Donald Trump and US politics

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Spoiler

Wiretapped doesn't necessarily involve a physical splice into a hard land line, anymore than a program with bugs involves literal insects as it originally meant. Here's the original computer bug (moth) found in 1947 in a Mark II computer at Harvard.




Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

You are entitled to you own interpretation of the facts, of course. The attempt to delay and hide Susan Rice's actions look bad, and that officials are still pursuing that information doesn't look good either. In this particular case, we will get to watch it all unfold, and like the Russia narrative, it won't be going in favor of the MSM or leftists.

I fully expect that the entire eavesdropping began at the behest of DNC players in a deliberate Watergate effort. The report that Comey 'relied' on to stimulate to entire thing was commissioned by a company with heavy DNC donorship and ties to a Venezuelan criminal enterprise. The MSM isn't telling you that, because they aren't forced to. YET.

Trump's team was eavesdropped on, using electronic means, in his tower. He was right, and will be proven right by the legal process, whereas the MSM position will be shown to be another Nothing Burger as Van Jones of CNN told us:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=l2G360HrSAs#t=24

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Bnevx7vco

Words.

Words can mean anything when it comes from Trump.

Words can have a meaning when they are said, but that meaning can change depending on what happens days later.

Donald J. Trump: "the meaning-bender"

He said: Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory.

But what he meant was: Susan Rice unmasked names of american citizens on a report of a monitored call of the Russian Embassy!

It's like they said: "Take him seriously, not literally" which means his words are meaningless, but they have weight behind it. *eyeroll*

"

DalaiLama wrote:

You said travel, not foreign goods and services. People who have wealth often want to buy quality products, or at least perceived quality. US companies can be as competitive in that market as anyone else. Historically speaking, when they are taxed more in one locale, they move themselves and their spending elsewhere. The US was a haven at one point for the wealthy, drawing them to live and spend here. It is the same for companies. Apple didn't move their money to Ireland because they had a hankering for local Guinness.

How does any of what you said change my point in any way? Be it travel, goods or services, the money that goes out doesn't come back. Even if you put tax on the goods bought overseas, you are not getting 100% of the money given in tax cuts back in the country.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

I could say the same, since you didn't link Ivanka Trump's $35 dress from Target.

Why do I need to do that? My point has been made, If a rich person spends 50k on a dress most of the money will go to another rich person, and say 10 million spend this way generate less jobs and will be less helpful to the economy than if they were used as tax cuts to he middle class. I dare say that there should be at least a dozen of ways to spend that money better than giving it to rich people.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Further, you missed the point that the money is not going 1:1 from rich person to rich person anymore than all $20 of a premium stash tab bundle is personally going to Chris Wilson. There's a whole chain of people whose jobs depend on those sales.

Yes there it is. Now, it's worth for the government help those jobs or working class?

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

soneka101 wrote:

Edit: Just reinforcing: "Trickle down" economics doesn't work, it was tried before it just doesn't.

Tell that to JFK.

"

The notion of Kennedy as supply-side forerunner is a powerful myth, but it is a myth. Context is key. Conservatives love to quote a speech Kennedy gave at the Economic Club of New York in December 1962. Here's one quote—I've italicized the crucial part often left out: "Our present tax system, developed as it was, in good part, during World War II to restrain growth, 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." JFK was not expounding an implacable economic philosophy; he was speaking about a very specific circumstance. The top marginal tax rate was 91 percent, which JFK wanted reduced to a "more sensible" 65 percent. Compare that with today's 35 percent top rate, and ask: If supply-siders are so enamored of JFK's tax policies, would they advocate a return to a "more sensible" 65 percent top rate? Applying Kennedy's tax talk to the current structure, JFK biographer Robert Dallek says, is like comparing "apples and watermelons."

Sauce: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/01/26/the-myth-of-jfk-as-supply-side-tax-cutter
Honestly, I didn't know JFK had lowered taxes during his presidency. Still, he lowered the taxes, he didn't get rid of them. Today taxes are already low, why should be even lower to rich people?

"

DalaiLama wrote:

As for increasing taxes to get more money for the government, here is what that looks like historically;






Who are these "Rich" people anyway? Let's say we agree the top 1% are rich. How much income does it take to be in the top 1% globally?

30,250 Euros

So, if you make that much, grab your financial ankles and prepare for 90% taxation of your income. If you are in the lowest brackets (less than $1 a day) then 22% of your income sounds fair doesn't it?

1% Globally? What other countries have to do with tax cuts in the U.S.?

Anyway, it didn't work when Reagan tried:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5CCRI1vdwE

It didn't work well for Bush either.(there should be videos about it on youtube)

Related: How the middle class got screwed

----------

I don't understand whats up with you man. I mean, you don't believe climate change and you think trickle down works... It's like you are someone that love debates and pick up lost causes just to prove you're good at it.

I will tell you that, if you are debating me just for the sake of debating you are going to win when it comes to stamina.

^That issue was crappy. No Spy vs. Spy's, twelve pages describing what the fallout zone looks like and only one fold-in. Alfred E. Neuman you disappoint =(

I think ol Donny is a nut job....

But I have to respect a man who as accomplished so much

Also we got a hot first lady/daughter out of the deal

its also super fun to pretend he had is voice switched with that of Donald Duck

try it some time watch a speech of his but switch his voice with Donald the duck

its super funny, someone should make a you tube video of that

"

soneka101 wrote:

I don't understand whats up with you man. I mean, you don't believe climate change and you think trickle down works... It's like you are someone that love debates and pick up lost causes just to prove you're good at it.

I will tell you that, if you are debating me just for the sake of debating you are going to win when it comes to stamina.

A lot of people are wrong all the time. In a way, it hardly matter.

It's impossible to talk specifics about taxes in a forum. You talking like 100,000 pages of code which cant be broken down in to simplistic percentages to tell the story. For example what was 91% highest marginal rate back in the day didnt have AMT and you could deduct almost everything which is why revenue was same % of GDP even with 91% tax because no one paid near that.

There should be no incomes taxes is all I;ll say and why I'll always vote R period. Its theft and slavery #1 so immoral. Dems dont have a problem with that as they were slave party but party of Lincoln(R) freed slaves. Most American work 3-4 months a year for free under threat of prison. Thats slavery and theft. It penalizes production when you should reward it. It's effect is to give it a corrupt bureaucracy and corp rent seekers who wastes it and enriches themselves way beyond market demands. It encourages warfare sloth and other antisocial behavior. Before 1913, before income tax, if government wanted to war it had to sell bonds to people to sell it in a very democratic way, put you money where mouth is. Now president can do whatever.

"

k1rage wrote:

I think ol Donny is a nut job....

But I have to respect a man who as accomplished so much

Also we got a hot first lady/daughter out of the deal

its also super fun to pretend he had is voice switched with that of Donald Duck

try it some time watch a speech of his but switch his voice with Donald the duck

its super funny, someone should make a you tube video of that

If Hillary would have been elected it would have been the first time in USA's history that two president had sex with each other.

"Correction: June 29, 2017

A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/25/us/politics/trumps-deflections-and-denials-on-russia-frustrate-even-his-allies.html

This is what I mean by seeing how news sources perform in accuracy over a period of time. The NYT knew this from the beginning.

On my local morning radio program they were going over survey data on what certain groups believed about the Russia narrative. The big comedic send-off, after minutes of citing various percentages, was "and 100% of US intelligence agencies."

Oops. 24%.

Fake news media (WSJ) provides first evidence of collusion.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-operative-sought-clinton-emails-from-hackers-implied-a-connection-to-flynn-1498770851


tick tick tick