Jump to content

Trump’s America


tx 3 putt

Recommended Posts

A note of folks wondering what is going to happen in 2025 economically.  Remember how excited some folks were, and how Trump's electicion created the biggest bump in Stock market history!  And how Trump's policies created more jobs than any President Ever!  And Republicans are concerned about the debt!

 

It's honestly amazing to me that none of the above are remotely factually correct, but you can hear these falsehoods repeatedly.  You will hear the same extolling of falsehoods this go round.  Except the reality is that the GOP has increased deficits by more than the Dems, every single time they have control of all three houses of Government.  For example the massive "Trump Bump" for the Market.  The Biden bump in November 2016 was about 10%, Trumps 6% mark is what is knows as smaller.  Employment must have been good right?  Well if you take the 6 month prior to Trump's inauguration and use that average, you look forward and find that after 2-1/2 years in office Trump is about 1.5 million behind the jobs creation number he inherited.  But... it was the greatest economy ever we were told ad nauseam.  And the Deficit was exploded do to the inability of the GOP to make any offsets for their endless reduction in revenue via tax cuts to save the rich more money.  So we borrowed a shit ton, and THAT my firieds was the begiing of the inflation that Biden supposedly created all by himself after inheriting the shitty ass Trump Economy.

Trump will have inherited the two strongest economies ever inherited by an incoming President.  I fully expect Trump will hand of an economy similr to each one handed off by a Republican since Ronald reagan, he will hand off an economy much, much weaker with an increase in e=deficit spending far beyond the prior administration.

Basically I expect historically accurate patterns to be the same.  I also expect a record number of folks believing the exact opposite from what is factually accurate. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 5
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, horn4life said:

A note of folks wondering what is going to happen in 2025 economically.  Remember how excited some folks were, and how Trump's electicion created the biggest bump in Stock market history!  And how Trump's policies created more jobs than any President Ever!  And Republicans are concerned about the debt!

 

It's honestly amazing to me that none of the above are remotely factually correct, but you can hear these falsehoods repeatedly.  You will hear the same extolling of falsehoods this go round.  Except the reality is that the GOP has increased deficits by more than the Dems, every single time they have control of all three houses of Government.  For example the massive "Trump Bump" for the Market.  The Biden bump in November 2016 was about 10%, Trumps 6% mark is what is knows as smaller.  Employment must have been good right?  Well if you take the 6 month prior to Trump's inauguration and use that average, you look forward and find that after 2-1/2 years in office Trump is about 1.5 million behind the jobs creation number he inherited.  But... it was the greatest economy ever we were told ad nauseam.  And the Deficit was exploded do to the inability of the GOP to make any offsets for their endless reduction in revenue via tax cuts to save the rich more money.  So we borrowed a shit ton, and THAT my firieds was the begiing of the inflation that Biden supposedly created all by himself after inheriting the shitty ass Trump Economy.

Trump will have inherited the two strongest economies ever inherited by an incoming President.  I fully expect Trump will hand of an economy similr to each one handed off by a Republican since Ronald reagan, he will hand off an economy much, much weaker with an increase in e=deficit spending far beyond the prior administration.

Basically I expect historically accurate patterns to be the same.  I also expect a record number of folks believing the exact opposite from what is factually accurate. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

That’s one big bummer about the election is the next President is inheriting significant economic tailwinds:

-Continued flow of capital and other benefits from post-pandemic stimulus (BBB, CHIPS).

-Advancements in AI and associated technology creating productivity improvements.

-The greatest transfer of wealth in history increasing velocity of money as Boomers retire and die.

Barring a nuclear power starting a war or the emergence of another pandemic, it will be hard for Trump to fuck up the economy.  If he does it will probably be due to civil unrest due to wealth inequality, although even that probably won’t happen during his term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, horn4life said:

A note of folks wondering what is going to happen in 2025 economically.  Remember how excited some folks were, and how Trump's electicion created the biggest bump in Stock market history!  And how Trump's policies created more jobs than any President Ever!  And Republicans are concerned about the debt!

 

It's honestly amazing to me that none of the above are remotely factually correct, but you can hear these falsehoods repeatedly.  You will hear the same extolling of falsehoods this go round.  Except the reality is that the GOP has increased deficits by more than the Dems, every single time they have control of all three houses of Government.  For example the massive "Trump Bump" for the Market.  The Biden bump in November 2016 was about 10%, Trumps 6% mark is what is knows as smaller.  Employment must have been good right?  Well if you take the 6 month prior to Trump's inauguration and use that average, you look forward and find that after 2-1/2 years in office Trump is about 1.5 million behind the jobs creation number he inherited.  But... it was the greatest economy ever we were told ad nauseam.  And the Deficit was exploded do to the inability of the GOP to make any offsets for their endless reduction in revenue via tax cuts to save the rich more money.  So we borrowed a shit ton, and THAT my firieds was the begiing of the inflation that Biden supposedly created all by himself after inheriting the shitty ass Trump Economy.

Trump will have inherited the two strongest economies ever inherited by an incoming President.  I fully expect Trump will hand of an economy similr to each one handed off by a Republican since Ronald reagan, he will hand off an economy much, much weaker with an increase in e=deficit spending far beyond the prior administration.

Basically I expect historically accurate patterns to be the same.  I also expect a record number of folks believing the exact opposite from what is factually accurate. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

So the price of eggs will do what?

See, price finally goes down and wham, here comes bird flu.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, horn4life said:

A note of folks wondering what is going to happen in 2025 economically.  Remember how excited some folks were, and how Trump's electicion created the biggest bump in Stock market history!  And how Trump's policies created more jobs than any President Ever!  And Republicans are concerned about the debt!


It's honestly amazing to me that none of the above are remotely factually correct, but you can hear these falsehoods repeatedly.  You will hear the same extolling of falsehoods this go round.  Except the reality is that the GOP has increased deficits by more than the Dems, every single time they have control of all three houses of Government.  For example the massive "Trump Bump" for the Market.  The Biden bump in November 2016 was about 10%, Trumps 6% mark is what is knows as smaller.  Employment must have been good right?  Well if you take the 6 month prior to Trump's inauguration and use that average, you look forward and find that after 2-1/2 years in office Trump is about 1.5 million behind the jobs creation number he inherited.  But... it was the greatest economy ever we were told ad nauseam. 

Wait...

Biden got a bump in Nov 2016 after Trump was elected????

 

Quote

And the Deficit was exploded do to the inability of the GOP to make any offsets for their endless reduction in revenue via tax cuts to save the rich more money.  So we borrowed a shit ton, and THAT my firieds was the begiing of the inflation that Biden supposedly created all by himself after inheriting the shitty ass Trump Economy.

Trump will have inherited the two strongest economies ever inherited by an incoming President.  I fully expect Trump will hand of an economy similr to each one handed off by a Republican since Ronald reagan, he will hand off an economy much, much weaker with an increase in e=deficit spending far beyond the prior administration.

Basically I expect historically accurate patterns to be the same.  I also expect a record number of folks believing the exact opposite from what is factually accurate. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

 

And tax revenues decreased after the 2017 tax cuts???

 

receipts-of-the-us-government-since-fisc

It appears they grew from $3.32T in 2017 to $4.9T in 2022.  Can you explain how that is a REDUCTION in revenues?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Wait...

Biden got a bump in Nov 2016 after Trump was elected????

 

 

And tax revenues decreased after the 2017 tax cuts???

 

receipts-of-the-us-government-since-fisc

It appears they grew from $3.32T in 2017 to $4.9T in 2022.  Can you explain how that is a REDUCTION in revenues?

 

Yeah, I don't know anything about these numbers, but I assume you need to look at where you are compared to where you would be. 

But I'm a lawyer, not a finance guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

It appears they grew from $3.32T in 2017 to $4.9T in 2022.  Can you explain how that is a REDUCTION in revenues?

Off topic, but it always makes me laugh the way political “conservatives” pat themselves on the back for wealth transfers just like the most profligate big spending progressives.
Money machine go BRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Off topic, but it always makes me laugh the way political “conservatives” pat themselves on the back for wealth transfers just like the most profligate big spending progressives.
Money machine go BRRRRRRRRRRRRR

How is it a "wealth transfer" when the tax rates went DOWN?

And when 50% of people pay 0% taxes...what wealth is being transferred where?

NOW...the spending part is Dumbass 101, but that's on both sides...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bookman said:

Yeah, I don't know anything about these numbers, but I assume you need to look at where you are compared to where you would be. 

But I'm a lawyer, not a finance guy. 

I didn't make a comment on them other than to ask how h4l's post jived with the actual numbers...

Not a finance guy, either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

How is it a "wealth transfer" when the tax rates went DOWN?

And when 50% of people pay 0% taxes...what wealth is being transferred where?

NOW...the spending part is Dumbass 101, but that's on both sides...

Because it’s a transfer from future to present and represents structural expansion of the deficit and the debt. Ands for your “both sides,” I should hope that I’ve made it clear over the last 23 years that I don’t care at all about any of that. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Because it’s a transfer from future to present and represents structural expansion of the deficit and the debt. Ands for your “both sides,” I should hope that I’ve made it clear over the last 23 years that I don’t care at all about any of that. 

To be crystal clear about what saying- tax cuts funded by debt expansion (eg 2001, 2003, and 2017) are wealth transfers from “kids” to @Ag with kids.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

How is it a "wealth transfer" when the tax rates went DOWN?

And when 50% of people pay 0% taxes...what wealth is being transferred where?

NOW...the spending part is Dumbass 101, but that's on both sides...

Who pays zero tax? How do they avoid sales and property taxes? How do they avoid paying into social security and Medicare?
 

 

Edited by Willfully Horn
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Noodling around on this, I saw this fantastic quote.

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Supreme Court Justice for 30 years, once declared: “I like to pay taxes, with them I buy civilization”.

A more progressive tax code disincentivizes fraud, corruption and regulatory violations by minimizing the reward for the risk. If any individual or entity knows beforehand they're only going to be able to keep a smaller portion of any ill-gotten gains, there's a far less likelihood that risk will be taken. As it is now, taking the risk is incentivized.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raises taxes on the rich would help overall society and the structural fiscal picture for our country.

But rich people run the country and normies need inflated stock prices to retire.

Any large tax increase would likely cause some big sell off on Wall Street and put us in a recession long enough to vote out the responsible party… thereby ensuring it never gets done.

True democracy doesn’t work anymore in an era of almost universal suffrage, universal disinformation, and seemingly universal disengagement from the process. 
Money as speech means that taxes are stifling speech …..
 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Raises taxes on the rich would help overall society and the structural fiscal picture for our country.

But rich people run the country and normies need inflated stock prices to retire.

Any large tax increase would likely cause some big sell off on Wall Street and put us in a recession long enough to vote out the responsible party… thereby ensuring it never gets done.

True democracy doesn’t work anymore in an era of almost universal suffrage, universal disinformation, and seemingly universal disengagement from the process. 
Money as speech means that taxes are stifling speech …..

You outline the problem in your statement - our democracy was eaten by our economic system. Capital is what determines policy - NOT The People 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Wait...

Biden got a bump in Nov 2016 after Trump was elected????

 

 

And tax revenues decreased after the 2017 tax cuts???

 

receipts-of-the-us-government-since-fisc

It appears they grew from $3.32T in 2017 to $4.9T in 2022.  Can you explain how that is a REDUCTION in revenues?

Because I do not do budgetary math in a vacuum! 😉 

It's really pretty simple. When you specifically do not answer the question posed and instead answer another question it's simple to be wrong.  Tax revenue reduction percentage were made, that EXPLODED the deficit.

You see when you do math there is something there is a bottom line figure. Did overall revenues increase? Yes.  Did the percentage of revenues collected decrease? Yes.  But if you want to PRETEND that a larger overall volume of revenue, that is offset by a far, far larger increase in expenses is something other than digging a deeper deficit hole, you are welcome to do so. 

AND prove exactly my point about the MAGA delusion of factual reality.  But very good contortion to avoid the bottom line of massive borrowing to pay for those tax cuts that HAVE NEVER EVER EVER, produced enough increase in overall tax revenue ,as predicted, to offset the massive borrowing expense of paying for those tax cuts.  So I think it's very reasonable to expect that same massive borrowing under Republicans to continue.  As it has since Ronald Reagan without exception.

 

 

I misspoke on 2016 vs 2020.  OF COURSE my assertion and the actual facts are accurate in that Biden's bump was larger percentage-wise than Trump's was.  In fact thanks for challenge> Apparently I grossly overestimated Trumps bump!  I used the Dow.  

For Trump market closed at 42,221.88 On November 5th 2024 and closed on December 31st at 42.544.22.   (.076% increase)

For Biden market closed at 27,480.03, On November 3rd 2020,  end closed of December 30th at 30,606.48.  (11.38% increase)

Though in Trump's defense the Biden Stock market has been so strong for so long, that there was likely some profit taking after such a long great run. Biden did not have to contend with anything but Covid, no jobs, and the greatest increase in the national debt percentage wise in 4 years in our nation's history.  And the burden of inheriting another exceptional economy is Trump's burden to bear.

Edited by horn4life
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, horn4life said:

You see when you do math there is something there is a bottom line figure. Did overall revenues increase? Yes.  Did the percentage of revenues collected decrease? Yes.  But if you want to PRETEND that a larger overall volume of revenue, that is offset by a far, far larger increase in expenses is something other than digging a deeper deficit hole, you are welcome to do so. 

AND prove exactly my point about the MAGA delusion of factual reality.

MAGA? There’s nothing new here. This has been orthodoxy since Reagan- debt funded fiscal stimulus via tax cuts regardless of whether it hurts or helps the economy. 
Volcker, Bush I and Clinton took us off that plan. Bush II put us back on it, permanently, with an unfortunate dagger 3 in 2010 on a turnover from Obama. 2017 was just running up the score in garbage time. 
The real irony is that these dudes have the stones to invoke Mises and Hayek when they do this shit despite being too Keynesian for Keynes. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

MAGA? There’s nothing new here. This has been orthodoxy since Reagan- debt funded fiscal stimulus via tax cuts regardless of whether it hurts or helps the economy. 
Volcker, Bush I and Clinton took us off that plan. Bush II put us back on it, permanently, with an unfortunate dagger 3 in 2010 on a turnover from Obama. 2017 was just running up the score in garbage time. 
The real irony is that these dudes have the stones to invoke Mises and Hayek when they do this shit despite being too Keynesian for Keynes. 

Damn that last line is a fucking mic drop. Nice!

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2025 at 10:24 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Because it’s a transfer from future to present and represents structural expansion of the deficit and the debt. Ands for your “both sides,” I should hope that I’ve made it clear over the last 23 years that I don’t care at all about any of that. 

The tax REVENUE increased after the cuts.  In fact, it increased 47% from 3.33T in 2018 to 4.9T in 2022.

Assuming,  the dumbass gov't didn't increase spending, then the deficit would decrease and the debt would grow slower.

But then, even IF the dumbass gov't DID increase spending, the debt would STILL grow slower than without them...

Please explain how DECREASING the rate that the debt increases is a "wealth transfer" from future generations when they will owe LESS with those tax cuts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Well, thanks, @Ag with kids, for the opportunity to point out the turnip party wants to cut SS, and, perhaps, Medicare, despite those two programs having a dedicated tax, which legally employed citizens pay into, and for that half of the country you mention, at 100% of their income. 

You DO understand that SS and MC will soon not take in enough money to pay out current benefits within a decade, right?

In a decade, if something doesn't get fixed/reformed/whateveryouwanttocallit with both programs, the "wealth transfer" that bozo doesn't want WILL occur...

So, if you'd like to ignore the upcoming problem, feel free...

But, at some point in time, even the Democrats will be voting to reduce benefits when they realize the "Social Security Trust Fund" is nothing more than this:

5b04f4c806c8bb013fba9bb09ff5d9db.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would you rather have cash in the trust fund that doesn't earn interest?

 

it's far too late to go back in time to when reagan didn't bring rates back down* and keep it a program that pretty much always ran with a thin buffer. now we've had 40 years of the social security tax being locked in, when for the first 50 years it changed pretty often. and we've trained 3 generations that the social security tax rate doesn't change.

at that time we also changed the tax code to vastly prefer the economy pay out in capital gains to wage income, leading to a reduction in the social security tax base.

 

 

*leading to huge surpluses he used to mask the deficits he was intentionally running.

Edited by elfenix
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

You DO understand that SS and MC will soon not take in enough money to pay out current benefits within a decade, right?

In a decade, if something doesn't get fixed/reformed/whateveryouwanttocallit with both programs, the "wealth transfer" that bozo doesn't want WILL occur...

So, if you'd like to ignore the upcoming problem, feel free...

But, at some point in time, even the Democrats will be voting to reduce benefits when they realize the "Social Security Trust Fund" is nothing more than this:

5b04f4c806c8bb013fba9bb09ff5d9db.jpg

Yes, I am aware of the crunch. Maybe, because of my age, I am also aware of Democrats who tried to set aside the inflow for today’s outflow and were outvoted by Republicans who wanted those funds included in the general budget (generally speaking.) I am also cognizant of the income cap, beyond which taxpayer’s income is no longer subject to these specific taxations. 
 

I am open to learning how taxing all income for these programs isn’t sufficient to the need, as well as that rate which would do so. Truth is, I haven’t the desire to learn what exactly is currently necessary to meet this nation’s promises, given the profligate motivations of past Republicans.

Edited to recognize you are aware that your claim that 50% of US citizens pay no tax is utter bullshit.

Edited by Willfully Horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's amazing to me that you can post this chart and then post the bolded text in the same day

200405.png.f97106320b50d61e6ddd4286200284bc.png

On 1/1/2025 at 10:11 PM, Ag with kids said:

How is it a "wealth transfer" when the tax rates went DOWN?

And when 50% of people pay 0% taxes...what wealth is being transferred where?

NOW...the spending part is Dumbass 101, but that's on both sides...

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2025 at 10:54 PM, Willfully Horn said:

Who pays zero tax? How do they avoid sales and property taxes? How do they avoid paying into social security and Medicare?
 

 

Sigh...we're discussing FEDERAL INCOME taxes.  There are not any FEDERAL sales or property taxes (well, I'm sure the tax code has some fucked up obscure ones, but not for the vast majority of people).

Some people avoid SS by working in jobs that don't pay into it.  Texas teachers, for instance.

But, almost 50% of workers do not pay ANY federal income taxes.

The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.7 percent of all federal individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.3 percent.

And there are a significant percentage of those bottom 50% that pay a NEGATIVE income tax rate.

 

19 hours ago, Bookman said:

Yes aren't the numbers you posted incomplete at best? 

Could you expound on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Yes, I am aware of the crunch. Maybe, because of my age, I am also aware of Democrats who tried to set aside the inflow for today’s outflow and were outvoted by Republicans who wanted those funds included in the general budget (generally speaking.) I am also cognizant of the income cap, beyond which taxpayer’s income is no longer subject to these specific taxations. 
 

I am open to learning how taxing all income for these programs isn’t sufficient to the need, as well as that rate which would do so. Truth is, I haven’t the desire to learn what exactly is currently necessary to meet this nation’s promises, given the profligate motivations of past Republicans.

The SSA not only disagrees with you, but they point to a different party that changed the accounting rules...

Quote

Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget."

Note that in 1968, the Democrats controlled the Senate, House, and Presidency...

 

Quote

Edited to recognize you are aware that your claim that 50% of US citizens pay no tax is utter bullshit.

I posted above some data for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

The tax REVENUE increased after the cuts.  In fact, it increased 47% from 3.33T in 2018 to 4.9T in 2022

Because you are a partisan Republican (like @Brisketexan was) you have been trained to believe that the causational relationship between fiscal stimulus via tax cuts and revenue recovery = eventual debt reduction. That’s political sleight of hand, not economic reality. 

7 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Assuming,  the dumbass gov't didn't increase spending, then the deficit would decrease and the debt would grow slower.

But then, even IF the dumbass gov't DID increase spending, the debt would STILL grow slower than without them...

 

image.png.8d87013bb15a122d0d4999eb3374013d.png

7 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Please explain how DECREASING the rate that the debt increases is a "wealth transfer" from future generations when they will owe LESS with those tax cuts.

Sure- and pay close attention here, because you seem to have missed a point I've been making for 22 years: we’re talking about specific, real-life events here, not hypothetical ones. Debt funded stimulus during expansion (2001, 2003, 2017) is stupid because organic growth is picking all the low hanging fruit, and stimulus is therefore inflationary.
So in this scenario it’s because the cost of the debt that was incurred to stimulate the economy was higher than whatever additional revenue was generated through the stimulus. 
 

 

7 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

You DO understand that SS and MC will soon not take in enough money to pay out current benefits within a decade, right?

In a decade, if something doesn't get fixed/reformed/whateveryouwanttocallit with both programs, the "wealth transfer" that bozo doesn't want WILL occur...

So, if you'd like to ignore the upcoming problem, feel free...

Oh, bless your heart.

 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

The SSA not only disagrees with you, but they point to a different party that changed the accounting rules...

Note that in 1968, the Democrats controlled the Senate, House, and Presidency...

 

I posted above some data for you.

Johnson borrowed money against SS to pay for the Vietnam War. Reagan and Bush borrowed money against SS to pay for tax cuts.

But, again, those citizens at the bottom of the pay scale pay federal payroll taxes. They pay into SS and Medicare. Do you claim teachers, or other government employees, those who exempt from SS tax and also from benefits, do not pay federal income tax? 
 

Yeah, I am concerned about not letting old people starve and also about medical care for sick people. And, while I am open to means testing for recipients, I know where the vast majority of wealth this nation has created over the past half century is located, and I support WW2 era tax policies upon that wealth.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

You DO understand that SS and MC will soon not take in enough money to pay out current benefits within a decade, right?

In a decade, if something doesn't get fixed/reformed/whateveryouwanttocallit with both programs, the "wealth transfer" that bozo doesn't want WILL occur...

So, if you'd like to ignore the upcoming problem, feel free...

But, at some point in time, even the Democrats will be voting to reduce benefits when they realize the "Social Security Trust Fund" is nothing more than this:

5b04f4c806c8bb013fba9bb09ff5d9db.jpg

Just because it’s the SS program that will be running a deficit doesn’t mean that it’s the SS program that will need to see benefit cuts.  

also

200.gif?cid=6c09b9524vzwsgayzj0kzdvb3nei

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

You DO understand that is a graph of federal REVENUES, right?

Can you explain how those revenues increasing contradicts my other post?

you DO understand that federal REVENUES includes payroll taxes which those "50% pay 0%" people pay, right?

 

apparently not or you wouldn't have posted dumb shit like "50% pay 0%" right after posting a graph of federal REVENUES.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

AWK is another one of those conservatives who I think really has become noticeably dumber during the Trump era.

He didn’t get dumber and they didn’t generally. They just retained a conservative political vocabulary even though their political tribe abandoned its conservative economic policy posture for this. So there’s a lot of cognitive dissonance there. It’s like you put Jay Gould’s brain in William Jennings Bryan’s mouth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...