• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The trump tax cuts have given us 4, 5, 6 % growth and paid for themselves

Tbird19482 said:
LOL
it was I who showed you that the people that run the " Debt clock " used info from the US treasury to correct their clock several times a week
I have posted a lot more facts then you have and I am the one that backed them up showing you where I got my info
It is you that doesn't hardly back up what you post
Now you say paying taxes on SS benefits had nothing to do with Trump OR the REPUBLICANS
well I never said it had anything to do with TRUMP
Your just trying to change what I said AGAIN.
but as for the Republicans having nothing to do with it that is a lie.
well it was started under REAGAN , wasn't he a Republican?
and here is where you can read the facts about it
WildTangent Games for HP - Top Games
and again I show you where I got my info , like I do most of the time and YOU don't
Have a nice day
Click to expand...
I do not know how that site got on there but here is the search I did that tells us it was started under Reagan
Under what President did people on SS start to pay income taxes on it - Google Search
sorry have a nice day
 
Tbird19482 said:
LOL
it was I who showed you that the people that run the " Debt clock " used info from the US treasury to correct their clock several times a week
I have posted a lot more facts then you have and I am the one that backed them up showing you where I got my info
It is you that doesn't hardly back up what you post
Now you say paying taxes on SS benefits had nothing to do with Trump OR the REPUBLICANS
well I never said it had anything to do with TRUMP
Your just trying to change what I said AGAIN.
but as for the Republicans having nothing to do with it that is a lie.
well it was started under REAGAN , wasn't he a Republican?
and here is where you can read the facts about it
WildTangent Games for HP - Top Games
and again I show you where I got my info , like I do most of the time and YOU don't
Have a nice day
Click to expand...

All I hear from you is complaints about red states getting more revenue from the federal gov't vs. blue states but never why you believe you should be deducting fully your state and local taxes from your federal return, a deduction that the Red states don't have

Your debt clock doesn't address context and it is context that matters. Mandates have nothing to do with Federal Income taxes paid and go to the states based upon federal laws created thus to both Democrat and Republican citizens, FIT is paid by employed income earning Americans and the states with the most people are going to pay the highest total dollar amount in FIT. California has the highest population in the nation, pays the most in FIT due to that population and yet gets the most dollars back from the federal gov't from the mandates. You have a nice day and of course by all means never let context get in the way of your partisanship and civics ignorance
 
jpn said:
You want to use a time span that begins later? You can't because people haven't had a chance to die yet!
Click to expand...

Ahh the old everyone is going to die argument dismissed. you guys seriously need to get new arguments these are simply getting old.


That may be the point you're trying to make. The point you're actually making is that you're still learning. Which is okay, we all start somewhere. At least you're interested, which is more than many Americans. I just wish you'd use mainstream sources so you get the accepted data serious people use to make decisions. There's a great deal of misinformation out there, and it takes some sophistication to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Life expectancy for less wealthy Americans is declining. They live on average 10 fewer years than an upper income person. So slashing taxes for the wealthy while trying to repeal health care for poorer Americans is just sick. Here's what
Click to expand...

This is what we call correlation without causation fallacy.
There are other reasons behind this than money. Even when i was far from rich and making 12 bucks
and hour i was still able to live pretty healthy.

I don't smoke and i don't drink excessively i walk and get some exercise.

No one slashes taxes for the wealthy this is where you argument dies in dishonest.

If I give a tax cut to EVERYONE. then EVERYONE gets a tax cut.
when it comes down to dollars the more money you make of course you are going to see a bigger tax cut in dollars.

also you have to understand that when you get into the money not all money is treated equally.
Most wealthier people make their money via capital gains. The sell of stocks etc ...
Depending on when they buy and sell the capital investment.

also you are taxed based on how much you make.
Understanding Long-Term vs. Short-Term Capital Gains Tax Rates

here are the tax charts for long term capital gains.
short term capital gains is considered regular income.

most of the tax returns went to people that own LLC or corp S type companies were they claim their business income on
their personal taxes.

Yes you are spreading a lot of misinformation you should stop.

A person making 50k a year that doesn't have to pay taxes on the first 25k is way more ahead than the millionaire that saved 10k dollars.
 
Conservative said:
All I hear from you is complaints about red states getting more revenue from the federal gov't vs. blue states but never why you believe you should be deducting fully your state and local taxes from your federal return, a deduction that the Red states don't have

Your debt clock doesn't address context and it is context that matters. Mandates have nothing to do with Federal Income taxes paid and go to the states based upon federal laws created thus to both Democrat and Republican citizens, FIT is paid by employed income earning Americans and the states with the most people are going to pay the highest total dollar amount in FIT. California has the highest population in the nation, pays the most in FIT due to that population and yet gets the most dollars back from the federal gov't from the mandates. You have a nice day and of course by all means never let context get in the way of your partisanship and civics ignorance
Click to expand...
Everybody has to love how you keep trying to change the subject and run away
What has the red state blue state thing have to do with what we were talking about
Again even when the Higher taxed states could deduct their property taxes they were paying more into the Fed. Gov. and getting less back then the lower taxed states. ( and I have posted where I got these facts several times on here ) and now that they can't deduct them they are paying more in and getting less back
You have never shown us where you got the Idea that it was the lower taxed red states that were funding the higher taxed Blue states
again keep trying to change the subject and run away because it is you that very seldom backs up what he posts
Have a nice day
 
Tbird19482 said:
Everybody has to love how you keep trying to change the subject and run away
What has the red state blue state thing have to do with what we were talking about
Again even when the Higher taxed states could deduct their property taxes they were paying more into the Fed. Gov. and getting less back then the lower taxed states. ( and I have posted where I got these facts several times on here ) and now that they can't deduct them they are paying more in and getting less back
You have never shown us where you got the Idea that it was the lower taxed red states that were funding the higher taxed Blue states
again keep trying to change the subject and run away because it is you that very seldom backs up what he posts
Have a nice day
Click to expand...

I don't change the subject I destroy your posts with facts, logic and common sense. You seem to have a problem remember exactly what you post.

What part of population growth affecting Income taxes don't you understand?? California has what 38 million residents and probably the largest labor force in the nation so why wouldn't that state be paying more dollars in FIT than others? What you don't seem to understand is that California gets the most dollars back from the federal gov't as well.

Just another subject you know nothing about or refuse to acknowledge, mandates vs FIT. It sure doesn't seem to bother you that you have had your state and local taxes fully deducted for years while Red States don't have those high state and local taxes to discuss. How selfish of you and interesting that you divert from that reality while focusing on a subject that has nothing to do with FIT

Maybe you ought to have a nice day by going to the library and doing some research on these issues before spouting and showing ignorance
 
Conservative said:
I don't change the subject I destroy your posts with facts, logic and common sense. You seem to have a problem remember exactly what you post.

What part of population growth affecting Income taxes don't you understand?? California has what 38 million residents and probably the largest labor force in the nation so why wouldn't that state be paying more dollars in FIT than others? What you don't seem to understand is that California gets the most dollars back from the federal gov't as well.

Just another subject you know nothing about or refuse to acknowledge, mandates vs FIT. It sure doesn't seem to bother you that you have had your state and local taxes fully deducted for years while Red States don't have those high state and local taxes to discuss. How selfish of you and interesting that you divert from that reality while focusing on a subject that has nothing to do with FIT

Maybe you ought to have a nice day by going to the library and doing some research on these issues before spouting and showing ignorance
Click to expand...
and even with being able to deduct those taxes the Blue higher taxed states still paid more in then they got back and now that they can't deduct those taxes they are paying in more then they did before and still not getting any where near back as they pay in.
You keep saying it is the RED low taxed states that are funding the higher taxed Blue states and yet you can't back that statement up with some facts
I and several people on here have backed up what we said and showed you where the higher taxed states pay in a lot more then they get back and the lower taxed Red states get back a lot more then they pay in
YOU tried to say it was because people on SS were moving to the red states and I showed you where there are more people on SS in some of the higher taxed blue states ( that don't get as much back as they pay in ) then in a lot of the lower taxed red states.
So again it is a fact that it is the higher taxed states that are funding the lower taxed states not the other way around
IF the states got that fed. money back on a per person percentage the higher taxed states would be getting back more and the lower taxed states would have to either cut programs that are now funded by the money coming back to them from the Fed. gov. or raise their taxes
I can see it gong back to the way things were in the 50's and 60's where the lower taxed states use to buy people a ticket on a bus and send them to the higher taxed states where they still could get the programs the lower taxed states , If that happens again I hope the higher taxed states pass a law that you have to lve in the state 2 years before you can get on these programs.
again it is the Higher taxed states that fund the lower taxed states and I and several other people on here have been able to back that fact up
It is YOU that keeps running yourmouth off and saying it is the other way around but has never been able to back that statement up with facts
have a nice day
 
ludin said:
No one slashes taxes for the wealthy this is where you argument dies in dishonest.
Click to expand...

Your posts are painful to try to read. Why don't you slow down and try writing in a manner that promotes understanding? The sentence above is just pitiful, but it's representative of how you write.

It's scary to think perhaps this is how thoughts are formulated in your brain. But it would explain a lot...
 
Mycroft said:
Can you read?

The article said 7 in 10 owners...keep in mind these are small business owners...reinvested "MORE" than a quarter of their savings back into their business....not "at least". And your "converse way to say it" is not substantiated by anything in that article. These small business owners are not "rich people", but their businesses certainly benefited from the tax cut. 69% of them say they have.

But hey...it appears you have a hard on for rich people. So it goes...
Click to expand...

And you suddenly have a hard on for trillion $ deficits So it goes....:lamo
 
Tbird19482 said:
and even with being able to deduct those taxes the Blue higher taxed states still paid more in then they got back and now that they can't deduct those taxes they are paying in more then they did before and still not getting any where near back as they pay in.
You keep saying it is the RED low taxed states that are funding the higher taxed Blue states and yet you can't back that statement up with some facts
I and several people on here have backed up what we said and showed you where the higher taxed states pay in a lot more then they get back and the lower taxed Red states get back a lot more then they pay in
YOU tried to say it was because people on SS were moving to the red states and I showed you where there are more people on SS in some of the higher taxed blue states ( that don't get as much back as they pay in ) then in a lot of the lower taxed red states.
So again it is a fact that it is the higher taxed states that are funding the lower taxed states not the other way around
IF the states got that fed. money back on a per person percentage the higher taxed states would be getting back more and the lower taxed states would have to either cut programs that are now funded by the money coming back to them from the Fed. gov. or raise their taxes
I can see it gong back to the way things were in the 50's and 60's where the lower taxed states use to buy people a ticket on a bus and send them to the higher taxed states where they still could get the programs the lower taxed states , If that happens again I hope the higher taxed states pass a law that you have to lve in the state 2 years before you can get on these programs.
again it is the Higher taxed states that fund the lower taxed states and I and several other people on here have been able to back that fact up
It is YOU that keeps running yourmouth off and saying it is the other way around but has never been able to back that statement up with facts
have a nice day
Click to expand...

What part of population impacting FIT don't you understand with regards to FIT revenue collected? Apples vs. Oranges are what you try to compare!!

There is no comparison between FIT revenue and Mandate expenses. get that through that head of yours
 
iguanaman said:
And you suddenly have a hard on for trillion $ deficits So it goes....:lamo
Click to expand...

Your ignorance of the deficits are on full display, Trump's deficits due to entitlement and debt service expenses, Obama due to loss of taxpayers and massive gov't spending. The ignorance of the left is staggering
 
Conservative said:
Your ignorance of the deficits are on full display, Trump's deficits due to entitlement and debt service expenses, Obama due to loss of taxpayers and massive gov't spending. The ignorance of the left is staggering
Click to expand...

So Trump did not just sign a $738 BILLION defense budget?
 
iguanaman said:
So Trump did not just sign a $738 BILLION defense budget?
Click to expand...

Probably, out of a 4.8 trillion dollar budget? How much should that defense of 330 million Americans be? Ever read the Constitution especially the Preamble? What is the basic role of the Federal gov't and why then is 15% of the budget a problem for you? Now run off again like most liberals
 
Conservative said:
Probably, out of a 4.8 trillion dollar budget? How much should that defense of 330 million Americans be? Ever read the Constitution especially the Preamble? What is the basic role of the Federal gov't and why then is 15% of the budget a problem for you? Now run off again like most liberals
Click to expand...

It's money we don't have and full of waste and graft. It is also the least efficient at growing the GDP of all Govt. spending. It is over half of our discretionary spending and nearly as much as the entire rest of the world spends on defense.

2019_trumpdiscretionarybudget-300x208.png


0053_defense_comparison-full.gif
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
It's money we don't have and full of waste and graft. It is also the least efficient at growing the GDP of all Govt. spending. It is over half of our discretionary spending and nearly as much as the entire rest of the world spends on defense.

2019_trumpdiscretionarybudget-300x208.png


0053_defense_comparison-full.gif
Click to expand...

And you have a problem with the gov't doing the major duty required of the Constitution? 15% of the budget is too much for you?? 9/11 cost this country over a trillion dollars according to GAO but 738 billion is too much?? Wonder if you would change if you had a relative killed by radicals?

Which of those countries has 330 million people and how do you know how much China is spending on defense? Why is this even relative? 15% on Defense, doubt you would find anyone other than radicals to complain about that number so let's cut the defense budget, how much???
 
ludin said:
Cool so people were able to keep 250 b of their own money and spend it back into the economy than giving it to the government
Click to expand...

The people who got the majority of the tax cuts are the people who will not spend the money back into the economy. It's for this reason that tax cuts are not stimulative unless they go to people who will spend the proceeds. The people most likely to spend the proceeds do not make enough money to really get a reduction in tax liability.
 
Kushinator said:
The people who got the majority of the tax cuts are the people who will not spend the money back into the economy. It's for this reason that tax cuts are not stimulative unless they go to people who will spend the proceeds. The people most likely to spend the proceeds do not make enough money to really get a reduction in tax liability.
Click to expand...

quote dishonesty you lose. have a nice day.
 
ludin said:
quote dishonesty you lose. have a nice day.
Click to expand...

No, this statement above is an example of cowardice. Tax cuts are a poor form of economic stimulus in a society with severe inequality and heavy personal debt levels.
 
Kushinator said:
No, this statement above is an example of cowardice. Tax cuts are a poor form of economic stimulus in a society with severe inequality and heavy personal debt levels.
Click to expand...

That is pure and total ignorance and someone who has no clue as to the components of GDP. In your world everyone apparently should be working for the gov't. Cowardice?? The only cowards I see here are liberals placing blame, name calling, promoting jealousy and class envy along with the politics of personal destruction. 56% of the American public supports the Job Trump is doing on the economy, you apparently aren't in that number. There is nothing independent in anything you post.
 
Kushinator said:
No, this statement above is an example of cowardice. Tax cuts are a poor form of economic stimulus in a society with severe inequality and heavy personal debt levels.
Click to expand...

no the statement above is based in fact. you dishonestly quoted me you lose pretty simple.
now you present a strawman.

our system doesn't really care about inequality. YOu should probably learn how our money system is managed and
that inequality is only an issue with zero sum systems. since we do not have a zero sum system inequality doesn't matter.

it doesn't matter if someone has 10m and you have 50k.

Heavy personal debt levels is a personal choice. I am as of right now pretty much debt free except for an affordable car loan.
and mortgage.
 
jpn said:
That may be the point you're trying to make. The point you're actually making is that you're still learning. Which is okay, we all start somewhere. ]
Click to expand...

I can see youre more interested in being condescending. No need to continue this.
 
Kushinator said:
The people who got the majority of the tax cuts are the people who will not spend the money back into the economy. It's for this reason that tax cuts are not stimulative unless they go to people who will spend the proceeds. The people most likely to spend the proceeds do not make enough money to really get a reduction in tax liability.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's called the multiplier effect. Colloquially known as "bang-for-the-buck." Highest multiplier effect: giving money to poor people. Because they spend it immediately, returning it to the economy. Lowest multiplier effect: Tax cuts for the rich who tend so sit on it. And right now we have WAY too much money sitting around, looking for somewhere to go.

BondPrices.jpg
 
jpn said:
Exactly. It's called the multiplier effect. Colloquially known as "bang-for-the-buck." Highest multiplier effect: giving money to poor people. Because they spend it immediately, returning it to the economy. Lowest multiplier effect: Tax cuts for the rich who tend so sit on it. And right now we have WAY too much money sitting around, looking for somewhere to go.

View attachment 67274121
Click to expand...

I don't expect a response from you but I do expect continued ignorant posts and arrogance from you. How do you know what people do with more of their money? Do they bury it in the back yard and why does it bother you so much seeing others keeping more of what they earn. You and the poster you are quoting are nothing but typical left wing radicals living in liberal areas and brainwashed by rhetoric. Both of you are supposedly books smart but no understanding of human behavior nor does context matter to you. The American people get it, you probably never will and will have to deal with Trump for another 5 years. I assume you aren't part of the 56% of Americans supporting the Trump economy as actual Trump results are ignored. The American people have a very unique way of proving people like you wrong, the vote for their own best interest not your lies, distortions or out of context pretty charts and graphs

Unemployment Rate 4.7% January 2017 vs. 3.6% today

Employed 152.2 million January 2017 to 157.9 million today so 6 million job growth from 2008 to 2017(146 million to 152 million) is celebrated but 6.7 million growth I the last two years isn't!! LOL

U-6 in January 2017 9.3% vs 6.9% today? Wow!! 2.4% better U-6 obviously meaningless to you

Part time for economic reasons, 5.7 million January 2017 vs. 4.2 million today? Looks to me that incredible job growth you claim was boosted by part time jobs

African American unemployment 8.0% vs. 6.0% today? That explains the surge in support from African Americans for Trump
 
Conservative said:
I don't expect a response from you but I do expect continued ignorant posts and arrogance from you. How do you know what people do with more of their money?
Click to expand...
Um, it has been a matter of study for a while, which is why they came up with terms like "multiplier effect".
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Um, it has been a matter of study for a while, which is why they came up with terms like "multiplier effect".
Click to expand...

You don't seem to grasp reality and the real multiplier effect of people keeping and spending more of their own money


Unemployment Rate 4.7% January 2017 vs. 3.6% today

Employed 152.2 million January 2017 to 157.9 million today so 6 million job growth from 2008 to 2017(146 million to 152 million) is celebrated but 6.7 million growth I the last two years isn't!! LOL

U-6 in January 2017 9.3% vs 6.9% today? Wow!! 2.4% better U-6 obviously meaningless to you

Part time for economic reasons, 5.7 million January 2017 vs. 4.2 million today? Looks to me that incredible job growth you claim was boosted by part time jobs

African American unemployment 8.0% vs. 6.0% today? That explains the surge in support from African Americans for Trump


Keep showing your liberal ignorance, arrogance and refusal to admit you are wrong on any subject. What is it about liberalism that creates people like you?
 
Conservative said:
You don't seem to grasp reality
Click to expand...
No, I've got firm grasp, and if you keep up the personal insults, I'll report them.
and the real multiplier effect of people keeping and spending more of their own money
Click to expand...
But that is exactly what jpn was discussing, which of those actions has the greater effect. Pointing to a already hot economy and saying "SEE THAT" is not a proof of point. It is again like being born on third and bragging about scoring a run....as if you hit a home run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom