Quick Enough's claim about the debt decreasing under W. Even Quick Enough seems to have abandoned that faux pas.
But I am still waiting for some Trump supporters to offer some references to professional economists who are predicting that the deficit will decrease because of this tax bill. I'm sure there have to be some such economists. I just want to see people give some references.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 12-20-2017 at 09:24 AM..
I think I can safely give up on hearing any conservatives defend Quick Enough's claim about the debt decreasing under W. Even Quick Enough seems to have abandoned that faux pas.
But I am still waiting for some Trump supporters to offer some references to professional economists who are predicting that the deficit will decrease because of this tax bill. I'm sure there have to be some such economists. I just want to see people give some references.
Giving up waiting on conservatives to provide proof for anything they claim in this forum is the standard now. I've asked for proof for a lot of things they've said and not once have they provided any. Case in point; earlier in this thread a someone posted that the US is a communist country. I asked them to provide proof to back up their claim. So far none has been provided.
You are only looking at disposable income to define quality of living, and that is rather simplistic I would argue.
As others have stated, one does not necessarily need more disposable income if much of the services that contribute to a higher quality of life are addressed more efficiently.
Let's look at some QOL rankings - lots of usual subjects here, such as the Nordic countries - what country isn't high on the list (or present at all)? The US
I think I can safely give up on hearing any conservatives defend Quick Enough's claim about the debt decreasing under W. Even Quick Enough seems to have abandoned that faux pas.
But I am still waiting for some Trump supporters to offer some references to professional economists who are predicting that the deficit will decrease because of this tax bill. I'm sure there have to be some such economists. I just want to see people give some references.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
Giving up waiting on conservatives to provide proof for anything they claim in this forum is the standard now. I've asked for proof for a lot of things they've said and not once have they provided any.
Yes, this is a trend I've noticed in lots of threads on various issues. Some liberals are guilty too, of course, but it seems to me that conservatives have totally mastered the art of evading or obfuscating all references to verifiable data. I would feel utterly foolish trying to make any claim without given some sort of reference to some source of information about the claim.
And just to be clear: I'm not even asking for "proof" of anything. I'm simply asking for references to the sources of information. I fully expect that, in a majority of cases, the conservatives will reference Breitbart News or an opinion articles or blog post. That's fine! I'm mostly just looking for transparency about the sources of information and opinions.
Now, ideally, we ought to be able to go to these sources and track down some empirical data or a professional scientist or economist or whomever serving as the ultimate source for the viewpoint. What I often find with conservative claims, however, is that the tracks generally just go in circles, form opinion to opinion to opinion without really ever connecting to verifiable data.
My hope is that conservatives will take up the challenge and prove me wrong. Ideally, some of them might even do some of the legwork themselves and track down their claims to verifiable empirical data.
Let me give an example: In an earlier post I said that my impression was that most economists did not expect this tax bill to decrease the national debt. Here is a reference: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3d8550390dc0
Quote from the article: Thirty-seven of 38 experts surveyed by the University of Chicago's Initiative on Global Markets agreed that the GOP tax bills in Congress would cause U.S. debt to increase "substantially" faster than the economy.
Now I know that most conservatives will just laugh at my reference to the Washington Post - pretty much the same way that many liberals would laugh at a reference to Breitbart - but that's okay. As I said, I'm really just looking for transparency about sources. Now I would ask conservatives to critique the Post article by referencing other sources and other data. The Post article names names and references a survey by the University of Chicago. Show me that this article is wrong. Don't just say "it's hogwash" - anyone can say that. Show me that it is wrong.
Now? It has been true for decades. The current $27 trillion worth of investments didn't appear in US workers'/retirees' pension/retirement accounts overnight.
Only the financially illiterate have no clue that the working class directly benefits tremendously when corporations prosper.
You are assuming that the corporations will reward investors as a result of this tax cut and overseas money returning. When GW Bush gave companies amnesty back in 2003 to repatriate off shore funds guess where it went, stock buy backs and executive compensation. I'm not even sure that large corporations will even benefit since on average they pay in the low 20's.
Simple. Based on most polls showing a democratic majority in 2018. Show me where you wishful thinking says this law lasts more than one year? You can't.
What a loony response. Hell, even loonier than most responses from leftists in this forum. Firstly, Dems aren't going to win a majority of anything in 2018. Secondly, you do realize that, even if they did, Trump would still be president and would never allow them to dismantle his signature achievement to date (i.e. he'd veto any bill of repeal quickly). Much like Obama wielded his veto pen (or the threat thereof) regarding efforts to repeal Obamacare.
So, again, even if you were right about majorities changing, how does that spell doom of this law in a year??
I think I can safely give up on hearing any conservatives defend Quick Enough's claim about the debt decreasing under W. Even Quick Enough seems to have abandoned that faux pas.
But I am still waiting for some Trump supporters to offer some references to professional economists who are predicting that the deficit will decrease because of this tax bill. I'm sure there have to be some such economists. I just want to see people give some references.
Come on, just head over to the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute and you will see some of those Pulitzer Prize winning economists supporting this.
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.
