It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Roberts and Schiff panned Trump's tax cut; Ron Paul: '[It] won't work without spending cuts'

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 06:09 PM
link   
been calling it now for a while

this is called leverage, you get the budget you want by cutting funding




posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I keep saying that the basic problem with the economy is that wages are stagnant and MC people are no longer making progress, were going backward.

Progress = a steady increase in wages

But in our present economy, although unemployment is low, wages are standing still. This has been going on for 40 or 50 years

This is not because of the workers since production is going up all the time BUT NOT WAGES



The paper notes that there are three dynamics that can explain the divergence between growth in productivity and growth in wages and benefits: growing inequality in compensation, or skyrocketing pay for those at the top of the economy compared to everyone else; a greater share of income going toward corporate profits and not wages; and the increase in consumer prices that means wages don’t stretch as far. The first two basically indicate growing income inequality, and together they account for more than two-thirds of the divergence between productivity and pay between 1973 and 2014. And it’s getting worse with time: Between 2000 and 2014, these factors made up 87.2 percent of the gap.


LINK

This tax cut, in theory, in a macro sense, will not help things get better since it only increases the wealth gap.
Economics is a zero sum game


Whoever has the money has the prize, whoever doesn’t has nothing.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I agree. Time to cut ALL military spending which did absolutely NOTHING to protect us on 9/11.



That's brilliant, Einstein.

Anymore ideas? How about cutting welfare out entirely? I'm sure that will save more money.






posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: nwtrucker

Exactly. Wait and see.

But it hasn't worked since jfk. That is my cynicism. That and the same idiots in Congress have been fighting spending freezes for decades.



It worked every time since JFK. Congress raised spending every time the revenues increased from the tax cuts. Every time.


So in other words. It didn't work in reality. It worked in a perfect scenario. Where bubbles and wars don't exist.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

??

Most Trump supporters gladly welcome spending cuts.....does this mean the left is finally on board with it?

Love how you try and spin an obvious into some big deal .

Let's get the scissors out!

I'll start Congress' Hush Slush Fund.
Make senators and representatives pay out of their campaign coffers or salary.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

The problem is congress is in the pocket of the mega corps. Just go to open secrets.

So is this a real tax cut or a ponzi scheme.

Hoping it's real, but the fact we can't freeze spending and create a rainy day fund with surplus is a problem for me.

I would love to see an actual tax code reform as well to simplify and reduce compliance costs. But that is a pipe dream. If history repeats itself they will end up raising taxes like a Reagan did. He signed off on one of the biggest tax raises of modern times to handle bubbles and international unsettling.

Fingers crossed they pass a budget without large increases.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: nwtrucker

Exactly. Wait and see.

But it hasn't worked since jfk. That is my cynicism. That and the same idiots in Congress have been fighting spending freezes for decades.

OK, go on and keep raising the taxes until the bubble bursts. There's your alternative. I don't care for that route. Sorry. I will take the cuts and make the best of the little wiggle room it provides. Me, mine and others.

So will the majority and rightly so, IMO. If your spending freeze isn't being done, then neither alternative is a starter. Then give me the money, honey....


It worked every time since JFK. Congress raised spending every time the revenues increased from the tax cuts. Every time.


So in other words. It didn't work in reality. It worked in a perfect scenario. Where bubbles and wars don't exist.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: antiantonym

Government wastes 20% of revenue. Targeted spending cuts are mandatory, regardless of tax reform.



posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

You realize Reagan signed a large tax increase correct? To fix the loss of revenue do to cuts and need for stimulus in the recession? No? Yet government grew more than carter. And that democrats and Republicans worked more together back then? No?

Didn't think so.

It could work if Congress wasn't what it is and lobbyists weren't what they are.
edit on 21-12-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-12-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 12:08 AM
link   
They're going to go after Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to "offset" the 1.5 trillion deficit they're creating.

I hope Millennial's are cool with the GOP taking Mom & Dad's medical and retirement. And based on past history, wages won't be increasing nearly enough for kids to afford to put their parents into geriatric prison (retirement homes).

Oh well, why spend money on the elderly? They're just going to die sooner rather than later anyway, right?!

Gotta love how the Boomers are cool raping the country, only to let their children and grandchildren figure out the mess.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I agree. Time to cut ALL military spending which did absolutely NOTHING to protect us on 9/11.



That's brilliant, Einstein.

Anymore ideas? How about cutting welfare out entirely? I'm sure that will save more money.









Cutting out welfare would collapse the economy. Is that what you would consider winning?
edit on 22-12-2017 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I agree. Time to cut ALL military spending which did absolutely NOTHING to protect us on 9/11.



That's brilliant, Einstein.

Anymore ideas? How about cutting welfare out entirely? I'm sure that will save more money.









Cutting out welfare would collapse the economy. Is that what you would consider winning?



And cutting National Security and Defence is considered winning?

For whom?

Won't have to worry about the economy if that happens.




posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 03:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I agree. Time to cut ALL military spending which did absolutely NOTHING to protect us on 9/11.



That's brilliant, Einstein.

Anymore ideas? How about cutting welfare out entirely? I'm sure that will save more money.









Cutting out welfare would collapse the economy. Is that what you would consider winning?



And cutting National Security and Defence is considered winning?

For whom?

Won't have to worry about the economy if that happens.






What exactly are you defending?

As far as I can tell the U. S military is projecting force. You don't really believe that military budget is defensive in nature do you... Like really?



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 05:04 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Think Obama surpassed him in 1st week,where do you liberals get your numbers,can't get a true result from arbitrary figures



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: nwtrucker

You realize Reagan signed a large tax increase correct? To fix the loss of revenue do to cuts and need for stimulus in the recession? No? Yet government grew more than carter. And that democrats and Republicans worked more together back then? No?

Didn't think so.

It could work if Congress wasn't what it is and lobbyists weren't what they are.


Yes. I've heard that. Both parties are culpable. Yet you point out that tax increase-omitting what and who it addressed- so that increase somehow justifies no tax cut today? I think not.

It's the people that come first, yes? Not the Gov't. I will take the tax cut and the Gov't can make....or not make the adjustment to that cut. History says they won't. Tough.

Forgive me for enjoying the cut, short term they likely will be.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: luthier

Think Obama surpassed him in 1st week,where do you liberals get your numbers,can't get a true result from arbitrary figures


I wouldn't know, seeing as I am not a liberal.

If Obama passed him on day one it would have been a carry over from GWB.

But yes Obama was absolute disaster for the debt.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I can see you don't really care about fiscal responsibility.

Which is how they pull the wool over most people's eyes. Here is your cut, never mind inflation and the coming bust...

Personally I am far more concerned with balancing the books then my temporary personal tax return.

I am very much for cutting taxes but as a simplification of the code and overall budget plan.

In my opinion this is like spending money before you check the books. For you its not.

Have a merry Christmas and I hope your right and history does not repeat itself.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Balance the budget, and watch the purchasing power of your dollar improve.

Its the kindest act we can give to an aging population invested in 401k's, but not having enough social security to continue paying out benefits.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: luthier

Balance the budget, and watch the purchasing power of your dollar improve.

Its the kindest act we can give to an aging population invested in 401k's, but not having enough social security to continue paying out benefits.


Couldn't agree more, apparently this is now a liberal point of view.

Part of my concern here is that it doesn't simplify anything at all. The compliance cost of the code is an unnecessary expense for businesses and for citizens.

I also am extremely skeptical these folks can balance a budget. Or even care to. Or dare address the actual future for manufacturing and things like professional drivers.



posted on Dec, 22 2017 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: luthier

Balance the budget, and watch the purchasing power of your dollar improve.

Its the kindest act we can give to an aging population invested in 401k's, but not having enough social security to continue paying out benefits.


Ironically, the Market and therefore the 401Ks are doing fine. The same situation applies now as it did under Obama- and the reason that on a national basis the republicans didn't push a balanced budget in the Presidential campaign- and that is a cut in spending to that degree would crash that market and likely the whole damn economy.

Build the economy, even if it causes inflation. Inflation lowers the debt percentile, overall anyways.

This tax cut can work. IF Trump has the guts to veto increased spending in areas he doesn't have a mandate for.
Cuts will be coming, modified by Congressmen and Senators that fear they won't be re-elected if they vote for cuts that affect their state.


edit on 22-12-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join