OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[1bad65]

I'm not going to engage in tit for tat.

I simply presented facts because you had presented falsehoods about the tax bill.

I will say that I think it is almost self evident that you support the 'tax reform' on ideological grounds (yet, you accuse me, constantly of being a DNC ideologue, which is very far from the truth).

But I also know that we aren't going to agree. Though we can still spout off, of course.

Of course I wont agree. I typically have to point out to those claiming to be able to say what's in my head they are dead wrong (A few do get lucky guesses )

I'm all for workers, myself included, getting to keep more of the money they earn. It's that simple.

Plus, I'll be getting a nice tax cut under the plan. Why would I not support that??

If others don't want a tax cut, they are free to give every dollar in tax cuts to the charity(s) of their choice, or to pass it around to bums on the street, etc.

[AddiX]

Flynns lawyers are currently meeting with Muellers team, further indication a plea bargain is on the table.

Kushner has delayed handing over documents to senate intel. What you hiding kushy?

[GhostofDempsey]

In other words all of this is happening inside your own head. I knew as much.

You don't even know what is going on inside your own head, let alone mine or anyone else's.

But unlike you, I speak very directly. I don't beat around a topic.

[Drunken Cat]

I simply presented facts because you had presented falsehoods about the tax bill.



Of course I wont agree. I typically have to point out to those claiming to be able to say what's in my head they are dead wrong (A few do get lucky guesses )

I'm all for workers, myself included, getting to keep more of the money they earn. It's that simple.

Plus, I'll be getting a nice tax cut under the plan. Why would I not support that??

If others don't want a tax cut, they are free to give every dollar in tax cuts to the charity(s) of their choice, or to pass it around to bums on the street, etc.

How about the optimistic $1.5 trillion on the deficit? Optimistic, because it is based on unrealistic projections (products of voodoo economics).

In addition, the counterpart of decreased revenue from lower taxes on corporations and super wealthy is retrenchment of government services.

That's why the Republicans have been trying to destroy the Affordable Care Act. It's to try to help offset tax cuts.

The associated higher costs in the way of access to healthcare directly amount to red ink (decreased income/wealth) on the part of users of healthcare.

This isn't just hypothetical for me, by the way. I have been semi-self employed over the past 1.5 years since returning to the US from Japan, and have benefited from the Affordable Care Act. I almost never go to the doctor, but health insurance is important as a way to avoid potential medical bankruptcy (broken leg always potentially a slip away).

I tried to sign up for healthcare through Open Enrollment. The premiums and deductibles have been jacked way up, and the coverage way down. I would not be purchasing health insurance. It is economically not opportune. So, I would be losing my health insurance.

Would be, if I wasn't on my way to China, where they have national health insurance (which I also had in Japan).

Healthcare is one example, and one which I'm in a position to discuss recent events related to.

Also, you know how the stock market is at record highs? Wall Street essentially has a gun to the head of the US economy, with respect to the tax cuts. The Trump Bump after the election was Wall Street pricing in the tax cut.

We are in an epic bubble, and it's not even clear what effect tax cut/lack there of will have; it is just speculation (hence, the common affiliation of that word, 'speculation' with stocks. There are too many factors to accurately determine anything. Wall Street still claims it has a gun to the head of the US economy--if you can understand their innuendo).

And what are all those tax revenues needed for? Mostly for funding the Military. The US Navy is the backbone of American military power, and it's role patrolling international shipping lanes is essentially what props up the dollar (the basis for value of which is the US national debt).

The military is in a state of decline, which is a result of inertia, and not reversible. There is, though, a lot of scrambling to rearrange deck chairs on the titanic.

Incidentally, it was Obama's military sequestration which triggered the decline in 'military readiness', which is now become an extant circumstance (across all services).

Whatever meaning one wishes to draw from all that is up to them. I'm just laying it out there.

The decline of American hegemony is an inevitable consequence. Trump is certainly speeding it along. Obama may have also done so. Bush Jr. most certainly did.

By the way, I sat across from Paul Zarembka in January of 2016; I told him I was concerned because the DNC was putting all their eggs in the Hillary basket, and she is unelectable; a Republican will therefore surely win (we were in the midst of the Republican clownshow Primary).

Bernie was also already in the race.

We know now that Hillary owned the DNC.

After Trump had wrested the nomination, I repeated myself. Hillary is unelectable. Trump will win. I was right.

I don't lament that Hillary lost. The election was a no-win proposition.

The only shadow of hope was for Bernie Sanders to actually run as a third candidate. He actually could've won. However, this was never in the cards, I don't believe.

[1bad65]

How about the optimistic $1.5 trillion on the deficit? Optimistic, because it is based on unrealistic projections (products of voodoo economics).

First off, I'll address the rest later. You took the time to present it, and it deserves more of my time than a quicky reply.

As for the tax rate cuts, two points.

1) Those are CBO numbers. Considering they underestimated the cost of Obamacare by HALF, they have no credability whatsoever.

2) Tax rate cuts have resulted in higher tax revenue, twice in my lifetime alone. Clintons Cap Gains tax cuts saw higher CG revenue, and Reagan's Income Tax cuts saw higher IT revenue (nearly doubling from 1980 to 1988)

The reason for increased debt and/or deficits in those cases were because despite rising revenue, lifers in Congress spent even more than the increased revenues.

[Drunken Cat]

First off, I'll address the rest later. You took the time to present it, and it deserves more of my time than a quicky reply.

As for the tax rate cuts, two points.

1) Those are CBO numbers. Considering they underestimated the cost of Obamacare by HALF, they have no credability whatsoever.

2) Tax rate cuts have resulted in higher tax revenue, twice in my lifetime alone. Clintons Cap Gains tax cuts saw higher CG revenue, and Reagan's Income Tax cuts saw higher IT revenue (nearly doubling from 1980 to 1988)

The reason for increased debt and/or deficits in those cases were because despite rising revenue, lifers in Congress spent even more than the increased revenues.

I do accept this interpretation as valid.

I am skeptical about Point 1. Point 2 could have some interesting insights attached to it. I'd need to explore these circumstances.

I don't really know enough about those circumstances to have much of an opinion.

The one thing, there could be room for skepticism with respect to the association of Reagan's income tax cut with higher IT revenue, particularly given the secular growth of the IT sector over the period (by secular growth, I mean a result of internal factors within that sector). This 'secular growth' culminated with the bursting of the IT bubble in 2000-1 (and consequent destruction of much of the so-called 'value' attributable to the build-up phase).

But they are interesting circumstances, and I don't have a strong opinion on it, really.

[THREAD-KILLER]

The lawyer for President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn met Monday morning with members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team — the latest indication that both sides are discussing a possible plea deal, ABC News has learned.

Jay Sekulow, a member of Trump’s legal team said: “No one should draw the conclusion that this means anything about Gen. Flynn cooperating against the president,”.

[1bad65]

I do accept this interpretation as valid.

I am skeptical about Point 1.

Start here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#7a0594f46a7f

I have more sourcing at home, including numbers on revenue growth under Reagan after the massive tax cuts.

The source does touch a bit on the Reagan Recovery vs the Obama Recovery (one of the many errors the CBO made regarding the costs of Obamacare was overestimating the Obama Recovery).

[HanzGruber]

Trump is such a moron my god lol

https://youtu.be/2weilPRCkW8

[PACnPBFsuck]

Trump is such a moron my god lol

https://youtu.be/2weilPRCkW8

He's literally, the greatest thing that has ever happened to this country. I love it