Jump to content

Donald Trump 2019

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 48.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2695

  • 4th&Five

    1699

  • jimmyjazz

    1286

  • atomheartbevo

    1219

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GHOSTUSER
GHOSTUSER

I fucking love this President. My 2 faves during my lifetime are Trump and Nixon. They share a lot of similarities and were besieged by the same groups of assholes. No I’m not trolling. Y’all, the lef

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
Brisketexan
Brisketexan

This.....is magnificent. The "younger generation" is going to have to work double-time to fund YOUR Social Security, which YOUR generation of elected officials raided the fuck out of.  And which,

Posted Images

4th&Five

4th&Five 41457

Posted
Posted

SAD!

About an hour before Trump was scheduled to speak, the long lines snaking around the Amway Center in downtown Orlando were gone and people could easily walk into the event.

A photo taken by an Orlando Sentinel photographer at 7 p.m. showed a large section of empty seats in the upper deck.

As Trump’s speech was about to begin, the arena was nearly full, though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexEx15

TexEx15 17444

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, zork said:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-raises-more-money-in-24-hours-than-opening-days-of-sanders-biden-orourke-harris-combined

 

 

So a sitting POTUS raised more than any one individual amongst a field of 20 over a year out from the election.  Well fuck me let’s just call off this futile election and make Trump king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

You also believe that Subway is better than Whataburger. 

Correct. Both are true statements. You know what else is a true statement?  Taco Bell is better than Whataburger. 

  • Fuck You 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Under a Bad Sign

Horn Under a Bad Sign 20342

Posted
Posted

Neo-Nazi website "Daily Stormer"  must pay Muslim comedian 4.1 million dollars after calling him a terrorist and doctoring videos to make it seem like he had admitted being a terrorist.


 

Quote

The comedian’s article, entitled “Will Donald Trump Ever Say the Words ‘White Supremacist Terrorism’?” sought to ask whether Trump would confront white supremacist violence. The next day, The Daily Stormer posted content from its founder, Andrew Anglin, which called Obeidallah the “mastermind” behind the Manchester Arena bombing in the United Kingdom that killed 22 individuals.

Anglin and The Daily Stormer didn’t stop with those errant accusations, either — they also doctored tweets to make them appear like Obeidallah had admitted to the attack, and said he was a Muslim terrorist.

The onslaught of attacks toward Obeidallah resulted in Twitter users threatening harm on his life. “They clearly thought I was a terrorist,” Obeidallah said in a separate interview with NPR.



https://deadstate.org/neo-nazi-must-pay-4-1-million-to-muslim-comedian-after-calling-him-a-terrorist/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13292

Posted
Posted

The only thing I can give Graham and Rubio is that you can occasionally sense that they're aware of the shame and degradation they've cast on themselves and their family.  Ted Cruz is perfectly happy kneeling before Zod after his father was accused of being a murderer and just shrugs his shoulders at the total destruction of any semblance of loyalty to his wife and her faith that her husband would never stand idle while someone publicly debased her dignity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

He just absolutely cannot stop himself from lying. He had to throw in Wharton in a vain attempt to make himself sound impressive.

Surely he knows that nobody in his base knows what the hell 'Wharton' means, right?  I mean even 'Penn' to them must just sound like, "Oh, must be University of Pennsylvania...must be Penn State's big rival.  I like football."  His voters have no idea what these schools are:  Sloan, Kellogg, McCombs, Booth, et. al.  

His constant dropping of 'Wharton' is like a reverse dog-whistle to the public.  His base has no real idea what it means just that he says it with pride.  And the rest of us are stunned that he somehow got through one of the best business schools in the nation.  He should probably throttle it down and just say "Ivy League Business School."  His base would understand it, he'd still feel accomplished, and the rest of us could at least take comfort that sounds like the usual douchey kind of thing he'd say.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bojack

Bojack 2073

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Fozzz said:

The Laffer Curve as a concept is essentially correct. 

Right. If you have a tax rate of 100%, tax revenues will drop to $0.  With the Trump tax cut and the Kansas Brownback tax cut, tax revenues decreased dramatically.  Where is the sweet spot in the Laffer Curve?  Do you agree with Laffer that Kansas didn't cut taxes enough?

 

Laffer has said the problem in Kansas was that Brownback’s tax cut didn’t go far enough. “When you put an atomic bomb on a place, it will materially change the place – but a cherry bomb probably won’t change the buildings or anything else,” he told The Guardian in 2017.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-19/trump-awards-medal-to-controversial-tax-cut-champion-laffer

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1384

Posted
Posted

The thing is, the Laffer curve is nothing new and was nothing new when Laffer drew it on a napkin. Anyone with basic understanding of economics and fiscal policy knew that at certain point higher tax rates mean less revenue. It's like taking credit for 2+2=4. What Laffer did was weaponized the concept as a political tool to justify tax cuts at any rate. He's been proven wrong time and time again. Tax cuts, from the federal rates and probably those in every state in effect today, DO NOT pay for themselves.

Laffer is a fake economist and a fraud. It is fitting the con man President is awarding him the highest civilian honor.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85056

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

Yes.  100% of people who identify as Republicans. 

 

12 minutes ago, Bookman said:

Republicans will believe anything that tells them they're right and "libs" are wrong. And "libs" include everyone who doesn't believe exactly everything they believe.

Yep.  That person would vote for Trump if all those things were a complete 180.  It would all be Obama/Soros/Hillary/Pelosi's fault Trump couldn't get anything done.  We must give him more time! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4th&Five

4th&Five 41457

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Correct. Both are true statements. You know what else is a true statement?  Taco Bell is better than Whataburger. 

The fact that you haven’t been negged off this board for this shows me that everyone has you on ignore. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jiggy-Z

Jiggy-Z 3428

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

The thing is, the Laffer curve is nothing new and was nothing new when Laffer drew it on a napkin. Anyone with basic understanding of economics and fiscal policy knew that at certain point higher tax rates mean less revenue. It's like taking credit for 2+2=4. What Laffer did was weaponized the concept as a political tool to justify tax cuts at any rate. He's been proven wrong time and time again. Tax cuts, from the federal rates and probably those in every state in effect today, DO NOT pay for themselves.

Laffer is a fake economist and a fraud. It is fitting the con man President is awarding him the highest civilian honor.

Some clarification on this statement:  All of it is correct, except the last sentence, which needs refining. To essentially say the cuts from the current rates do no pay for themselves.

The Laffer curve is as a concept correct stating that there is a point between 0% taxation and 100% taxation where revenue is optimized.  The tax cut crowd is selling the argument that  rates are too high and that cutting them will optimize revenue.  The devil is in the details as there can be debate about not only where we are on the curve but what the shape of the curve is and which of the tax rates( personal, corporate, capital gains, estate) would best be suited to optimize revenue.

In the case of states, each one would have its own unique curve.

For the tax cutters it is an easy sell, because when taxes are cut, it does stimulate the economy almost immediately and proponents can point to that.  However, based on the evidence it has thus far in recent American History, shown that the cuts have not been adequately offset by taxation of the stimulated economy.

Case in point on the Trump tax cut and its effect on stock price.  If a major component of stock price is its present value of future cash flows, then a reduction in the corporate tax from 35% to 21% would automatically create a higher stock price.  There is no Trump business magic, the market's rise has been a continuation of an existing trend and a tax cut.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...