Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 223

Thread: Trump Budget and Healthcare

  1. #101

    Default

    Bank CEO says that Moa doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Wells Fargo CEO reveals the scam at the heart of Republicans’ tax bill

    In an interview with CNN Money, Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan made it clear what he plans to do with the corporation’s tax windfall — and it doesn’t benefit the average American worker.

    “Is it our goal to increase return to our shareholders and do we have an excess amount of capital? The answer to both is, yes,” Sloan told CNN Money. “So our expectation should be that we will continue to increase our dividend and our share buybacks next year and the year after that and the year after that.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/wells-farg...-6b6b8462f239/

  2. #102

    Default

    ^Ain't that the truth! Accumulation of wealth, more for the rich and nothing to trickle down to the 99%.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  3. #103
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Bank CEO says that Moa doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Wells Fargo CEO reveals the scam at the heart of Republicans’ tax bill

    In an interview with CNN Money, Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan made it clear what he plans to do with the corporation’s tax windfall — and it doesn’t benefit the average American worker.

    “Is it our goal to increase return to our shareholders and do we have an excess amount of capital? The answer to both is, yes,” Sloan told CNN Money. “So our expectation should be that we will continue to increase our dividend and our share buybacks next year and the year after that and the year after that.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/wells-farg...-6b6b8462f239/
    follow up news flash... bank ceo confirms moa doesn’t know what he’s talking about but gives him full credit for consistency across all topics.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  4. #104

  5. #105

    Default Trump’s tax tsunami is about to wallop Canadian jobs and investment

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Bank CEO says that Moa doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Wells Fargo CEO reveals the scam at the heart of Republicans’ tax bill

    In an interview with CNN Money, Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan made it clear what he plans to do with the corporation’s tax windfall — and it doesn’t benefit the average American worker.

    “Is it our goal to increase return to our shareholders and do we have an excess amount of capital? The answer to both is, yes,” Sloan told CNN Money. “So our expectation should be that we will continue to increase our dividend and our share buybacks next year and the year after that and the year after that.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/wells-farg...-6b6b8462f239/
    follow up news flash... bank ceo confirms moa doesn’t know what he’s talking about but gives him full credit for consistency across all topics.
    Not every company is benefiting from these rules - many that have had some breaks (like Apple or Microsoft, and their banks), are going to be hurt. Others will have surplus cash to return to investors (mostly pension funds), who can then reinvest in the US where the regime is now more attractive. Jack Mintz knows plenty about tax policy, and understands what is happening here:

    http://business.financialpost.com/op...and-investment

    Further, the U.S. tax burden on domestic investment will dramatically decline well below many countries and slightly less than in Canada, especially in the next five years.

    The lower corporate income-tax rate, and allowing expensing rather than amortization of machinery and equipment, will boost productivity as American business retool operations with digitization, artificial intelligence, robotics and big data processes. The growing U.S. economy will create more demand for imported goods and services, but the U.S. is also turning itself into a more powerful magnet for corporate investment that might have gone elsewhere.

    The U.S. tax bill also contains some important limitations on the deductibility of interest expense for corporations: specifically, any interest expenses in excess of 30 per cent of adjusted profits will not be deductible. That will see multinationals moving their debt out of the U.S. and onto their books in foreign jurisdictions. Canada will bear some of this cost with falling corporate tax revenues.

    The new dividend exemption regime saves multinationals from paying U.S. corporate tax on foreign profits brought back to the U.S. Some US$2.5 trillion in profits belonging to American firms currently sits parked in foreign subsidiaries. That can be brought home to boost investment and equity values. So we’ll see significant dividend flows out of foreign countries to the U.S. just as corporate debt is flowing the other way, from the U.S. to other countries. Overall, the reform will likely support a stronger U.S. dollar.
    Last edited by moahunter; 19-12-2017 at 01:01 PM.

  6. #106

    Default

    Just watch in the week after the midterm elections, the Republicans will suddenly announce that the deficit is out of control and they have to cut medicare, medicaid and other social programs.

    Just you watch.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #107

    Default

    Paul Ryan's already been talking about that for over a week. Ignoring, of course, the 1.5 Trillion that his tax cuts will add to the debt. Tax cuts aren't the problem. The problem is all those sick and old and poor people that want treatment instead of just dying like they should.

    Paul Ryan aims for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security cuts in 2018
    Ryan cited debt concerns as the reason for spending cuts, days after GOP passes tax plan projected to hike deficit

    "We're going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit," Ryan said during an interview on Ross Kaminsky's radio show, The Washington Post reported. "Frankly, it's the health care entitlements that are the big drivers of our debt, so we spend more time on the health care entitlements — because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking."

    https://www.salon.com/2017/12/07/pau...-cuts-in-2018/

  8. #108

    Default

    Ryan and the Republican Death Panels.

    Getting rid of the surplus population...

    • "At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
      "Are there no prisons?"
      "Plenty of prisons..."
      "And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
      "Both very busy, sir..."
      "Those who are badly off must go there."
      "Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
      "If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
    https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_panel







    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 19-12-2017 at 02:25 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #109
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Bank CEO says that Moa doesn't know what he's talking about.

    Wells Fargo CEO reveals the scam at the heart of Republicans’ tax bill

    In an interview with CNN Money, Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan made it clear what he plans to do with the corporation’s tax windfall — and it doesn’t benefit the average American worker.

    “Is it our goal to increase return to our shareholders and do we have an excess amount of capital? The answer to both is, yes,” Sloan told CNN Money. “So our expectation should be that we will continue to increase our dividend and our share buybacks next year and the year after that and the year after that.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/wells-farg...-6b6b8462f239/
    follow up news flash... bank ceo confirms moa doesn’t know what he’s talking about but gives him full credit for consistency across all topics.
    Not every company is benefiting from these rules - many that have had some breaks (like Apple or Microsoft, and their banks), are going to be hurt. Others will have surplus cash to return to investors (mostly pension funds), who can then reinvest in the US where the regime is now more attractive. Jack Mintz knows plenty about tax policy, and understands what is happening here:

    http://business.financialpost.com/op...and-investment

    Further, the U.S. tax burden on domestic investment will dramatically decline well below many countries and slightly less than in Canada, especially in the next five years.

    The lower corporate income-tax rate, and allowing expensing rather than amortization of machinery and equipment, will boost productivity as American business retool operations with digitization, artificial intelligence, robotics and big data processes. The growing U.S. economy will create more demand for imported goods and services, but the U.S. is also turning itself into a more powerful magnet for corporate investment that might have gone elsewhere.

    The U.S. tax bill also contains some important limitations on the deductibility of interest expense for corporations: specifically, any interest expenses in excess of 30 per cent of adjusted profits will not be deductible. That will see multinationals moving their debt out of the U.S. and onto their books in foreign jurisdictions. Canada will bear some of this cost with falling corporate tax revenues.

    The new dividend exemption regime saves multinationals from paying U.S. corporate tax on foreign profits brought back to the U.S. Some US$2.5 trillion in profits belonging to American firms currently sits parked in foreign subsidiaries. That can be brought home to boost investment and equity values. So we’ll see significant dividend flows out of foreign countries to the U.S. just as corporate debt is flowing the other way, from the U.S. to other countries. Overall, the reform will likely support a stronger U.S. dollar.
    for the record, i know jack minz and have had some very long and interesting discussions with him around tax policy and around government policy in general. the issues are a lot more complicated than what you choose to cherry pick to support your thought of the day.

    as for your first cherry-picked chart of the day, if you think that canada was only competitive because our combined corporate income tax rate was 68% of the american 39%, are you really suggesting that we should maintain that differential and reduce ours from 26.7% to 17.75% in order to play in the same sandbox? how long do you think it would take for that to bankrupt the country and every province in it?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  10. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    as for your first cherry-picked chart of the day, if you think that canada was only competitive because our combined corporate income tax rate was 68% of the american 39%, are you really suggesting that we should maintain that differential and reduce ours from 26.7% to 17.75% in order to play in the same sandbox? how long do you think it would take for that to bankrupt the country and every province in it?
    My point has been that the reforms to modernize the US corporate tax system (in many respects to be more similar to the Canadian system), reforms that are by no means Trump driven but have been recognized by tax policy experts as costing America for decades, are going to benefit the US economy, and I believe, benefit most Americans, as most Americans have pension fund investments for retirement and jobs. I think Canada will gain some benefit as a roaring US economy tends to also drag up Canada. I think the claims many are making though, that this just benefits the "1%", are truly stupid, because jobs and pensions aren't things for a few people, they are something most of us need.

  11. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    as for your first cherry-picked chart of the day, if you think that canada was only competitive because our combined corporate income tax rate was 68% of the american 39%, are you really suggesting that we should maintain that differential and reduce ours from 26.7% to 17.75% in order to play in the same sandbox? how long do you think it would take for that to bankrupt the country and every province in it?
    My point has been that the reforms to modernize the US corporate tax system (in many respects to be more similar to the Canadian system), reforms that are by no means Trump driven but have been recognized by tax policy experts as costing America for decades, are going to benefit the US economy, and I believe, benefit most Americans, as most Americans have pension fund investments for retirement and jobs. I think Canada will gain some benefit as a roaring US economy tends to also drag up Canada. I think the claims many are making though, that this just benefits the "1%", are truly stupid, because jobs and pensions aren't things for a few people, they are something most of us need.
    Oh yes, it will certainly benefit Americans, but the important question is which ones. The corporate tax cuts are lasting, the personal ones expire and even then are offset by reductions of some benefits and deductions that the middle class use (increased health care costs, reduced deduction for state taxes, reduced mortgage interest deduction, etc..). The net cost to the government is 1.5 trillion, so someone sure as heck is going to benefit but it isn't going to be the poor schmucks at the bottom and or the middle class.

  12. #112
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    as for your first cherry-picked chart of the day, if you think that canada was only competitive because our combined corporate income tax rate was 68% of the american 39%, are you really suggesting that we should maintain that differential and reduce ours from 26.7% to 17.75% in order to play in the same sandbox? how long do you think it would take for that to bankrupt the country and every province in it?
    My point has been that the reforms to modernize the US corporate tax system (in many respects to be more similar to the Canadian system), reforms that are by no means Trump driven but have been recognized by tax policy experts as costing America for decades, are going to benefit the US economy, and I believe, benefit most Americans, as most Americans have pension fund investments for retirement and jobs. I think Canada will gain some benefit as a roaring US economy tends to also drag up Canada. I think the claims many are making though, that this just benefits the "1%", are truly stupid, because jobs and pensions aren't things for a few people, they are something most of us need.
    that's nonsense...

    you do realize that in 2014 (i'm sure more recent figures are out there and that it's come down since) only 33 percent of all private-sector workers in the u.s. participated in a defined contribution plan (dc) with another 2 percent participating in a defined benefit (db) pension plan don't you?

    just as i'm sure you realize that many of that 35% are those americans who need a pension plan the least while the 65% of americans who need one the most don't have one?

    just as i'm sure you realize that with an increasingly older population that the costs to the american government for what that 2/3rds of their population without any retirement income or benefits will consume in healthcare etc. continues to be underfunded and unaccounted for but will still need to paid for nonetheless.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  13. #113

    Default

    It is very clear that the middle class tax breaks are only temporary while the corporate tax breaks are permanent and will be nearly impossible to raise again when this plan proves to fail, without a supermajority.

    What good is a $2,000 credit in 2018 that is offset with less deductions on home loans, student loans and municipal and State taxes. Then in the following years your deductions progressively get smaller.

    Overarching this is the repeal of health care and future cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other health and social programs. I know people in the US who pay a thousand dollars a month for health insurance and don't know what they will do in 2018. They worry about health care EVERY DAY. These people have jobs but as health care takes a bigger chunk of their paycheck, they don't see the raises to cover the increasing premiums and they have no benefits from their employers or are self employed. The stress is a major health issue for them. It is not like they own stock in Humana or play the stock market.

    They see that more will be taken away from them with no real gains and an ever increasing personal debt load.

    I talk with companies and business owners every day who cannot find skilled workers and there is nearly zero real unemploymemt in the US but they cannot offer large wage increases, pensions or health benefits. You cannot offer a 25% premium to a new hire without raising the salaries on your 20 current employees. Tell me one buiness that can afford to do cross the board double digit wage increases?

    Back in the 1980s, I had friends who worked at Safeway, large companies and other places. Some were Union and had all the benefits, making $10 to $24 an hour, 40 hours a week. This is equivalent to $30 to $80 an hour today. Tell me where you can find those easy to come by jobs today? Tell me which supermarket or department store that pays a living wage with full hours and benefits today?
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 20-12-2017 at 06:49 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  14. #114

    Default

    And if you lose your home in a disaster like a wildfire or a flood, you'd better hope that it's big enough to qualify as a federal disaster or you're out of luck.

    Disaster victims to suffer additional losses from Republican tax bill
    Tax deductions for personal losses from disasters to be eliminated.


    Disaster victims currently can deduct losses that are not insured and that amount to more than 10 percent of their incomes. Under the new tax plan, deductions for personal loss from natural disasters such as hurricanes and wildfires would be eliminated unless the event is a federally-declared disaster.

    https://thinkprogress.org/gop-to-eli...-de0541f38205/
    And don't count on getting aid from a charity like the Red Cross. By doubling the standard deduction, charities expect to see a big drop in donations since more people won't be claiming the charitable deduction anymore.

    GOP tax plan trashes the value of two popular tax breaks

    The Republican tax reform plan being unveiled Wednesday shows that while two popular deductions would remain intact, they'd become useless to the majority of taxpayers who now take advantage of them.


    GOP lawmakers want to retain the tax breaks for mortgage interest and charitable contributions. Yet given that the plan is to nearly double the standard deduction, "many current itemizers would choose that instead, so a lot less people would use those deductions," said Joseph Rosenberg, a senior research associate at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

    ---

    Currently, taxpayers choose between the standard deduction or itemized deductions and use whichever amount is greater to reduce their tax bill. For 2017, the standard deduction is $6,350 for individual taxpayers, $9,350 for heads of households and $12,700 for joint filers.


    In other words, if those amounts nearly double, a married couple would need deductions to exceed $24,000 to make itemizing worthwhile.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/26/gop-...ax-breaks.html


  15. #115

    Default

    Meanwhile cleanup from disasters is a windfall to cleanup contractors who charge FEMA up to $1,000 per appliance for removal compared to their usual $100 fee, pre-disaster. A fridge, stove, deep freeze, washer and dryer adds up to $5,000.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  16. #116
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Just watch in the week after the midterm elections, the Republicans will suddenly announce that the deficit is out of control and they have to cut medicare, medicaid and other social programs.

    Just you watch.
    Yeah. And should the Republicans lose control of the House of Representatives and/or the Senate, they'll blame the Democrats for the ballooning budget deficit.

  17. #117

    Default

    Its passed in the senate (just a final hoop back in congress).

    Most Americans will pay less tax next year with the standard deduction increasing (which will especially help poor people).

    And corporations, will enjoy a modern territorial tax system, just like Canada's - they won't have to park their profits offshore anymore:

    16. Change how U.S. multinationals are taxed: Today U.S. companies owe Uncle Sam tax on all their profits, regardless of where the income is earned. They're allowed to defer paying U.S. tax on their foreign profits until they bring the money home.

    Many argue that this "worldwide" tax system puts American businesses at a disadvantage. That's because most foreign competitors come from countries with territorial tax systems, meaning they don't owe tax to their own governments on income they make offshore.

    The final GOP bill proposes switching the U.S. to a territorial system. It also includes a number of anti-abuse provisions to prevent corporations with foreign profits from gaming the system.
    http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/15/news...ils/index.html

  18. #118

    Default

    Scotiabank economist Derek Holt, meanwhile, calculated that the tax savings would be heavily skewed towards the top of the income pyramid, so as to make the impact "unnoticeable to most people."The top 20 per cent of earners, will pocket $7,640 on average, and the top one per cent will save $51,140 in taxes. The top 0.1 per cent of earners will save $193,380, Holt says.
    Meanwhile, "the bottom quintile of earners will save $60 in taxes on average in 2018, or a family breakfast at Denny's," Holt said, bluntly. "What the top 0.1 per cent will save in taxes could almost buy the average priced resale home … and that's called reform."
    Yeah, that extra family breakfast at Denny's will certainly help all the struggling folks in the US. Thank goodness all those struggling companies will be have all that freed up cash to pay higher wages to their workers. Oh, wait...

    Backers of the bill say the tax breaks would spur corporations to invest and hire more workers. But U.S. companies already hold nearly $2.4 trillion US in cash on their books which they aren't investing, said Joseph Song, senior economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch."It's not like they're dying for extra cash."
    Although Republicans all voted for the bill, a few expressed concerns about its impact on the government debt, by cutting so deeply from tax revenues.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-tax-...vote-1.4457658
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  19. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Its passed in the senate (just a final hoop back in congress).

    Most Americans will pay less tax next year with the standard deduction increasing (which will especially help poor people).

    And corporations, will enjoy a modern territorial tax system, just like Canada's - they won't have to park their profits offshore anymore:

    16. Change how U.S. multinationals are taxed: Today U.S. companies owe Uncle Sam tax on all their profits, regardless of where the income is earned. They're allowed to defer paying U.S. tax on their foreign profits until they bring the money home.

    Many argue that this "worldwide" tax system puts American businesses at a disadvantage. That's because most foreign competitors come from countries with territorial tax systems, meaning they don't owe tax to their own governments on income they make offshore.

    The final GOP bill proposes switching the U.S. to a territorial system. It also includes a number of anti-abuse provisions to prevent corporations with foreign profits from gaming the system.
    http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/15/news...ils/index.html
    Things like affordable health care would be what would really help poor people, but I think it the cost of it will be going in the other direction under this tax plan. I suppose if they forgo health care and hope they don't get sick, they might end up a bit ahead under this plan.

    Now, if you could only convince most average Americans this tax cut will benefit them more than the very rich.

  20. #120
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Most Americans will pay less tax next year with the standard deduction increasing (which will especially help poor people).
    Especially help poor people? The Joint Committee on Taxation of the US Congress calculates that in 2019, on average, a poor American making less than 30,000 will save $82, a middle income American making between $50,000 to $75,000 will save $841, and a rich American making $1,000,000 or more will save $64,428.

    I calculated these numbers by dividing the change in federal taxes paid in the last table on page 6 by the number of taxfilers by income class on page 7 of the downloadable document below:

    https://www.jct.gov/publications.htm...rtdown&id=5054

    Even worse, by 2021, the tables on page 6 show that Americans making less than $30,000 (filing as individuals not businesses) will actually start paying more compared to what they were paying before these 'make the wealthy even richer' tax cuts.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 20-12-2017 at 11:24 AM.

  21. #121

    Default

    ^what you define as poor, I define as middle class, if you look those brackets, they are a lot lower in tax than what Canadians pay.

    2. Nearly doubles the standard deduction: For single filers, the bill increases it to $12,000 from $6,350 currently; for married couples filing jointly it increases to $24,000 from $12,700.

    The net effect: The percentage of filers who choose to itemize would drop sharply, since the only reason to do so is if your deductions exceed your standard deduction.
    So a poor family making $24,000 now pays no tax, whereas it used to be a family making $12,700. That takes a massive number of people out of the tax system.

  22. #122

    Default

    Pfft. 3-4 years should be plenty of time for these people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps & get themselves out of a punitive tax bracket.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  23. #123
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    ^^Not sure why you put a ^ on your reply.

    Footnote 2 on the table on page 7 makes clear that the income concept used to place tax returns into income categories is adjusted gross income, not income after taxes.

  24. #124

    Default

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.dd08092fd939

    President Trump was so excited about passing his first major piece of legislation Wednesday that he blurted out that the Republican Party had misrepresented the entire bill, handing Democrats some potentially troublesome talking points for the 2018 midterm elections.Speaking at the White House just before the House prepared to sign off on the tax-cuts bill one last time, Trump reveled extensively in his win before turning things over to Vice President Pence to heap praise upon him continuously for a few minutes. It was a thoroughly unique spectacle, even as victory dances and Trump Cabinet meetings go.
    But along the way, Trump basically admitted that the GOP's talking points on the bill weren't exactly honest in two major ways.
    While talking about the corporate tax rate being cut from 35 percent to 21 percent, Trump said, “That's probably the biggest factor in our plan.”
    Trump's second admission was about the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate being repealed in the bill. Apparently eager to argue that this constituted him having cut taxes and slew Obamacare in one fell swoop (after Congress came up short on Obamacare this year), he argued that repealing the individual mandate was basically the same as repealing Obamacare.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  25. #125

    Default

    ^What a BS article, don't have to sell anything until the election in May. By then, the economy will be humming even more than it is now. All the Democrats who voted against this bill in favor of higher taxes are going to have to explain that on the hustings - that's exactly what Republicans want to message on swing states.
    Last edited by moahunter; 20-12-2017 at 12:15 PM.

  26. #126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^What a BS article, don't have to sell anything until the election in May. By then, the economy will be humming even more than it is now. All the Democrats who voted against this bill in favor of higher taxes for corporations & the rich are going to have to explain that on the hustings - that's exactly what Republicans want to message on swing states.
    I know you're doubled down on the fallacious notion that this is a tax cut for the Average Joe & not a handy under the table for Trump & his ilk, but you once again have missed some rather salient points while vomiting your regressive rhetoric. I put them back in.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  27. #127

    Default

    ^lets see what happens in May, the Republicans think they can sell this, I doubt they are quaking in their boots that some soicalists at the Washington post think otherwise. Tax Reform was what Trump promised, and its what has achieved, a huge achievement for first year in office.

  28. #128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^What a BS article, don't have to sell anything until the election in May. By then, the economy will be humming even more than it is now. All the Democrats who voted against this bill in favor of higher taxes are going to have to explain that on the hustings - that's exactly what Republicans want to message on swing states.
    It's a dubious assumption the tax cuts will cause the economy to "hum" along, as the rich are more likely to save than spend all their the extra dollars. However, I will humour you and go along with that assumption just for the purposes of this discussion. Say the "humming" economy, which is close to current capacity already, could then easily overheat and result in a sharp increase in inflation, which will cause interest rates to rise, a correction in the housing and stock markets, which are both very sensitive our historically low interest rates. Now, I don't think any of that will make the voters happy and I wouldn't want to be the politician explaining how wonderful an idea the tax cuts were if that happened.

    It seems to me the best time to offer a stimulative tax cut (if this cut really is stimulative, as the proponents claim) is when the economy is in a recession or doing poorly. While it took a long time to recover from the last recession, the US economy has been doing fairly well and steadily improving over the last several years. It's like the Republicans have got the economic cycle backwards. Of course the last time they cut taxes the country actually ended up in a recession, so I wouldn't be surprised if that happens again.

  29. #129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Tax Reform was what Trump promised, and its what has achieved, a huge achievement for first year in office.
    He also said he was going to reform it in ways that weren't self-serving to himself, which is laughably & tragically untrue now that we've seen his "reforms".
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  30. #130

    Default

    Yup, going to simplify the tax system. Basically, "we're going to make it simple for people like Trump to make way more and pay much less while exploding the debt and blaming it on the middle class and the poor."

    Republicans Promised to Simplify the Tax Code. They’re Making It Way More Complicated.
    Corporations and rich people will have new ways to game the system and pay fewer taxes.

    The 95 percent of business owners whose profits are taxed as individual income will mostly be able to deduct 20 percent of their earnings. In making that change, Republicans are imposing an unprecedented penalty on wages and salaries. They are also inviting employees to turn themselves into a one-person business that is eligible for the 20 percent discount. Republicans made sure last week that real estate companies, like those owned by President Trump, will be eligible for the deduction.


    Traditional corporations will be able to shift profits abroad to take advantage of Republicans’ decision to adopt a “territorial” tax model that only taxes domestic profits. There are some provisions that seek to curb profit-shifting. But as Mother Jones has written, they may end up having the opposite effect.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...e-complicated/
    And the article mentioned in the last line above.
    Trump’s “100 Percent Pro-America” Tax Plan Is Actually a Huge Gift to Offshorers
    The Republican plan eliminates taxes on foreign profits.

    Today, the United States has what’s known as a worldwide tax system in which all profits—foreign and domestic—are subject to a 35 percent corporate income tax. If a US company wants to return foreign profits to the United States, it pays the 35 percent rate minus what it’s paid to foreign governments. The House and Senate tax bills replace this with a “territorial” system that drops the tax rate to 20 percent for domestic profits and nothing for foreign profits.


    The territorial model that the GOP is pushing would create an additional incentive to invest in countries like Ireland where the corporate rate is significantly lower than the United States. Republicans believe the differences won’t be big enough to drive investment abroad. Steve Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, disagrees, saying that’s still “plenty of juice” to encourage companies to shift production to countries with lower tax rates. Kimberly Clausing, an expert in international taxation at Reed College, writes that the shift to a territorial system “makes explicit, and permanent, the preference for foreign income over domestic income.” She estimates that profit shifting already costs the US government more than $100 billion per year.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...to-offshorers/

  31. #131

    Default

    How dare people keep their own money!

  32. #132

    Default

    ^Yup - and how dare the US implement an international tax system like most of Europe and Canada, those bastions of inequality.

  33. #133
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    It seems to me the best time to offer a stimulative tax cut (if this cut really is stimulative, as the proponents claim) is when the economy is in a recession or doing poorly. While it took a long time to recover from the last recession, the US economy has been doing fairly well and steadily improving over the last several years. It's like the Republicans have got the economic cycle backwards.
    You mean like the last big tax cut back in the early 1980s at a time the US was in recession and the unemployment rate was in double digits?

    https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

    Note: The default table is only for the past decade. But the time series can be backed up to 1980 or even before for those interested in historical US unemployment rates.

  34. #134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Most Americans will pay less tax next year with the standard deduction increasing (which will especially help poor people).
    Especially help poor people? The Joint Committee on Taxation of the US Congress calculates that in 2019, on average, a poor American making less than 30,000 will save $82, a middle income American making between $50,000 to $75,000 will save $841, and a rich American making $1,000,000 or more will save $64,428.

    Making $30,000 will save $82 = 0.3%
    making between $50,000 to $75,000 will save $841 = 1.1%
    making $1,000,000 or more will save $64,428 = 6.4%

    Just for fun, lets reverse those percentages
    At 6.4% making $30,000 will save $1,920
    At 1.1% making between $50,000 to $75,000 will save $841
    At 0.3% making $1,000,000 or more will save $3,000

    Sound more fair?
    Would that not be better for the economy? Trickle up theory?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  35. #135

    Default

    ^People who don't pay tax (and there will be many more of them now, as the deduction has gone up), will save nothing under this tax cut. How terrible.

    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
    The fifth would pay $1.
    The sixth would pay $3.
    The seventh would pay $7.
    The eighth would pay $12.
    The ninth would pay $18.
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
    So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

    And so:

    The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
    The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
    The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
    The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
    The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
    The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

    ‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’

    ‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’

    ‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’

    ‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’

    The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

    The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

    David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
    Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
    Last edited by moahunter; 20-12-2017 at 04:24 PM.

  36. #136

    Default

    "I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.” - Senator Grassley (R-Iowa)

    But people will pay more for health insurance since they're removing the individual mandate. They'll pay more because they can't deduct their state and local taxes. It'll be harder to buy a home because they won't be able to deduct their mortgage interest. They won't be able to deduct their student loan interest, which is MUCH larger than for people in Canada. No deduction for moving expenses. And, remove the Alternative Minimum Tax, which will benefit Trump, regardless of his laughable claims that this bill is bad for him and his family.

    And if they later change their mind, they're simply adding to the impact on the debt which is already set to grow by $1.5 Trillion over 10 years.

    But trickle down will take care of all of that. Just like it did under Reagan. Or currently in Kansas.

    I think it's time for Moa to change his name to Cartman.

    Last edited by kkozoriz; 20-12-2017 at 04:32 PM.

  37. #137

    Default

    Meanwhile, if you're struggling to rebuild Puerto Rico, they GOP wants to drive US businesses from the island.

    How do Republicans plan on helping Puerto Rico? By raising taxes on the island, of course.

    As the U.S. island struggles to climb out of a $70 billion debt crisis and recover from the devastation of Hurricane Maria, House Republicans voted Tuesday to impose a 12.5 percent tax on intellectual property income made by U.S. companies operating on the island and a minimum 10 percent tax on their profits in Puerto Rico. The Senate passed the measure early Wednesday.


    That means that businesses with operations in Puerto Rico will pay higher taxes than their counterparts on the U.S. mainland, which puts industries and jobs on the island at risk.


    The provision, tucked into the GOP’s tax reform bill, was intended to stop American companies from dodging federal taxes by shifting their profits overseas. But because the U.S. tax code treats Puerto Rico as a foreign territory, business operations on the island will get hit.

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...land-of-course

  38. #138

    Default

    ^^^ moahunter, your argument and example is completely a false equivalent and you should be embarrassed by your own post. Where did you dig up that fake argument that is so disingenuous?

    This is about income taxes on money earned, nor on the cost of goods.

    I don't think that poor people get to use the Capital Gains deduction or write off their private jet maintenance or are able to deduct real estate costs.

    The poor are just scraping by and cannot afford health care.

    Either we go to a flat income tax and everyone pays 25 percent with no deductions and access to free public health care is included as a right or you go with the progressive rate tax system.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  39. #139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    This is about income taxes on money earned, nor on the cost of goods..
    That example exactly points out the fallacy of your argument - we pay taxes based on our incomes so that the government can provide services to benefit us all. People who earn more pay a lot more for society (in that case beer) than those who earn less. It’s true as well in its conclusion, Canada’s government revenue from the wealthiest individuals has gone down not up, since Trudeau hiked the tax rate. By contrast when Martin cut it, government revenues went up. If people feel they are taxed fairly they don’t mind paying their fair share, but once it gets unreasonable they look for alternatives, or simply stop working as hard / bothering to make risky investments.
    Last edited by moahunter; 20-12-2017 at 05:19 PM.

  40. #140

    Default

    moahunter, you are a shill of the propaganda of the White House as portrayed by on 30 October 2017, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders kicked a press briefing by reading an anecdote about reporters and a bar tab to try to explain who would benefit from the proposed Republican tax reform framework:
    https://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^People who don't pay tax (and there will be many more of them now, as the deduction has gone up), will save nothing under this tax cut. How terrible.

    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
    The fifth would pay $1.
    The sixth would pay $3.
    The seventh would pay $7.
    The eighth would pay $12.
    The ninth would pay $18.
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
    So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

    MORE B.S.


    MORE B.S.

    MORE B.S.



    And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

    David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
    Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
    This was not written by Dr. David R. Kamerschen, a professor of economics at the University of Georgia, who has been erroneously attributed as the author of this essay. He posted a denial of authorship on his personal web page:. This was also not written by T. Davies, Professor of Accounting & Chair, Division of Accounting and Business Law, The University of South Dakota

    Your source is corrupt. Fake News on your part.

    https://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp

    Here is the counter argument to you spurious example

    As for your cute analogy this is where it goes wrong. While many people wish that the service our government provided was beer or a good meal, alas our government does not provide that service. In fact it does not provide just one service. The story fails in it’s simplicity for not looking at what benefits everyone receives and wrongly assumes that everyone benefits equally from a strong government. This is where I encourage people to look behind the facts.

    Those people that do not like government or the social safety net will be quick to point out all the areas where the poor benefit more than the rich and middle class. Things such as food stamps, Medicaid and unemployment benefits immediately come to mind. And those people are absolutely right, poor people benefit more than the rich and middle class from those items. Again, we as a nation can decide which if any of those benefits we want to continue, and at what level, but once we do we have to pay for them.


    Where your story really misses the mark is on the functions the government provides that benefit the rich and middle class more. Trying to keep this simple I will limit this to a couple of examples. The government maintains roads and an interstate transit system (something lacking in a large portion of the world). The poor person that does not own a car benefits little from that system, the middle class person that drives to work or on vacation benefits, but the people and companies that own fleets of trucks and need the roads to get their goods to market benefit the most.


    Likewise our government employs air traffic controllers and the Federal Aviation administration to keep our skies safe. The poor, that can not afford plane tickets, only benefit to the extent planes do not fall out of the sky and land on their heads, since they own no cars or homes. Middle class people benefit because it makes it easier to take vacations and visit family and friends. Rich people and companies with private jets or the need to get their employees and goods places quickly benefit the most.

    While there are several examples I will end this section with the thing the wealthy benefit most from. It is a stable government leading to stable markets. When we have large losses in the markets due to the government’s inability to get our fiscal house in order it should be clear who is hurt the most, and conversely who benefits the most. So when the stock market falls 20% the poor loose nothing because they own nothing. The middle class losses tens and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars in their retirement accounts. However, the wealthy and the corporations loose millions and billions. This is why Warren Buffet and the Wealthy have a vested interest in making sure we have a stable government and put our fiscal house in order. Asking them to pay more to save them billions in economic losses does not seem like it is asking too much.


    For a comical take on your analogy please see the post at http://www.viralgrapevine.com/how-ta...ernet-garbage/
    source http://truefiscalconservative.blogsp...gy-to-our.html

    That said, one think the counter argument does not state, is that millionaires and business people that take risks such as Donald Trump, can declare bankruptcy multiple times, get tax writeoffs carried over for years, get tax breaks, their business receive subsidies, bailouts, government contracts and corporate welfare that the poor and middle class pay for through their their taxes or lack of services such as universal healthcare.

    You and Sarah Sanders is insulting our intelligence.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  41. #141

    Default

    In the 1950's, in the post war boom, the top US tax rate on income over $200,000 (~$2 million today) was 91%. Yet the economy boomed. The Middle class expanded. Now, if they don't get a pass through rate of 20%, they're being hard done by.

    The economy and the country does best when the benefits are spread equally among everyone involved. Which is why things like the Estate Tax exist. Sure you can give a big chunk of money to your heirs but you can't make them multi-millionaires.

    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.

  42. #142

    Default

    ^^you honestly believe that Daryl Katz or Bill Gates costs society millions if not billions more than what you or I do, such that their taxes are a good deal personally? Thats about the stupidest argument I have ever heard. Like it or not, Trudeau’s tax increases have reduced the tax take - made for good publicity among the left, but there is now less government revenues to support us all. Paul Martin understood that, and the Republicans do also, it’s sad that reality gets trumped by mindless partisan politics.
    Last edited by moahunter; 20-12-2017 at 05:34 PM.

  43. #143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.
    I think what comes around goes around, the trust fund babies you are so jealous of, aren’t neccesarily happier than you or me, and if they don’t get off their bums and Work, that wealth will eventually be taken by someone more willing to put the effort in. The people who make the most aren’t the ones who try to steal the biggest chunk of pie, they are the ones who make the pie bigger for us all.
    Last edited by moahunter; 20-12-2017 at 05:36 PM.

  44. #144
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^^you honestly believe that Daryl Katz or Bill Gates costs society millions if not billions more than what you or I do, such that their taxes are a good deal personally? Thats about the stupidest argument I have ever heard. Like it or not, Trudeau’s tax increases have reduced the tax take - made for good publicity among the left, but there is now less government revenues to support us all. Paul Martin understood that, and the Republicans do also, it’s sad that reality gets trumped by mindless partisan politics.
    While on the topic of stupid arguments, might be time to examine yours.

    The federal government acknowledged the one-time reduction of personal income tax revenues in its 2016-17 Annual Financial Report:
    Personal income tax revenues decreased by $1.2 billion, or 0.8 per cent, in 2016–17, largely reflecting the impact of tax planning by high-income individuals to recognize income in the 2015 tax year before the new 33 per cent tax rate came into effect in 2016. This behaviour raised revenues in 2015–16 but lowered them in 2016–17.
    Source: http://www.fin.gc.ca/afr-rfa/2017/re...#_Toc492557457

    This one-time reduction in personal income taxes will not repeated in future years. In fact, personal income taxes are up 6.2% in the first 6 months of the 2017-18 fiscal year compared to the same time period a year earlier. See page 2 of the document here: http://www.fin.gc.ca/fiscmon-revfin/pdf/2017-09-eng.pdf

  45. #145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    In the 1950's, in the post war boom, the top US tax rate on income over $200,000 (~$2 million today) was 91%. Yet the economy boomed. The Middle class expanded. Now, if they don't get a pass through rate of 20%, they're being hard done by.

    The economy and the country does best when the benefits are spread equally among everyone involved. Which is why things like the Estate Tax exist. Sure you can give a big chunk of money to your heirs but you can't make them multi-millionaires.

    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.
    Very well said.

    You will also see that the stock market crash was preceded with some of the lowest tax rates and more recently that the deficit increased with lower taxes



    Now lets compare the national debt. GOP Voodoo economics based upon a trickle down theory...



    Regarding the Estate Tax, I recall a certain Republican on the floor of the Senate, railing against extending unemployment insurance* benefits during Obama's first term when the financial crisis caused by the big banks gambling with people's money, was at it's maximum and Obama wanted to stimulate the economy from the bottom up. The Senator claimed that extending UI benefits would create a lazy lower and middle class.

    * (for those that the people paid into, you know the definition of 'insurance')

    The very next day, that same GOP Senator, demanded Estate Tax reform and that children of millionaires were entitled to the family wealth, tax free. He noteable did not state that Estate Tax reform would create a lazy privileged class.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  46. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^^you honestly believe that Daryl Katz or Bill Gates costs society millions if not billions more than what you or I do, such that their taxes are a good deal personally?
    Katz received hundreds of millions in government welfare. Gates and Katz both place huge sums in investments that are for their financial gain. They don't raise their workers pay above the norms like Henry Ford did when he raised the daily wage from $2.25 to $5 (including the bonuses etc)


    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Thats about the stupidest argument I have ever heard.
    Nope, not even close. Your beer argument was a monumental level of stupidity and you even got that wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Like it or not, Trudeau’s tax increases have reduced the tax take - made for good publicity among the left, but there is now less government revenues to support us all. Paul Martin understood that, and the Republicans do also, it’s sad that reality gets trumped by mindless partisan politics.
    This is not about Canadian tax rates.

    Interesting today that the tax bill was passed in the US and investors thought that the US dollar would strengthen and the DOW would go up. NEITHER HAPPENED.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  47. #147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.
    I think what comes around goes around, the trust fund babies you are so jealous of, aren’t neccesarily happier than you or me, and if they don’t get off their bums and Work, that wealth will eventually be taken by someone more willing to put the effort in. The people who make the most aren’t the ones who try to steal the biggest chunk of pie, they are the ones who make the pie bigger for us all.
    Actually small business create the most jobs, not big corporations. https://www.forbes.com/sites/allbusi.../#7eaa45329e6e



    Another false argument of yours. You really are batting at flies...
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 20-12-2017 at 06:56 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  48. #148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.
    I think what comes around goes around, the trust fund babies you are so jealous of, aren’t neccesarily happier than you or me, and if they don’t get off their bums and Work, that wealth will eventually be taken by someone more willing to put the effort in. The people who make the most aren’t the ones who try to steal the biggest chunk of pie, they are the ones who make the pie bigger for us all.
    Where did the "happier than you or me" come from? And you think that someone is just going to take millions from the beneficiaries of the Estate Tax? That they won't have an accountant somewhere looking after it for them while they're off to the south of France or whatever? It's not like it's just a big pile of cash sitting in a chequing account linked to a debit card.

    But it's OK because "they're not happier than you or me".

  49. #149
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But, in your world, if people aren't giving millions of dollars to their kids, most of whom won't have to work a day in their lives, the system is rigged against them. Meanwhile, your employees, the ones who actually do the hard work of making you all that money, don't deserve a cut of the pie.
    I think what comes around goes around, the trust fund babies you are so jealous of, aren’t neccesarily happier than you or me, and if they don’t get off their bums and Work, that wealth will eventually be taken by someone more willing to put the effort in. The people who make the most aren’t the ones who try to steal the biggest chunk of pie, they are the ones who make the pie bigger for us all.
    ??????
    those trust fund babies might not be any happier than you or me but i’ve had no money in the past and i still have friends that have no money and i can tell you for a fact that even if i’m not going to be any happier i’d much rather not be happier with money than without.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  50. #150

    Default

    Moa is having a opinion sale today...



    Factual arguments are not included.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  51. #151

    Default

    New Report on CHIP Funding Delay Shows Nearly 2 Million Kids May Lose Coverage in January

    https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2017/12/2...ge-in-january/

    A new analysis by the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families found that if Congress does not act soon to fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), an estimated 1.9 million children in separate CHIP programs could lose coverage in January. An additional 1 million children would also be at risk of losing coverage by the end of February.

    “Congress must get CHIP done before they leave for the holidays. The policy for a five-year CHIP extension has had bipartisan support for months now, so there are no more excuses for kicking this can down the road any further,” said Joan Alker, executive director of the Georgetown University research center. “Families need the peace of mind that their child’s coverage will not disappear as the new year begins.”
    Trump Wins Tax Cuts, Kids Lose Health Insurance
    The president and Republicans finally passed major legislation, but they can’t even reauthorize a program to take care of 9 million children.
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-...e-crisis-looms

    Republican lawmakers also were celebrating a major legislative win at the precise moment when the rest of the legislative docket remains stagnant. Shortly before they gathered with Trump to applaud the slashing of taxes, news broke that they’d failed to advance a bill that would re-authorize a program providing healthcare to 9 million children.

    Senate aides told The Daily Beast they expected the debate over funding the program, CHIP, to be resolved sometime in January. But that is just one of the many pressing issues that the Congress has left for the next year. The others include protections for undocumented children, money for community health centers, and the funding of the actual government.
    Sources close to the White House said on Wednesday that they were fully anticipating the possibility that this brew of major items could result in a government shutdown, thereby negating some of the economic gains that the tax cuts would facilitate.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  52. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    ??????
    those trust fund babies might not be any happier than you or me but i’ve had no money in the past and i still have friends that have no money and i can tell you for a fact that even if i’m not going to be any happier i’d much rather not be happier with money than without.
    Many of my friends are just as happy surfing on a beach with nothing, as I am working for material toys. If you are given toys it doesn't make your life a joy, its achieving and giving that creates happiness, not receiving. What I have seen of such families, is that most of them who have inherited but who have no drive (typically three generations from the wealth creator), are miserable. My experience of visiting developing countries is you can find someone as happy farming in a rice field as in a big office in a corporate tower in Europe. We are all lucky in North America there are normally opportunities to improve your life - its important government supports that, but it doesn't extend so far that we don't have to try to make dreams (if have) happen, for once that occurs, once its all effortless and handed to you, it results in misery whether you are rich or poor.
    Last edited by moahunter; 21-12-2017 at 09:32 AM.

  53. #153

    Default

    “its achieving and giving that creates happiness, not receiving.”

    That’s only your assumption. Nice thought but everyone is different.

  54. #154
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Moa is having a opinion sale today...



    Factual arguments are not included.
    Aaaaaaand . . . just for moa: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wdoGVgj1MtY
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  55. #155

    Default

    The US news is reporting a number of big companies (AT&T, Boeing, some other big ones I've never heard of) have announced wage increases, bonuses, and more investment in the US with the passing of this tax bill.

    No wonder the left is so loudly against it - if people have more money in their pockets and can get jobs easier because of Trump and the Republicans, it's going to be difficult to listen to all the politicians saying how much these tax cuts are going to hurt you.

  56. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    The US news is reporting a number of big companies (AT&T, Boeing, some other big ones I've never heard of) have announced wage increases, bonuses, and more investment in the US with the passing of this tax bill.

    No wonder the left is so loudly against it - if people have more money in their pockets and can get jobs easier because of Trump and the Republicans, it's going to be difficult to listen to all the politicians saying how much these tax cuts are going to hurt you.
    If it isn’t matched with equal spending reductions and instead the government debt and deficit rises then it’s a big bet that growth will outpace the added debt that is being taken on.

    The numbers I’ve seen are that it’s a trillion plus dollar debt enabled bet.

    If the bet falls short, then watch the slashing of programs begin.

    As an aside, their massive unresolved social security system funding problems have now reached the point where the US is dealing with real and no longer a paper IOU problem. Some cans can only be kicked down the road so far. Kick a bunch down the road and a whole lot of bills could come due at the same time. This is how bankruptcies occur.

  57. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    ??????
    those trust fund babies might not be any happier than you or me but i’ve had no money in the past and i still have friends that have no money and i can tell you for a fact that even if i’m not going to be any happier i’d much rather not be happier with money than without.
    Many of my friends are just as happy surfing on a beach with nothing, as I am working for material toys. If you are given toys it doesn't make your life a joy, its achieving and giving that creates happiness, not receiving. What I have seen of such families, is that most of them who have inherited but who have no drive (typically three generations from the wealth creator), are miserable. My experience of visiting developing countries is you can find someone as happy farming in a rice field as in a big office in a corporate tower in Europe. We are all lucky in North America there are normally opportunities to improve your life - its important government supports that, but it doesn't extend so far that we don't have to try to make dreams (if have) happen, for once that occurs, once its all effortless and handed to you, it results in misery whether you are rich or poor.
    Yeah, the poors are doin' just fine.
    Ten conservatives who have praised slavery


    David Horowitz. Horowitz is the president of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and edits the ultra-conservative FrontPage magazine. In a diatribe against reparations for slavery, Horowitz thought this argument celebrating the luxurious life of blacks in America would bolster his case: “If slave labor created wealth for Americans, then obviously it has created wealth for black Americans as well, including the descendants of slaves.”


    https://www.salon.com/2012/10/12/ten...aised_slavery/

  58. #158
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    ??????
    those trust fund babies might not be any happier than you or me but i’ve had no money in the past and i still have friends that have no money and i can tell you for a fact that even if i’m not going to be any happier i’d much rather not be happier with money than without.
    Many of my friends are just as happy surfing on a beach with nothing, as I am working for material toys. If you are given toys it doesn't make your life a joy, its achieving and giving that creates happiness, not receiving. What I have seen of such families, is that most of them who have inherited but who have no drive (typically three generations from the wealth creator), are miserable. My experience of visiting developing countries is you can find someone as happy farming in a rice field as in a big office in a corporate tower in Europe. We are all lucky in North America there are normally opportunities to improve your life - its important government supports that, but it doesn't extend so far that we don't have to try to make dreams (if have) happen, for once that occurs, once its all effortless and handed to you, it results in misery whether you are rich or poor.
    i have no idea how to respond to a bad science fiction description of an alternative universe...
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  59. #159

    Default

    Trump's pathetic bankruptcy past shows through in GOP's fantasyland tax bill

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...lum/973694001/
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  60. #160

  61. #161

    Default

    Beware when someone starts talking about "average taxpayers"
    These Unusually Rich Sample Tax-Plan Families Are All Too Real

    On the Today Show, House Speaker Paul Ryan boasted that the average tax cut for a family of four would be $2,059. The author Molly Knight responded: “Barry Bonds and I hit an average of 36.5 home runs in 2001.” Economist Richard Thaler got in on the act: “Rafa Nadal and I have an average of 5 French Open titles.” (Thaler and I have an average of .5 Nobel Prizes, by the way.)


    The point being that statisticians use the median, not the average, to illustrate what’s typical. When it comes to household earnings, the distinction isn’t trivial: Mean family income in 2016 was $97,000. Median family income was closer to $73,000. Median household income (including non-families) was another $14,000 lower still.

    ---

    Bloomberg, working with Tim Steffen of Baird Private Wealth Management, divided taxpayers up eight ways.


    • The Multimillionaires in New York
    • The Second-Home Scenario in California
    • The Small Business Owners in Pittsburgh (adjusted gross income 300k)
    • The Suburban Family in Westchester (AGI $270k)
    • Single in Manhattan (AGI $130k)
    • Married in Austin (AGI $100k)
    • Median Income in Oregon
    • Renting in Milwaukee


    Only the Milwaukee family represents the bottom half of earners in America.

    https://slate.com/business/2017/12/w...s-so-rich.html

  62. #162

    Default

    Yup, Trump's 1% tax giveaway is going to lead to many more jobs!

    AT&T laid off hundreds of workers in time for Christmas — right before paying $1K bonuses to workers to celebrate GOP tax overhaul

    Across the Midwest, an estimated 600 workers were notified they were being laid off by the company on December 16, a week before the company announced it was doling out $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 of its employees in celebration of the Republican Party's tax overhaul.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2017/12/att...-tax-overhaul/



  63. #163

    Default

    “This is going to cost me a fortune, this thing, believe me,” he said last month in Missouri while pitching the GOP tax bill. “This is not good for me. Me, it’s not so — I have some very wealthy friends. Not so happy with me, but that’s OK. You know, I keep hearing Schumer: ‘This is for the wealthy.’ Well, if it is, my friends don’t know about it.”

    Trump tells Mar-a-Lago friends ‘You all just got a lot richer’ after he signs GOP tax bill

    President Donald Trump began the holiday break by telling friends he invited to Mar-a-Lago for dinner that “You all just got a lot richer,” referring to the Republican tax bill — which largely benefits the wealthy. Trump told his guests this Friday evening just hours after signing the bill into law, according to CBS News.

    https://thinkprogress.org/trump-tell...-0a0c4c0edd5a/

  64. #164

    Default

    "I will do everything within my power not to touch Social Security, to leave it the way it is; to make this country rich again; to bring back our jobs; to get rid of deficits; to get rid of waste, fraud and abuse, which is rampant in this country, rampant, totally rampant. And it's my absolute intention to leave Social Security the way it is. Not increase the age and to leave it as is."

    - Donald Trump, March 10, 2016
    Republicans Announce Plans For Drastic Cuts To Social Security, Raise Retirement Age

    Chairman Sam Johnson, the Republican Chairman of the Social Security Subcommittee of Ways and Means, just introduced a bill that would deeply cut Social Security as we today know it, not to mention his intention to raise the retirement age from 67 to 69.


    If the bill passes, which many expect that it will in some form, it will affect all Americans 49 and younger.

    http://news.groopspeak.com/republica...irement-age-5/

  65. #165

    Default

    As if we didn't know that was going to happen.

    There is no free lunch.

    Trump lied. His massive tax cuts to the top 1% and corporations are to be paid for by the poor and middle class who only got a temporary tax break just to get their vote.

    Trump says he is working for the little guy but he has never done that in his whole life. He has been playing them all as fools and anyone who voted for him ARE FOOLS! He is there only to make himself richer, get tax cuts for himself and his billionaire friends and benefit the people who got him there. The NRA, the Russian oligarchs who he laundered their money, the Super Pacs, and the uber rich. He wants to get rid of all the social programs like welfare, unemployment benefits, social security, mental health care, Medicare, Medicaid and retirement benefits.

    Mr Scrooge, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
    "Are there no prisons?"
    "Plenty of prisons..."
    "And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
    "Both very busy, sir..."
    "Those who are badly off must go there."
    "Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
    "If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

    He sees the world through his myopic vision that to get ahead, you lie, cheat and steal your way to the top, crushing everyone who gets in your way and not show an ounce of compassion. Then you should adore him without question, have a yuge military parade in his honor as he throws cheap momentos of his greatness to the yuge crowds.

    His followers are suckered and they have become drunk on his purple kool-aid that is killing them.

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 26-02-2018 at 06:47 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  66. #166

    Default

    Yup

    Predicted it on post #106 19-12-2017, 01:29 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Just watch in the week after the midterm elections, the Republicans will suddenly announce that the deficit is out of control and they have to cut medicare, medicaid and other social programs.

    Just you watch.
    I forgot that I had quoted Charles Dickens Christmas Carol in post #108

    From my original post #1
    Trump budget chief defends plan to slash food stamps, children’s health care
    https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2...afety-net.html
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 26-02-2018 at 08:13 AM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  67. #167

    Default

    It's over 500 pages. Of course he hasn't read it. He only reads one page summaries with pictures and bullet points.
    Trump signs report rejecting his own views on trade, Canada


    WASHINGTON -- Donald Trump's views on trade have been clobbered in a report released by the White House -- and signed by none other than the president of the United States himself.


    The self-rebuke includes some of his talking points about Canada.


    The president regularly bemoans a trade deficit with the northern neighbour and was complaining again on Monday about Canadian trade, saying: "We lose a lot with Canada. People don't know it. Canada's very smooth. They have you believe that it's wonderful. And it is, for them. Not wonderful for us."


    But a different story is told in the newly released 2018 White House "Economic Report of the President" -- an annual document prepared by Trump's own team, in which Trump's own signature appears below the introductory foreword.


    It contradicts a number of trade statements and policies already articulated by Trump.


    One example involves the supposed trade deficit with Canada. Trump keeps insisting it exists, but the document he signed states Canada is among the few countries in the world with whom the U.S. runs a surplus.


    The documents states that in three different places. For example, it says, "All countries show a (U.S.) services surplus offsetting a goods deficit, with the U.S. running a net bilateral surplus only with Canada and the United Kingdom."


    And again: "The United States ran a trade surplus of $2.6 billion with Canada on a balance-of-payments basis."


    And once again: "The United States has free trade agreements ... with a number of countries -- some of which represent net trade surpluses for the United States (Canada and Singapore), and some of which represent deficits (Mexico and South Korea)."

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/trump-...nada-1.3819431

  68. #168
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,493

    Default

    LOL! What a complete [email protected]
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  69. #169

    Default

    He's the best for the stock market. The absolute best! Just ask him.
    Dow plummets more than 500 points after Trump announces tariffs

    The Dow dropped more than 500 points on Thursday after President Trump said his administration will impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. The Nasdaq and the S&P 500 declined about 1.5% apiece.


    Trump's controversial tariff announcement caught investors off guard and immediately raised concerns about retaliation from China or other major U.S. trading partners.


    "This is the first shot across the bow over a trade war," said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley FBR. "And nobody wins a trade war."

    http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/01/inve...ffs/index.html

  70. #170

    Default

    The DOW continues to fall. Loss of over 1,400 points (6%) this week. The tax breaks, and a trade war could lead to a new round of worldwide inflation.

    Thanks Mr. ******** President.

    Trump just announced a move that could have devastating economic consequences — and markets tanked
    http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...ade-war-2018-3
    For instance, beer producers responded to the Commerce Department's recommendations with a warning that an aluminum tariff could drive up the cost of beer cans and then what customers pay.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  71. #171

    Default

    Get ready for the world to retaliate.

    Trump says ‘trade wars are good and easy to win’

    President Donald Trump spoke out defiantly Friday against global criticism of his plan to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, seeming to welcome the idea of a trade war.


    “When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win,” Trump wrote in an early morning tweet.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/tru...good-easy-win/

  72. #172

    Default

    Trump was angry and ‘unglued’ when he started a trade war, officials say

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/whi...icials-n852641

    A real "stable genius."
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  73. #173
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,081

    Default

    Bush tried the same thing in 2002. In 2003 he had to lift it because of its negative effects on the US, causing a job loss of an estimated 200,000. There is no way no one told Trump this, but I guess jobs don't actually matter to him.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_U...s_steel_tariff

  74. #174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Bush tried the same thing in 2002. In 2003 he had to lift it because of its negative effects on the US, causing a job loss of an estimated 200,000. There is no way no one told Trump this, but I guess jobs don't actually matter to him.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_U...s_steel_tariff
    Actually there are no adults in the room and no one willing to stand up to Trump and say, "Don't do anything until we talk with the industry executives tomorrow and wait until we study the legalities over the next couple of weeks." Nope, Trump was angry and lashed out at at trading partners, probably assuming it was China, without even checking to find out that the majority of the steel and aluminum comes from Canada. Also major producer Alcoa is American owned and has plants worldwide that would be affected by American tariffs.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  75. #175

    Default

    Even his own party think he's nuts.

    In tweets calling for trade war, Trump reveals he doesn’t know how tariffs work
    "Trade wars are good, and easy to win."

    Members of the president’s own party cautioned that Trump may not actually be aware of what he is doing.


    “I am highly concerned about the negative aspects. I completely want fair and reciprocal trade and there’s no doubt about it America’s has been magnanimous in its trade laws,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) told reporters Thursday. “There have been abuses building up over the years. We should target those abuses. I’m just not sure this is the way to do it overall with the steel and aluminum. It really will have negative and unintended consequences.”


    Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) called Trump’s Friday morning tweet “kooky 18th century protectionism.”


    “Trade wars are never won. Trade wars are lost by both sides. Kooky 18th century protectionism will jack up prices on American families — and will prompt retaliation from other countries,” Sasse said in a statement. “Make no mistake: If the President goes through with this, it will kill American jobs — that’s what every trade war ultimately does. So much losing.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/trump-does...-5a00bbd94403/

  76. #176

    Default

    Stop fanning the flames by reporting on what the president said!

    ‘I take objection’: Chris Wallace rips apart Trump aide after he blames media for ‘fanning flames’ on trade wars

    “It would be helpful the media didn’t have all these crazy headlines about trade wars,” Navarro complained.


    “Wait a minute, no, no,” Wallace interrupted. “Trade wars are good was a tweet from the president, Mr. Navarro. Would you agree [with Trump] that trade wars are good?”


    “I’m going to finish this argument,” Navarro said, ignoring the question.


    “Do you agree that trade wars are good?” Wallace asked again. “I’m asking you questions and I take objection to the idea that the talk of trade wars is an invention of the media when the president tweeted out, ‘Trade wars are good and easy to win.'”


    “You guys are fanning the flames,” Navarro quipped.


    “I’m fanning the flames?” the Fox News host exclaimed. “I’m not the one who wrote the president’s tweet.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/tak...es-trade-wars/

  77. #177

    Default

    So much winning!

    Abbreviated Pundit Round-up: Welcome to the trade war


    Trump is so determined to make trade into a zero-sum game, even though that has no basis in fact. After all, how can you be a winner unless someone else loses, and Trump is determined that someone is going to lose this game. So far that someone is everyone in America who buys anything that’s made out of steel Sorry, autoworkers, Donald Trump is making steelworkers happy this week, but look! He’s already offered to upend the economy to help you next. Which is just going to go great. Because the last time someone restricted cars foreign cars coming into the US, the production of cars … went down.


    U.S. car makers also lowered production in 1984 to help boost car prices. Less production meant fewer workers: America lost over 60,000 auto jobs between 1982 and 1984 due to the trade restrictions, according to Brookings.


    When Reagan put limits on imports of Japanese cars, American companies saw the opportunity to drop their own production and create an artificial shortage of vehicles, driving up prices and giving them more profit per car. They also cut R & D spending because … why research improvements if the White House is willing to just shut out the competition. As a result, the quotas and tariffs Reagan laid against foreign autos, cost American consumers, and lowered the number of jobs in the auto industry. Meanwhile, consumers outside the US were finding a glut of new vehicles available, giving them the power to demand a bargain. So maybe someone does have to win.

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...-the-trade-war
    And we're unlikely to avoid the tariffs.

    Trump trade adviser says no exceptions for allies on new aluminum and steel tariffs

    The Trump administration sent mixed signals about its new aluminum and steel tariffs on Sunday, saying that any exceptions for allies are unlikely but also leaving room for an unpredictable president to change his mind.


    White House trade adviser Peter Navarro appeared to draw a firm line against case-by-case exemptions as he defended President Trump's sudden imposition of new trade premiums, which are likely to hit Canada and Europe hardest.


    “That's not his decision,” Navarro said when asked about the possibility of exemptions. “As soon as he starts exempting countries, he has to raise the tariff on everybody else,” the adviser said when asked about Canada and the European Union. “As soon as he exempts one country, his phone starts ringing with the heads of state of other countries.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.62f175d8f164
    Not that he really has any idea what he's doing.

    ‘Typical Donald’: Biographer explains how tariff-promoting Trump went ‘out of his way’ to use cheap Chinese steel

    With Reid turning back to the Trump’s steel tariffs, she asked, “We just put up the top suppliers of steel to the United States and, as you said, Canada, Brazil, South Korea and Mexico are one, two, three, four. For aluminum it’s Canada, Russia, United Emirates and China. Did Donald Trump use American steel, by the way, when he was building his buildings?”


    A laughing Johnson replied, “He went to great lengths, as [journalist] Kurt Eichenwald sussed out to use Chinese steel.”


    “This is classic Donald, ‘Do as I say and not as I do,” the biographer quipped, “And let’s keep in mind, Donald was given a degree in economics — I use that verb deliberately because he was given a degree in economics by Penn. And this and a lot of other things demonstrate he doesn’t have any idea what he’s talking about.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/typ...chinese-steel/
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 04-03-2018 at 12:42 PM.

  78. #178

    Default

    Another one out the door.

    Gary Cohn Will Resign as Trump’s Chief Economic Adviser
    President Trump’s threat to impose steep tariffs was reportedly the breaking point.

    Gary Cohn, President Donald Trump’s chief economic adviser, is leaving the White House.


    The New York Times reported on Tuesday that the former Goldman Sachs executive is planning to resign in the coming weeks, concluding months of speculation over how long Cohn would remain in the role. His departure came after Trump announced his plan to impose steep tariffs on steel and aluminum imports—an announcement that marked a major loss for Cohn, who had been strongly opposed to the idea.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics...nomic-adviser/

  79. #179

    Default

    Trump talks staffing and North Korea, says tariffs will be applied 'in a loving way'

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/06/polit...den/index.html

    Has he been talking to Justin?
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  80. #180

    Default

    Yup, the winning will just go on and on...

    Consulting Firm Says Trump Tariffs Will Cost 146,000 Jobs



    https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...t-146000-jobs/

  81. #181

    Default

    Trump gets really tough on China. Demands cut in trade deficit of 1/4 of one percent.

    Trump Demands 0.26% Cut in China’s Trade Deficit

    Is this a Dr. Evil parody? Last year we ran a $375 billion dollar trade deficit with China. This year it will be—who knows? $400 billion? How would you even know if it had gone down by a quarter of a percent?

    https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...trade-deficit/

  82. #182

    Default

    He admits that he just pulls his "facts" out of his ***.

    ‘I didn’t even know’: Trump boasts about making up information during meeting with Canada’s Trudeau

    “Trudeau came to see me—he’s a good guy, Justin,” Trump said at the fundraiser, according to audio reviewed by the Post. “He said, ‘No, no, we have no trade deficit with you, we have none. Donald, please.’”


    “Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in—‘Donald, we have no trade deficit,’” Trump continued. “He’s very proud because everybody else, you know, we’re getting killed.”


    Trump bragged to GOP donors that he told “proud” Trudeau, “wrong, Justin, you do.”


    “I didn’t even know,” Trump admitted. “… I had no idea. I just said, ‘You’re wrong.’ You know why? Because we’re so stupid.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/did...nadas-trudeau/

  83. #183

    Default

    The Art of the Lie

  84. #184

    Default

    I don't even understand what the President of the United States is blubbering about.
    Sad...

    It is incoherent. Not even one proper sentence. If I knew better, I would think he was totally stoned.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  85. #185

    Default

    His tweet about it today is much the same.

    Trump doubles down on lie he told Canada’s Trudeau in jumbled new tweet


    Donald J. Trump

    @realDonaldTrump
    We do have a Trade Deficit with Canada, as we do with almost all countries (some of them massive). P.M. Justin Trudeau of Canada, a very good guy, doesn’t like saying that Canada has a Surplus vs. the U.S.(negotiating), but they do...they almost all do...and that’s how I know!


    10:29 AM - Mar 15, 2018
    In fact, the United States government says that the U.S. actually does have a trade surplus — not a deficit — with Canada.


    “U.S. goods and services trade with Canada totaled an estimated $627.8 billion in 2016,” writes the Office of the United States Trade Representative. “Exports were $320.1 billion; imports were $307.6 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with Canada was $12.5 billion in 2016.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/tru...led-new-tweet/

  86. #186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    He admits that he just pulls his "facts" out of his ***.

    ‘I didn’t even know’: Trump boasts about making up information during meeting with Canada’s Trudeau

    “Trudeau came to see me—he’s a good guy, Justin,” Trump said at the fundraiser, according to audio reviewed by the Post. “He said, ‘No, no, we have no trade deficit with you, we have none. Donald, please.’”


    “Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in—‘Donald, we have no trade deficit,’” Trump continued. “He’s very proud because everybody else, you know, we’re getting killed.”


    Trump bragged to GOP donors that he told “proud” Trudeau, “wrong, Justin, you do.”


    “I didn’t even know,” Trump admitted. “… I had no idea. I just said, ‘You’re wrong.’ You know why? Because we’re so stupid.”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/did...nadas-trudeau/
    Well whether he intended it or not, Trump at least got the last part right ... "You know why? Because we’re so stupid."

  87. #187

    Default

    So much winning!

    Even Fox News jabs Trump with split-screen of plummeting stock market as he signs new tariffs

    But as the president was speaking, the Dow Jones Industrial Average began to fall. CNN and MSNBC quickly had graphics up showing the drop as the president spoke. Fox News Channel and Fox Business eventually added stock market graphics to their broadcasts as well.


    By the end of Trump’s event, the Dow was down over 300 points.




    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/eve...s-new-tariffs/

  88. #188

    Default

    This is the woman that Trump put in charge of the opioid crisis. Apparently it's all because people aren't eating enough ice cream. Who knew? Also, just say no.

    Trump opioid chief Kellyanne Conway advises: Eat ice cream, not fentanyl and ‘it all works out’

    “So my short advice is, eat the ice cream, have the French fry, don’t buy the street drug — believe me, it all works out,” Conway added.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/wat...entanyl-works/

  89. #189

    Default

    Cut healthcare, cut social programs, cut infrastructure spending and replace it with smoke and mirrors, increase the military spending and then whine that the budget is out of control.

    After backing $1.5 trillion tax cuts, these GOP lawmakers are suddenly concerned about the debt

    Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a self described “fiscal conservative” who co-founded the House Freedom Caucus, voted for the 2017 tax cut and argued that it should not be revenue-neutral. On Thursday, he said his party’s spending bill “may be the worst bill I’ve seen in my time in Congress, the worst bill our leadership’s ever allowed to come to the floor.” He highlighted the bill’s $1.3 trillion price tag, “which will lead to a trillion dollar deficit.”

    https://thinkprogress.org/after-back...-79bec05f6c68/

  90. #190

    Default

    And the Dow drops 700 points after Trump announces tariffs on China. Expect retaliation. More winning!

    Dow tumbles more than 700 points after Trump's China tariff push

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell sharply at the end of the trading day to close down 724.42 points, or 2.93 per cent, at 23,957.89, the S&P 500 was off by 68.24 points, or 2.52 per cent, at 2,643.69, and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 178.61 points, or 2.4 per cent, ending at 7,166.68.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/doll...rket-1.4587888

  91. #191

    Default

    Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter say Trump will be impeached as a result of omnibus bill
    https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/0...f-omnibus-bill

    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  92. #192

    Default

    What happened to Trump's boasting about 4% growth with his tax plan????

    U.S. Economy Grew by 2.3% in First Quarter
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/27/b...p-economy.html

    U.S. economy slows as consumer spending brakes sharply
    LUCIA MUTIKANI, REUTERS


    The U.S. economy slowed in the first quarter as consumer spending grew at its weakest pace in nearly five years, but the setback is likely temporary against the backdrop of a tightening labor market and large fiscal stimulus.


    Gross domestic product increased at a 2.3 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said in its snapshot of first-quarter GDP on Friday, also held back by a moderation in business spending on equipment and investment in homebuilding.


    The economy grew at a 2.9 percent pace in the fourth quarter. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast output rising at a 2.0 percent rate in the January-March period.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  93. #193

    Default

    That $2.95 per week share of the tax cuts doesn't go as far as the GOP thought it would.

  94. #194
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,362

    Default

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tran...ions-1.4639020

    it looks like the net that was cast in the budget for big game like apple and google et al is going to catch a lot of relatively small-fry ex-pats napping and without a lot of options as you can't retroactively renounce citizenship. not only is there a big american tax hit for 2017, there will be a big canadian tax hit in 2018 for monies withdrawn in 2018 to pay the 2017 american tax bill.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  95. #195

    Default

    Record borrowing. Deficit up by nearly $150 billion for this year alone. On track to hit $1 trillion by 2020. So much winning.

    Mnuchin Sees Solid Treasuries Demand After Record U.S. Borrowing

    The U.S.’s need to issue more Treasuries is expected to grow as the fiscal picture deteriorates. The budget deficit widened to $600 billion halfway through the fiscal year, as spending increased at three times the pace of revenue growth in the October-to-March period, according to Treasury figures released earlier this month.


    Tax and spending measures approved by Congress and President Donald Trump are expected to push the budget gap to $804 billion in the current fiscal year, from $665 billion in fiscal 2017, and then surpass $1 trillion by 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ntent=business

  96. #196

    Default

    I thought that many in the GOP refused to pass legislation that increase the deficit. Looks like they failed their constituents.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  97. #197

    Default

    So much winning. China strikes back, not with tariffs but by cancelling existing orders and simply not buying US soybeans.

    Trump's trade war hits farmers even harder as China has halted all U.S. soybean purchases

    The world’s biggest oilseed processor just confirmed one of the soybean market’s biggest fears: China has essentially stopped buying U.S. supplies amid the brewing trade war.


    “Whatever they’re buying is non-U.S.,” Bunge Ltd. Chief Executive Officer Soren Schroder said in a telephone interview Wednesday. “They’re buying beans in Canada, in Brazil, mostly Brazil, but very deliberately not buying anything from the U.S.” […]


    It’s “very clear” that the trade tensions have already stopped China from buying U.S. supplies, Schroder said. “How long that will last, who knows? But so long as there is this big cloud of uncertainty, that’s likely to continue.”

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...bean-purchases

  98. #198

    Default

    Trump thinks he can win a trade war.

    Trump is playing checkers and the Chinese are playing a Four Dimensional version of GO


    Trump takes a jab and the Chinese take Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota farmers down quicker than a Bruce Lee fight.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  99. #199

    Default

    Monthly Budget Review for April 2018 | Congressional Budget Office
    https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53821


    https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115.../53821-mbr.pdf

  100. #200

    Default

    From the CBO link above:
    The federal budget deficit was $382 billion for the first seven months of fiscal year 2018, the Congressional Budget Office estimates, $37 billion more than the shortfall recorded during the same period last year. Revenues and outlays were higher, by 4 percent and 5 percent, respectively, than they were during the first seven months of fiscal year 2017.
    Revenue up by 4 percent but outlays up by 5% and since the last round of tax cuts failed to excite the 99%, the GOP is proposing another round which will reduce income even more.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •