Trumpeting a $4 Trillion Unpaid Tax Cut | What's Wrong With This Picture?

We're gonna use the Obarry system and just say how great everything is over and over and over but in his case it will be true LOL

 

Ok but remember to stock up on ammo and water and git yerself a nice bucket to crap in and leave a bar of soap down by the crick LMAO

 

exactly, short and sweet of it!

 

You're leaving out a few important points.
"Read my lips... no new taxes." A promise that had to be broken because recession was imminent during Bush Sr.'s presidency.
Clinton increased taxes... RETROACTIVELY.

Now ask yourself about the "tech boom". Why and how did it occur? Because the government heavily funded R&D and the Clinton Administration made the expansion of the internet one of their priorities.

 

It's OK. The Republicans won't be in total control for much longer.

 

I'm sorry, but companies don't grow necessarily because their taxes are low. They grow when revenues increase and revenues are a direct result of both product availability and a loyal/expanding customer base willing to pay for said products. Did Apple begin to fail because Steve Jobs was ousted, or because Apple lost its ability to inspire innovative products that kept a loyal customer base buying? When Steve Jobs returned to Apple, did revenues begin to increase because Apple's taxes were lowered or because innovation and inspiration returned to Apple along with loyal customers willing to buy into that innovation.

If you have seen me talk about this issue once, then you have seen me discussing it a thousand times before on this forum. Innovation is what drives an economy to scale. And, if we had done what both Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama wanted which was begin to build a New Energy Technology related Economic Engine, we would not be having this conversation right now, because our economy would probably be growing at a consistent 5.7% per year without any end in sight. But, we failed to listen to Jimmy Carter, because we thought he was nuts when it said that we would eventually end up in foreign lands fighting wars for natural resources. And, we dropped a nuclear economic bomb on Obama, in the form of the 2007/2008 economic implosion that completely removed his campaign agenda which was the establishment of a New Energy Technology Economy - which by the way nobody seems to remember anymore.

I'm not saying I want to pay higher taxes. I'm saying that the use of Taxes as a wedge issue has been going on long enough and we need to stop being silly on the matter of what really expands our economy. Innovation, has always been the key to economic growth and expansion and that comes from doing the work of inspiring people to think outside the box for the purpose of solving age old problems in more efficient ways and providing new ways of doing things that could not be done before. That's not tax problem per se. That's a leadership, focus and desire problem all rolled into one.

 

Yup that's my biggest concern!

 

You mean like Reagan's and Bush's?

Remind us what happened to the deficits during their terms with their "pro growth" tax cuts.

 

And your basis for that assertion is what? Because that certainly sounds like something you just pulled out of your ass.

 

Always good to see "patriots" hoping for the destruction of the country.

 

Half? Donald Rumsfeld, told us on the literal eve of 911, that the government lost $2.2 Trillion taxpayer dollars and they had no idea how it happened. The very next day, four (4) commercial aircraft allegedly fell from the sky on American soil. Shortly thereafter we found ourselves invading both Afghanistan and Iraq. Subsequently, we have no looked back at what should have been the biggest news story since the resignation of Richard Milhous Nixon. Instead, today we are preoccupied with Terror and Terrorists - both of which we created with our own failed foreign policy decisions.

Getting by with half? I wonder just how many Trillions have been lost without explanation and without anyone in government coming forth to tell the truth about it. We can probably get by on a lot less than half, if the government were truly doing its job and not controlled by those who control the nation's money supply through fraud and continued deception.

We have lost the ability to appropriately govern ourselves and we have created a monster of epic proportions. We did that. We The People, by abdicating our duty and responsibility that a free democratic republic demands. The System is now in control of us. We have lost control of the System. That took place about 141 years ago.

Half? We can do a lot better than that, just not under the current Framework and not until We The People, suffer something similar to 1929/1932. Until we see Soup Lines and Soup Kitchens again en masse, nothing will change because We The People, refuse to awaken.

 

The blue area represents more people...No mandate unless you include coyotes, jackrabbits and deer...Why do you keep dragging out this ridiculous meaningless map, champ?

 

Did you just just call Thomas Jefferson a patriot? I'm sure he would appreciate that very much. I'm also certain that he would look at you as if you were the enemy.

Imagine, this man looking at you believing that you were the problem and not the solution:



Not something I would want or enjoy.

 

OP...I predicted last year Trump was running so he could abolish inheritance tax so his family can inherit all his wealth. My prediction is nearly fulfilled.

A non politician runs for office to abolish inheritance tax and he looks like he will succeed. Has there been a greater man ever?

 

That isn't actually true. Rumsfeld was talking about the Pentagon's antiquated and incompatible accounting systems, and how it made it impossible to fully track all the Pentagon spending. He never suggested the money had been lost or wasted.

It's been an ongoing problem for some time.
http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002hxm

Something that needs fixing? Of course. Something that suggests you can cut the budget in half with no harm? Not at all.

This is like the more recent claim that Ben Carson uncovered $600 billion in missing money at HUD. Again, bunk. The HUD IG reported that much in aggregate accounting errors, meaning both positive and negative. The money wasn't missing, and the net effect on HUD's books was minimal.

 

Sorry about the typo - my bad.

About more of the paycheck. I did not hear anything in the comments made by Goldman Sachs today, that middle America or working America for that matter would be involved in the huge tax to anywhere near the same degree that corporate America would by definition. I run a business and I have no issues with tax cuts. But, I would prefer that tax cuts be commensurate with spending reductions and that is not what Goldman Sachs told us today.

I write my own paycheck. However, I still pay taxes and I'd like to know that my tax dollars are not being spent on the absurd or the immoral - which has been the case for quite some time now.

They are not talking about Spending Controls in DC and that is far more important to me than a hair cut in my favor. I can make any amount of money I need to offset any amount of tax they are ever going to extract from me. That's not the problem.

 

No, I called people who want to "kill the government and start from scratch" and claim we are "long overdue" for a revolution, faux "patriots".

 

Honestly, the Inheritance Tax, right along with the highly immoral (IMO) Death Tax, should have been ripped from the pages of the tax code along time ago. Quite frankly, those abominations should never have been allowed to come to a vote in the first place. So, I'm not going to ding him for that. He's got a lot more that he can be dinged for, IMO.

If his plan adds to the deficit, then that becomes the Elephant in the middle of the living room that will get swept down the road well beyond his single term in office and once again, We The People, get stuck with the bill. It is completely irresponsible to lower revenues while maintaining spending levels.

Now, he claims that the nation will undergo a magical 6.5% GDP boost as a Trickle Down net effect of his tax cuts at the corporate level. That's pure fantasy. We currently have 4.7% unemployment. Even at full throttle employment, which would be necessity result in a 1.0% percent rate, that would not be sufficient to product 6.5 GDP sustained rate of growth. So, he's lying through his teeth and he sent Goldman Sachs to tell his lie to boot. Very insulting, IMO.

He just slapped America straight in the face and basically told all of us: You are a bunch of flaming idiots who will buy anything I have to sell you. I am paraphrasing, of course. This President is completely off the hook nuts. He's not playing with a full deck. He does not think things through to their logical conclusion and he seems to know precious little about the controlling factors that keep our nation running - such as the matter of Economics.

I want the tax cuts - don't misunderstand what I'm saying. But, I want to see the Omnibus process outlawed and a new appropriations process set in its place, so that the each proposed spending measure can be focused on line-by-line and audited prior to a vote for actual efficacy, effectiveness and optimization - not to mention Constitutional congruence. If this President were serious about setting the record straight, he would have done his homework on the entirety of the Omnibus process before putting forth any kind of Tax proposal.

 

Pay very close attention to the question from the Senator prior to Rumsfeld's reply. When you give a reply that accepts the underlying premise without correcting it, then by definition you vouch for said underlying premise even if you don't re-state the premise verbatim:

"I was going to say Terrifying"
Donald Rumsfeld, Senate Confirmation Hearings, 2001​

Is it any wonder that he would use the word "Terrifying" literally hours before 911 would take place and just before the entire country would be flushed into a psychological operation that focuses their minds on "Terror" 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and 366 days on leap year? We now have "Terror" tattooed to our collective limbic brain. We can no more get through a single week in this country without being scared half to death by the word "Terror" being dosed out by either the media or some politician doing their level best to fulfill the mandate embodied in the costs of 911 to this country.

He did not do that by mistake, or because he could not come up with a different word. He knew damn well what he was talking about. That's what these people do. BEFORE they act, they put the thing directly under your nose in a way that you don't know or understand until it is too late. It is called Hubris and Arrogance and Neocons are full of both.

​

Whether you claim you "cannot track more than $2.3 Trillion dollars in transactions," or you give your implicit agreement to the same when asked by a Senator to explain how the Pentagon could lose trillions, it is quite clear that you are talking about the exact same thing. Whether losing it, misplacing it, forgetting about it, not being able to track it or incorrectly accounting for it the result is the same - the American Taxpayer is getting screwed. Period.

True. They have been throwing good money after bad for quite sometime before September 10th, 2001.

Certainly, not without a reduction in spending to make it revenue neutral.

HUD is not DOD. HUD does not have Black Projects that have Black Books with Ghost Colored Ink about Dark Programs that have No Name and no way to inform the public about what's going on with their Tax Dollars. You are left to trust the government that it is spending your money according to your will and consent. Are you willing to put that much faith in an institution that has time after time proven that it cannot be trusted to spend tax dollars according to your will and consent? I'm not.

By the way, exactly what are we now doing with the SR-71 Blackbird? That was a Black Project with Black Books and Ghost Colored Ink.

 

Reagan also tripled the deficit...

So much for all that "deficit hawk"nonsense huh?

That didn't last very long (as predicted)

 

My favorite? Eliminating the inheritance tax.
Currently, the exclusion limit is $5.45 million -- if an estate is below that, no inheritance tax.
I would bet a poll of Trump Chumps would reveal they don't know that - they would say "yes" to eliminating the inheritance tax - which is now only on the rich!!

Two of the all-time favorite and biggest budget lies - "savings from eliminating waste and corruption" - and "the economy will grow and tax revenue will soar".

This is nothing more than more "trickle down"malarky. Just as the GOP voted over and over to repeal ObamaCare with the same result, they keep up with the Trickle Down malarky and promise different results.

 

Why, exactly? Why are those who repeat the refrain of Jefferson, Faux Patriots while Jefferson himself gets a pass on being labeled as such.

Did Jefferson, not leave behind instructions for exactly what patriots would do when the government overstepped its role under the United States Constitution, or when the government became so burdensome on The People, as to usurp their rights on the road towards tyranny? Did not Jefferson, warn us about this a very long time ago?

Should those who speak in such terms head to Boston and kick things off with a little party of their own that draws up the new People's Amendment to the United States Constitution, which would as its first of many measures call for the immediate remanding of power back to The People, the disbandment of the current Congress along with its powers and to secure for The People, the powers of the Executive Office until such time as The People, can decide for themselves what form of govern to institute on their behalf, by their will and by their consent?

What part of this do you disagree with, exactly?

 

Like the poster said, wildly out of control.

 

Because Jefferson's words, taken in context, do not reflect a desire to "kill the government and start over from scratch", nor to have a full-blown revolution.

He was referring to small rebellions, specifically Shay's Rebellion. And was arguing that the government shouldn't treat such rebellions too harshly, as they reflected the heartfelt -- if misguided -- feelings of the rebels.

He clearly did not feel that the rebels had cause, or that the young government he had just helped create was engaged in tyranny or deserving of being overthrown.