"Trump Probably Picked the Worst Time to Propose a Giant Tax Cut"

I disagree, I think they were fine buying houses until the economic downturn cause by foreign outsourcing and foreign imports, when the money and jobs started going overseas, it meant less money and jobs to pay things like loans... when the price of homes dropped because of that, it made more sense to let your house foreclose and buy a new one as it was cheaper, so many did it... no one forced banks to loan people money that could not afford it, if they did that, they did it hoping to profit from the foreclosures, which normally is profitable for them

I woudl also add, part of the down turn started on y2k, everyone bought new PC's and servers to avoid y2k, this meant less new pc's and servers sold the next 5 years.... which caused a downturn in the economy

 

Decreasing taxes doesn't lower deficits, but it does increase tax revenues through increased consumer spending which spurs economic growth, resulting in more gross tax revenues. What can't be done (which Congress always does) is continue to spend more than taken in. Unspent tax revenues is a holy sin to Washington DC.

 

BS. What exactly did the R's do to rid the world of Subprime loans. That's right ABSOLUTLY NOTHING. Partisan hacks, can't believe a single one of em.


American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



On December 16, 2003, President George W. Bush signed into law the American Dream Downpayment Initiative, which was aimed at helping approximately "40,000 families a year" with their down payment and closing costs, and further strengthen America’s housing market. This legislation complemented the President's "aggressive housing agenda" announced in a speech he gave at the Department of Housing and Urban Development on June 18, 2002.[1]

This loan assistance program was discontinued in 2008.[2] However, other similar programs are still available, including low down payment FHA home loans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dream_Downpayment_Assistance_Act

...And this is a good time for the American homeowner. Today we received a report that showed that new home construction last month reached its highest level in nearly 20 years. The reason that is so is because there is renewed confidence in our economy. Low interest rates help. They have made owning a home more affordable for those who refinance and for those who buy a home for the first time. Rising home values have added more than $2 1/2 trillion to the assets of the American families since the start of 2001.

The rate of homeownership in America now stands at a record high of 68.4 percent. Yet there is room for improvement. The rate of homeownership amongst minorities is below 50 percent. And that's not right, and this country needs to do something about it. We need to close the minority homeownership gap in America so more citizens get the satisfaction and mobility that comes from owning your own home, from owning a piece of the future of America. ...
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=64935

Bush and the R's added fuel to the raging fire.
This crash was caused by decades of home ownership policies.
To blame 1 party is only done by blind people.

 

As opposed to you typical alt right response of blame the other side. LOL.

 

I don't know why these people dislike the majority of the working class American. Mind boggling.

 

Oh, I doubt it.

Obama really sucked on this metric.


Give Trump time to work, then we will compare their performances.

He's off to a hell of a start!

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOPGSTB

I see how you clipped out bush's part of the graph.

 

Bush sucked. We rejected Jeb! for offered 4 Bush term. And the Bush presidency stated nearly two decades ago. Where Obama sucked, just last year.

Off to one hell of a start!

Making America Great Again!

 

While not a big fan of all things obama.
The economy made a long slow steady recovery from the debacle of the bush and R congress.
So, I won't say he sucked. Help wanted signs are showing up everywhere.

 

Obama handed off an economy plunging to zero. Trump's off to a damn fine start turning that around though!

 

I say sucks is subjective.
A strong economy to most all people is sucks for some people. It's how people view things in life.

And some will cherry pick data.

 

Yeah. US serfs were supposed to accept "the new normal" elect Hillary and bow to the inside club that runs the imperial city of DC, the most powerful city in the world.

We had a better idea.... Trump!

How The Deep State Squeezed America's Wealth
.
The Acela Express from Baltimore to New York – was subsidized by taxpayers from all over the country.

The train runs from one end of today’s modern economy to the other. It goes from Washington, D.C. – the center of politics – to New York – the center of money.

In between is nothing but poverty and dereliction. There are factories that last made a product in the ’50s. There are workers’ houses almost unchanged in half a century. There are abandoned warehouses… wrecked cars… junk steel… and burly men in orange vests working with machines.

The middle is where real work was done and real things were made, shipped, and distributed; it shows few signs of growth or prosperity.

It is as though a sausage had been squeezed in the middle, driving the rich meat to the ends. In between is lean… and greasy.

How come?

Deep State’s Fingerprints
Every crime scene has many fingerprints on it.

Most are of the innocent.

The insiders use fake money to transfer wealth and power from the people who earn it to themselves.

It is as though they loaded up the train in Newark and Trenton… and shipped everything to Washington.

You earn real money by making real things and providing real services. But fake money is different. You don’t earn it by adding to the world’s wealth.

You get it by subtracting from it… that is, by borrowing from future output.

Real money is not controlled by anyone.

It is earned – freely – in win-win exchanges. Back in the 1950s and 1960s, it ended up in places like East Baltimore and Trenton because they used to make things people wanted.

But fake money takes a different route. It is created by the insiders… and controlled by them. It goes where they want it to go.

No Stimulus
Money always bows to politics; often, it is completely beholden to it.

In Russia, the oligarchs took government-owned property and used it to build their fortunes. In China, state-owned enterprises and favored entrepreneurs get government-backed credit to build their apartments, factories, and shopping malls.

And in America, the fake money is directed to favored sectors by 73,000 pages of the Internal Revenue Code… and 81,000 pages of the Federal Register.

Some may argue that the money “stimulates” the economy… and that it “trickles down” to the common people. If so, there is little evidence of it.

As a percentage of the working-age population, fewer people have jobs today than at any time since the 1970s. Back then, the typical man had to work 900 hours to earn enough to buy a new pickup truck. Today, he has to work 1,500 hours.

Central banks have increased the world’s monetary base (and their own balance sheets) by $20 trillion so far this century.

This money didn’t go to the fellow in the orange vest. Instead, it went to Russian tycoons… Chinese billionaires… art collectors… hedge fund managers… and rich people on both ends of the track.

http://www.internationalman.com//articles/how-the-deep-state-squeezed-americas-wealth

 

They came after the crash and helped to get us into a full recovery with 52 months of solid growth, rising income with full employment and SOARING tax revenues and a deficit falling to just $161B.

THEN the Democrats took control of the government and fiscal policy in January of 2007. How did they deal with THAT crash? Exactly the opposite of what they should have done and we had the worst recovery in modern history and you guys want more of it?

Again you said

What failed about them?

When you have a good economy and people going to work to fend for themselves and become productive tax payers you can spend less at home although spending went up and one of the reasons we did that is that we did spend money going after those who were attacking us and threatening peace throughout the world. The issue is DOMESTIC growth and making us more competitive which except for Obama were and are being addressed.

 

What??

 

Why are you asking fallacious questions about the middle class, the Bush tax rate cuts cut middle class taxes and removed millions at the bottom for any tax liability and I've yet to hear any proposals to tax the rich other from people except those who are jealous and envious of them and don't care about the effects on tax revenues and the deficits and debt. The Clinton tax rate increases slowed tax rate growth and in particular his 29% rate on cap gains produced half the revenues of the Bush 15% and less than a quarter of realizations, economic activity. Why would you want to put that rate back to the Clinton rate other than to satisfy your envy and jealousy?

As long as you uncap the benefits accordingly, they already lose money in that program, it is a RETIREMENT SYSTEM not a welfare system. What if the government tried to pass a law saying your retirement income from your retirement savings would be capped at $28,800 no matter how much you contributed to those funds throughout your life and that all that extra money would be taken from you and given to others.? Who you support that? It is not a general tax and spend program of the government. They pay the highest rate on every dollar earned subject to the tax, they do not earn extra benefits on income above that, while at the bottom some collect without contributing or contributing far less than the benefits they claim due to the EITC.

I bet if you said we should allow people to invest for themselves and the government would subsidize those accounts into safe long term investments and that money is YOURS when you retire and if you die before you reach that age or shortly thereafter that money goes to your heirs and the more you invest the more benefits you receive you would be against that.

 

I do know why people who cannot refute the facts nor support their own claims make specious statements.

 

I have, dozens of times to you. You just ignore and continue on disliking average working class America.
As I said earlier to you, it's beating a dead horse.

 

I think everyone should pay some taxes.

A lot of rich folks , who all swore by the way during the Bush Tax Cuts that they wanted to pay more taxes, are really screaming about the new bubble tax and the loss of deductions. Their taxes are going way up!

We need the change in corporate tax rate in order to level the playing field with our trading partners, the rest is just window dressing to sell it and to make it revenue nuetral in order to get it through the Senate. Unless you are upper middle class or rich, most of your taxes are payroll taxes and unless there is a change there, none of this matters beyond the margins.

There is no will in this country to change Social Security, too many depend on it, and even though Trump has been in office less than one year, he has already extended the life of the Trust fund, a full year. Obama lost a year, on average, every year he was in office. If Trump can continue his trend of gaining a year, each of his eight, and then Pence can do the same for two terms, that will carry us through the peak of the Boomer retirement, and that has been the bulge in the python that has had everyone's concern.

They are for top down control and against individual freedom and liberty. You can nearly predict their every move if you understand this.

 

That’s not true either. Income is taxed at a much higher rate than sales.

 

Well give that man a fish. There is NO income tax on sales.

 

i was wondering why you asked this "And when has that worked?[the trickle up]"
you seem to not like the idea of a stimulus, because everyone gets up to the same amount, in the case I suggested, up to 5k rich or poor

see there ya go, you wont want to save Social security unless the rich get more... why is that?

I woudl be all for investment account IF, they were guaranteed, meaning if the market crashes, you still get what social security woudl of gave you, if your so sure gambling in the stock market will work better, woudl you agree to that?

nothing wrong with cap'g benefits, there is no reason 90% of us should pay the tax on every dollar we earn and the rich do not, the rich will always get the max allowed based on what they put in, seems fair to me, trust me, they do not need you to defend them, they will be fine in their old age

I just find it weird that tax cuts for the rich are never questioned by the right, but tax cuts for the middle class are, seems odd....

 

Well, and that is what has been occuring since Clinton started taxing Social Security benefits. Cutting benefits, that won't fly, taxing them, especially the wealthy, that seems to fly fine.

As wealthy Americans continue to get wealthier, a bigger share of their wages is escaping the Social Security tax. So, one proposed solution is to get rid of the cap and keep the 12.4 percent payroll tax rate, which would mean an estimated $100 billion more taxes a year for the wealthy, who currently pay a smaller proportion of their income into Social Security compared with poorer families. Simply put, this would close the current funding gap.

And never forget, these are the same sob's who humble bragged all through the Bush Tax cuts about how much they would LOVE to pay higher taxes!

 

yes, decreasing takes on the working class helps the economy, tax cuts on the mega rich not so much

government jobs also add to the economy, as well does food stamps and the like

Presidential vacations usually help the economy too, course in this presidents case..... Trump's businesses

 

No argument there, whatsoever. However, the devil in the details is what the government considers "mega rich". Democrats think anyone making 200k a year need to be taxed at 50%. We agree, just not the definition of "rich".

 

spending overseas dropped cause of the economic crash, lol, you know that right, if that spending had been here in the first place and not so many jobs shipped overseas, we woudl be much better off economically