Author Topic: The Trump Presidency  (Read 1200201 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3350 on: April 28, 2017, 09:56:41 AM »
It must really suck having a playbook with only three plays: 1. Racist, 2. Class warfare (i.e., the 1%), 3. Sexist

Phil is so obsessed with how much money a rich guy keeps he can't see what's good for him.

Your boy wacky is attacking the privileged. Not I.

You know your previous posts are pasted above, right?

I literally said we all get more money...great. ignoring the other side of the income statement doesn't make it irrelevant.

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3351 on: April 28, 2017, 09:58:14 AM »
This is going to be a fun 4 years, where libs still try to spin anything positive into the "lol trump" thread.  :love:

So you getting more money is a positive no matter the macro impacts?
Thankfully due to my liberal friends, whatever extra $ they get, they can funnel into the macro cause. I know they'll do the right thing. It's what you guys stand for. Thank you!

Who do I write my check to to fund the wall, social security, Medicare, military spending?

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3352 on: April 28, 2017, 10:00:29 AM »
Ask Obama. He should know.

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3353 on: April 28, 2017, 10:03:40 AM »
Great first 100 days guys

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10168
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3354 on: April 28, 2017, 10:13:10 AM »
The deduction part does help the bottom, and I'm more than fine with it, but this plan really is for the rich. It allows them to continue to gain a stronger stranglehold on everything. Trickle down doesn't work, it only removes capital from the pool available and rich people only reinvest in items (securities, derivatives, etc) that enrich them and their buddies. It doesn't spur real tangible growth that gets people jobs. It spurs getting fatter salaries for those at the top, and does away with them having to provide tangible benefits to their company. They can basically become a hoard of Charlie Weis's running around, getting a fat salary, not needing to showing any improvement other than limp along, and then burning down the program (or company), and moving onto the next one.

The reason for example taxes on the rich were 90% on income back in the 1930s-1960s was to create incentive in paying those rich people in stock and dividends, which forced them to have to perform and care more about the performance of the company, since their pay was directly tied to the company performance. Hence capital gains being not a big tax then since it was seen as the true reward for a job well done for the wealthy. Better company performance that forces you to create jobs and grow tangibly, not sock cash away and sit on it for just you. But now that we've slashed the income tax on the wealthy again and again, we see their salaries soar, and while most if not all CEOs do get stock incentives, it's a mere amount compared to the what many can make in sheer salary.

Think of it as Charlie Weis. If we had a super high tax on salary over let's say 500k, and keep other income like capital gains (we'll call them wins) low, you'd get contracts like this:

Salary: $500k
Gains per win: $100k

That gives incentive to win.

If you have super low tax on the rich, that means you'd want to negotiate to have a super high slary, cause why not:, and if you do nothing to the gains, or try to raise it you get this:

Salary: $5mill
Gains per win 100k

Where is his incentive to win? And if he does win, great, if not, no big deal. But who benefits the most from the first case? Everyone. Who benefits from the second case? Charlie Weis.

So cheer for your little 4k extra, but the house you live in might be burned down. Ever wonder why in a lot of ways we had '07-'08? The Enrons and the like? Give the super rich more cash to play with, they will play with yours too, and if they lose, everyone loses. If this plan was just to double the deduction, and reduce corporate tax by removing all loopholes so the effective tax and actual tax rate were a lot closer. I'd be behind it 110%. The way it is now, it's a sweet morsel with a poisonous core.

Sorry, long /rant
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater with a tesla


Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 65793
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3355 on: April 28, 2017, 10:22:24 AM »
Yeah, 70k per year is def lower middle class in rural America

It's typical coal miner pay.

I guess you don't see the irony in calling someone privileged in the same sentence you call a 70k per year job lower middle class in rural America.
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3356 on: April 28, 2017, 10:22:50 AM »
Trickle down has worked for 250 years.  Saying it doesn't, doesn't make it so.

If you have concerns regarding the deficit, I'm all ears, but I don't give a eff how much money or taxes someone else makes or pays. Everyone should get paid as much as they can.  Rich people are not to blame for the plight of poor people, there's no coherent argument supporting that statement, only a preference for socialist redistributive policy--which nobody wants in case you haven't noticed.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37456
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3357 on: April 28, 2017, 10:24:20 AM »
Yeah, 70k per year is def lower middle class in rural America

It's typical coal miner pay.

I guess you don't see the irony in calling someone privileged in the same sentence you call a 70k per year job lower middle class in rural America.

Well, if $200k is upper middle class, then what is $70k?

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3358 on: April 28, 2017, 10:41:54 AM »
Trickle down has worked for 250 years.  Saying it doesn't, doesn't make it so.

If you have concerns regarding the deficit, I'm all ears, but I don't give a eff how much money or taxes someone else makes or pays. Everyone should get paid as much as they can.  Rich people are not to blame for the plight of poor people, there's no coherent argument supporting that statement, only a preference for socialist redistributive policy--which nobody wants in case you haven't noticed.

I have concerns about what this plan does to the deficit.  I don't disagree with anything else you posted. I also don't think if you are wealthy you should get extra breaks ...aka deductions nobody else can take.

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39534
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3359 on: April 28, 2017, 10:42:15 AM »
Yeah, 70k per year is def lower middle class in rural America

It's typical coal miner pay.

I guess you don't see the irony in calling someone privileged in the same sentence you call a 70k per year job lower middle class in rural America.

Well, if $200k is upper middle class, then what is $70k?

$70k is just about double the median household income in WV

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10168
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3360 on: April 28, 2017, 10:42:19 AM »
Trickle down has worked for 250 years.  Saying it doesn't, doesn't make it so.

If you have concerns regarding the deficit, I'm all ears, but I don't give a eff how much money or taxes someone else makes or pays. Everyone should get paid as much as they can.  Rich people are not to blame for the plight of poor people, there's no coherent argument supporting that statement, only a preference for socialist redistributive policy--which nobody wants in case you haven't noticed.

Trickle down works for the very few, so wrong, it guess it "worked" but not in a way joe schmoe gets to enjoy the benefits of it. The times of the greatest amount of people succeeding have been when it hasn't been in effect. But w/e you don't understand that. I have zero problem with people being rich, or that rich people are to blame for people being poor, there are plenty of people who are stupid with their money. But when you propose and have but into effect a tax system that allows people to get paid away with literally eff you money, instead of forcing them to prioritize their performance and the performance of the company with bonuses and incentives, tons of people lose. But I guess that's unfettered capitalism for you.

If your company have you a big salary, and mild bonus and incentives, you don't care as much about performing and helping than if they paid you a lower salary, but gave the the prospect of a big ass bonus.
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater with a tesla


Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3361 on: April 28, 2017, 10:43:43 AM »
Ask Obama. He should know.

You don't see the problem? We can't keep spending like this and cut taxes. It doesn't work. Then you want to build a billion and billion dollar wall and buy more tanks?

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13745
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3362 on: April 28, 2017, 10:52:49 AM »
Ask Obama. He should know.

You don't see the problem? We can't keep spending like this and cut taxes. It doesn't work. Then you want to build a billion and billion dollar wall and buy more tanks?

The republicans that post on this board dgaf about the deficit unless a democrat is in office.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3363 on: April 28, 2017, 10:53:40 AM »
I don't want to build a wall. That's Trump's crap. I'll believe it when I see it.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 65793
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3364 on: April 28, 2017, 10:56:58 AM »
Ask Obama. He should know.

You don't see the problem? We can't keep spending like this and cut taxes. It doesn't work. Then you want to build a billion and billion dollar wall and buy more tanks?

The republicans that post on this board dgaf about the deficit unless a democrat is in office.

That's true
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37456
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3365 on: April 28, 2017, 10:59:08 AM »
Yeah, 70k per year is def lower middle class in rural America

It's typical coal miner pay.

I guess you don't see the irony in calling someone privileged in the same sentence you call a 70k per year job lower middle class in rural America.

Well, if $200k is upper middle class, then what is $70k?

$70k is just about double the median household income in WV

Yeah, it's a poor state. That doesn't make a family earning a household income of $40,000 middle class.

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39534
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3366 on: April 28, 2017, 11:01:50 AM »
iirc WV and OK were the only two states in which Trump won every county. just trying to see how his plan would affect them.

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3367 on: April 28, 2017, 11:05:50 AM »
I don't want to build a wall. That's Trump's crap. I'll believe it when I see it.

You voted for it...you just were so excited you might get some tax break. Great!

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37456
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3368 on: April 28, 2017, 11:06:41 AM »
A married couple earning a household income of $40,000 with no kids taking the standard deduction currently pays $3,643.75. The Trump plan would have them paying $1600.

Edit: Sorry, I was looking at his old bracket that had a 0% rate for the first $25k. I guess his current plan starts at 10%. In the coal miner example, he would be paying $5800, not $4500.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2017, 11:18:28 AM by Rage Against the McKee »

Offline Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15424
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3369 on: April 28, 2017, 11:10:43 AM »
A married couple earning a household income of $40,000 with no kids taking the standard deduction currently pays $3,643.75. The Trump plan would have them paying nothing.

So you are a fan.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3370 on: April 28, 2017, 11:11:50 AM »
I don't want to build a wall. That's Trump's crap. I'll believe it when I see it.

You voted for it...you just were so excited you might get some tax break. Great!
Jesus, stop with that crap. Did you love everything on Hillary's platform? Libs who get vile at Trump voters are the weirdest rough ridin' ppl of all time. Like, they owe them something. Like, this wasn't thee worst selection of candidates in the history of time.

When you voted for Obama, we're you super pumped to spend a crap more on healthcare? Like, get married and whomever's provider you choose, is getting deducted over $250 a check now. rough ridin' OBAMA VOTERS! :shakesfist:

Offline Institutional Control

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15113
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3371 on: April 28, 2017, 11:13:10 AM »
Great first 100 days guys

1360 more great days to come.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37456
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3372 on: April 28, 2017, 11:13:27 AM »
A married couple earning a household income of $40,000 with no kids taking the standard deduction currently pays $3,643.75. The Trump plan would have them paying nothing.

So you are a fan.

I'm a fan of poor people not paying taxes, yes.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 65793
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3373 on: April 28, 2017, 11:20:43 AM »
I don't want to build a wall. That's Trump's crap. I'll believe it when I see it.

You voted for it...you just were so excited you might get some tax break. Great!
Jesus, stop with that crap. Did you love everything on Hillary's platform? Libs who get vile at Trump voters are the weirdest rough ridin' ppl of all time. Like, they owe them something. Like, this wasn't thee worst selection of candidates in the history of time.

When you voted for Obama, we're you super pumped to spend a crap more on healthcare? Like, get married and whomever's provider you choose, is getting deducted over $250 a check now. rough ridin' OBAMA VOTERS! :shakesfist:

I understand people that voted for bush, dole, bush, McCain, Romney. There is no excuse for voting for Donald Trump. Don't try and justify it with any other candidate, a vote for Donald Trump is baffling
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: The Trump Presidency
« Reply #3374 on: April 28, 2017, 11:22:12 AM »
You voted for a poster on this board. Not sure if you're the one who should be throwing shade at who votes for what.