myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Trump
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1217, 1218, 1219 ... 1247, 1248, 1249  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 1562

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More lies:

Donald Trump continued to voice his opposition to expanded mail-in voting with a tweet on Sunday spreading falsehoods about the prevalence of fraud in the process, even though confirmed cases of voter fraud have been in the single digits in past presidential elections.

“The United States cannot have all Mail In Ballots. It will be the greatest Rigged Election in history,” Mr Trump tweeted, the latest in a recent uptick of attacks on Democrats’ — and even many Republicans’ — desire to expand mail-in voting to mitigate health risks during the coronavirus pandemic.

“People grab them from mailboxes, print thousands of forgeries and ‘force’ people to sign. Also, forge names,” the president wrote, falsely, without citing any evidence to support such claims.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-2020-election-mail-in-ballots-vote-fraud-forgeries-a9530661.html?utm_source=reddit.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 1562

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
swchandler wrote:
I'm thinking that if Joe Biden and Democrats prevail in congressional elections, we will see an increase in income tax obligations for wealthy folks, particularly relative to capital gains income. In addition, corporate taxes need to be raised back to pre-Trump levels.

It would be the right thing to do to begin addressing our deficit, and ultimately helping to whittle down our debt. Actually, everyone should be chipping in the long haul, even the middle class, but the robustness of a recovery must take hold first.

Responsibility has its costs, and the sooner that that is recognized, our nation will be much better off in the long run.
Yep, chase those rich corporations back out of our country again to avoid those raising taxes. What most of you dems still don't get is that people can and will change their behavior and business practices to legally avoid paying increased taxes, which the dems love to call "loopholes", giving it a negative connotation. We have never been mindless sheep to just bend over and accept higher taxes w/o doing anything about it, never.
Keeping or lowering taxes even more, makes for smaller unemployment numbers, more people paying in, more revenue gained, but dems absolutely refuse to believe it. JFK was one of the few who did, but lucky for you guys, he's dead.


The argument that income tax cuts raise growth is
repeated so often that it is sometimes taken as gospel.
However, theory, evidence, and simulation studies tell
a different and more complicated story. Tax cuts offer
the potential to raise economic growth by improving
incentives to work, save, and invest. But they also
create income effects that reduce the need to engage
in productive economic activity, and they may subsidize
old capital, which provides windfall gains to asset holders
that undermine incentives for new activity. In addition,
tax cuts as a stand-alone policy (that is, not accompanied
by spending cuts) will typically raise the federal budget
deficit. The increase in the deficit will reduce national
saving—and with it, the capital stock owned by Americans
and future national income—and raise interest rates,
which will negatively affect investment. The net effect of
the tax cuts on growth is thus theoretically uncertain and
depends on both the structure of the tax cut itself and
the timing and structure of its financing.

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/09_Effects_Income_Tax_Changes_Economic_Growth_Gale_Samwick.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 14706
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
swchandler wrote:
I'm thinking that if Joe Biden and Democrats prevail in congressional elections, we will see an increase in income tax obligations for wealthy folks, particularly relative to capital gains income. In addition, corporate taxes need to be raised back to pre-Trump levels.

It would be the right thing to do to begin addressing our deficit, and ultimately helping to whittle down our debt. Actually, everyone should be chipping in the long haul, even the middle class, but the robustness of a recovery must take hold first.

Responsibility has its costs, and the sooner that that is recognized, our nation will be much better off in the long run.
Yep, chase those rich corporations back out of our country again to avoid those raising taxes. What most of you dems still don't get is that people can and will change their behavior and business practices to legally avoid paying increased taxes, which the dems love to call "loopholes", giving it a negative connotation. We have never been mindless sheep to just bend over and accept higher taxes w/o doing anything about it, never.
Keeping or lowering taxes even more, makes for smaller unemployment numbers, more people paying in, more revenue gained, but dems absolutely refuse to believe it. JFK was one of the few who did, but lucky for you guys, he's dead.


What a tool. When JFK lowered taxes--a measure I supported--the marginal rate was 91%, and it was lowered to 65%. Now it is in the 30's. But I hear you believe in the tooth fairy too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6313
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
nw30 wrote:
swchandler wrote:
I'm thinking that if Joe Biden and Democrats prevail in congressional elections, we will see an increase in income tax obligations for wealthy folks, particularly relative to capital gains income. In addition, corporate taxes need to be raised back to pre-Trump levels.

It would be the right thing to do to begin addressing our deficit, and ultimately helping to whittle down our debt. Actually, everyone should be chipping in the long haul, even the middle class, but the robustness of a recovery must take hold first.

Responsibility has its costs, and the sooner that that is recognized, our nation will be much better off in the long run.
Yep, chase those rich corporations back out of our country again to avoid those raising taxes. What most of you dems still don't get is that people can and will change their behavior and business practices to legally avoid paying increased taxes, which the dems love to call "loopholes", giving it a negative connotation. We have never been mindless sheep to just bend over and accept higher taxes w/o doing anything about it, never.
Keeping or lowering taxes even more, makes for smaller unemployment numbers, more people paying in, more revenue gained, but dems absolutely refuse to believe it. JFK was one of the few who did, but lucky for you guys, he's dead.


What a tool. When JFK lowered taxes--a measure I supported--the marginal rate was 91%, and it was lowered to 65%. Now it is in the 30's. But I hear you believe in the tooth fairy too.
Like I said...…. and mac never disappoints. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 1562

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Typically, NW misses the nuance. I suppose he also supports Increasing the minimum wage. Expanding unemployment benefits. Boosting Social Security benefits to encourage workers to retire earlier. Spending more for highway construction:

Most historians say Kennedy's long-term economic impact was profound but complicated. Virtually all agree that in the short run, his policies did contribute to that golden era of the mid-1960s when the United States was enjoying one of the most robust economic expansions in history.

By 1966 — the year that might have been the fifth of his presidency had he lived — Kennedy would have been presiding over an economy growing at a rate of 6.6 percent and an unemployment rate falling to just 3.8 percent.

That boom came after Kennedy got Congress to try to stimulate the economy by passing a "liberal" agenda that included:

Increasing the minimum wage.
Expanding unemployment benefits.
Boosting Social Security benefits to encourage workers to retire earlier.
Spending more for highway construction.
But Kennedy also did something that conservatives have been praising ever since: He pushed for much lower tax rates.

In 1962, speaking at the Economic Club of New York, Kennedy said he was committed to "an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes." The tax system, mostly designed during World War II, "exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking," he said.

Many lawmakers worried that reducing taxes without cutting spending would create unacceptable budget deficits. But Kennedy, who famously noted that "a rising tide lifts all boats," insisted tax cuts would generate broad-based growth.

Congress finally approved the tax cuts in early 1964, three months after Kennedy's assassination. The following fiscal year, the federal budget deficit did indeed shrink. Stock investors loved it. Between 1962 and 1966, the Dow Jones industrial average nearly doubled.

To this day, conservatives point to that robust period as evidence that cutting taxes will lead to higher revenues.

But liberals say conservatives' interpretation is misleading because conditions were so different in the early 1960s, when the top marginal tax rate was 91 percent. The Kennedy-backed tax cuts took down that rate to 70 percent. Today, the highest rate is 39.6 percent. Cutting the top tax bracket now would not have the same impact because it already has been lowered several times, the argument goes.

"You can only go to the well so many times before you lose effectiveness," says David Shreve, an economic historian who has written about the Kennedy-era tax cuts.

Shreve says there's another factor conservatives overlook: Kennedy's biggest tax cuts were aimed at average wage earners in hopes they would spend more. Boosting the demand side of the economy "gave us the widest prosperity and longest unbroken run of growth in history" up to then.

In contrast, conservatives focus on "supply-side" cuts, which target the marginal tax rates for wealthier individuals. The goal is to encourage them to invest more and expand output.

https://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244772593/jfks-lasting-economic-legacy-lower-tax-rates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 9683

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW30, I can tell you really can't see the future because you're drunk on nonsense. If you think that we as a country can go back to some earlier time, you've listened to too much Donald Trump and a foolish Republican party.

The future will be into automation and computer science, and that will change the idea of labor and where things will happen in the future. We need to be focusing on our infrastructure and transforming in the best ways to maintain our strength and stature in the world, and that means bringing all Americans up.

Yet, I think that you are so intoxicated with an unfit character like Donald Trump and a long gone past to see a meaningful future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 4735

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

boggsman1 wrote:
In Trumps 3 years in office, the US added 3 Trillion in debt.

You may wish to check how much debt your B+ President, Obama added in the first 3 years of his Administration........and then ask yourself why you were so calm about that.

boggsman1 wrote:
Stop referencing the Democrats.

Boggsy, I am still hopeful that one day I will be blessed with an intelligent response from you.......but that hope is fading. You howled about the train wreck that is the Trump Administration, and wailed that the country can't take four more years. Yet you are affronted by a response that references the alternative to Trump! You may be unaware, but Congress controls government expenditures. Pelosi and Schumer don't care what tone Trump sets...........they pursue their own agenda which currently includes massive stimulus spending. There is no reason to believe that they would change their ways if Biden wins the WH, so it's entirely reasonable to consider whether Nancy and Chuck would be any better than the 4 more Trump years which gives you the vapors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 14706
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2020 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
boggsman1 wrote:
In Trumps 3 years in office, the US added 3 Trillion in debt.

You may wish to check how much debt your B+ President, Obama added in the first 3 years of his Administration........and then ask yourself why you were so calm about that.

boggsman1 wrote:
Stop referencing the Democrats.

Boggsy, I am still hopeful that one day I will be blessed with an intelligent response from you.......but that hope is fading. You howled about the train wreck that is the Trump Administration, and wailed that the country can't take four more years. Yet you are affronted by a response that references the alternative to Trump! You may be unaware, but Congress controls government expenditures. Pelosi and Schumer don't care what tone Trump sets...........they pursue their own agenda which currently includes massive stimulus spending. There is no reason to believe that they would change their ways if Biden wins the WH, so it's entirely reasonable to consider whether Nancy and Chuck would be any better than the 4 more Trump years which gives you the vapors.


So much happy horseshit. Trump and McConnell have the balance of power, and McConnell authored the first draft of what became the CARES Act. Trump signed it, although only Mnuchin in his administration had any idea what was in it. McConnell was a supporter of TARP. Mrgybe is either a fool or a liar; there is no other choice.

https://www.politico.com/story/2009/10/mcconnell-tarp-worked-027851
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vientomas



Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 1562

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greens Fees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 14706
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2020 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And then there is corporate debt—fueled by reckless lending. According to this article, Hertz and American Airlines are among the borrowers. Hertz just declared bankruptcy, and American’s prospects are flying low. These are the folks that Trump and McConnell are bailing out—instead of fixing water systems, roads, and bridges. Some liars on the forum even disparage funding for infrastructure.

https://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/the-coronavirus-is-exposing-wall-streets-reckless-gamble-on-bad-debt?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_052420&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5dfabdf7fc942d641a20c2e1&cndid=28886814&hasha=50a49ee4eeff8b7d418ff57d217d3beb&hashb=6f5d489012732b7aa770fb5e3828f8210cbb7ba1&hashc=9b48f2f27b5765b8fae61887f02d334ccc060921a4938a43449259568394713d&esrc=bounceX&utm_term=TNY_Daily
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1217, 1218, 1219 ... 1247, 1248, 1249  Next
Page 1218 of 1249

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group