Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
www.politico.com
People in debt always magically believe that is so -- until the bill comes due.Whatever Trump is accused of spending, we got a big bang for our buck. Gas prices were low, the Military was well financed, the border was under control, kids weren't being kidnapped and castrated by the government and there was no sign of inflation. What you get when democrats spend money? Chaos in foreign policy, high energy costs and high food costs, businesses going broke, kids dying on fentanyl poisoning and citizens getting raped and murdered by illegal aliens.
1. CBP covers the entire US, $1.35b Remittance Tax would cover wall maintenance or some CBP salaries. ITS REAL MONEY, ITS FREE MONEY.Not really. The annual budget for Customs and Border Patrol is $13 billion. So your remittance tax would cover the cost of their coffee.
One percent?!? That's more than even Bernie Sanders is asking for! What are you, a socialist?
The problem with FTTs is they decrease trading volume and lower asset prices and result in revenues coming in below their targets.
There are a lot of downsides to an FTT. I won't plagiarize any further and will just link to this:
Eliminating tax expenditures would provide an immediate budget surplus.1. CBP covers the entire US, $1.35b Remittance Tax would cover wall maintenance or some CBP salaries. ITS REAL MONEY, ITS FREE MONEY.
2. The US has a $2T Budget Deficit. Sending Welfare to the states nets $1.3T if they can handle it. Add $400b from the new FTT gets $1.7T, remove the cap on SS fixes SS, remove the capital gains tax break gains $100b, close tax loop-holes to gain $1.5T and the $2T deficit turns into a $1.2T surplus.
3. We need to get to a surplus fast or the dollar will collapse. The rating agencies will soon rate US Debt as "junk" then the dollar crashes and the BRIC countries become us, while we become Venezuela North.
No, it sounds like you live on a toxic waste dump if people are dying way before the average lifespan.
SS and Medicare are separate from regular taxes. They have nothing to do with our budget.Eliminating tax expenditures would provide an immediate budget surplus.
Raising the SS and Medicare ages to 70, and indexing them to 9 percent of the population, would provide an even larger budget surplus.
We'd have such a large surplus, we could lower tax rates for EVERYONE.
Tell me, how is money the government doesn't have yet, add to the debt?"We're effectively run in this country via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made." - JD Vance
Poor Flip Flopper JD. He's going to have to wash down his self respect with some racist Diet Mountain Dew again. His boss is kowtowing to the corporate oligarchs by promising them a big tax cut.
Since Trump has no idea how to cut spending, this decrease in revenues will add more to our debt, of course.
But wait, there's more!
Trump is also promising our country's geezers he will end taxes on Social Security income!
More debt!
This is blatant vote buying. Geezers are the largest Trump voting bloc. The average age of Fox News viewership is 128 years old.
I happen to know the guy running Trump's failing Truth Social platform is Deven Nunes. Nunes was a Congressman and one of Trump's biggest lickspittles in the House. He would run to Trump and spill confidential information about the House investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. For this, Trump gave Nunes the Presidential Medal of Freedom as Trump was on his way out of the White House. And then he hired Nunes to run his social media company.
But there is something Nunes said years ago which backs up everything I have ever said about tax expenditures. The man nailed it.
You should read this as many times as it takes to get it:
No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says
"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."
Trump lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent WITHOUT taking out "everybody's special loophole".
And now he wants to exacerbate the problem even more with a 15 percent corporate tax rate.
Now, before some idiot completely misunderstands me, I am 100 percent for lowering taxes, but ONLY if we also eliminate the tax expenditures which have made them so high to begin with.
Every deduction, credit, and exemption has to be offset by higher tax rates. They are theft. So if you want to lower tax rates, you have to get rid of the deductions, credits, and exemptions which drove them higher.
Nunes got it. Trump doesn't. Because he's an idiot and he doesn't care about saddling future generations with even more unsustainable debt, just to please JD's corporate oligarchs.
Trump pushes for lowering corporate tax rate to 15%
Trump Calls For Eliminating The Income Tax On Social Security Payments
What are you talking about?SS and Medicare are separate from regular taxes. They have nothing to do with our budget.
You see, the way a government budget works, to put it simply, is it collects taxes (revenues) and then pays for highways and entitlements and free puppies for hookers and such.Tell me, how is money the government doesn't have yet, add to the debt?
1. NFW everyone can work until they are 70. I retired at 62. You can raise the ages a few years over time, say 64 early and 69 full?Eliminating tax expenditures would provide an immediate budget surplus.
Raising the SS and Medicare ages to 70, and indexing them to 9 percent of the population, would provide an even larger budget surplus.
We'd have such a large surplus, we could lower tax rates for EVERYONE.
What Trump figured out, and what every modern president has figured out, is that government spending is a great way to artificially juice our GDP numbers.
If you don't know how to grow an economy the right way, and Trump certainly hasn't a clue, then you spend. And spend. And spend. And spend some more.
Every voter has their hand out.
The new American motto is, 'Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it.'
Index to 9 percent means that would be the percent of the US population collecting Social Security and Medicare.1. NFW everyone can work until they are 70. I retired at 62. You can raise the ages a few years over time, say 64 early and 69 full?
2. Not sure what indexing to 9% means?
Yes, even the standard deduction. Our politicians are playing a con game on you. They created the Standard Deduction and then raise the tax rate to offset the cost of that deduction on revenues.3. Eliminating all deductions is what you mean by "Eliminating tax expenditures", correct? Even the Standard Deduction??????
1. Instead of indexing the retirement age, index the deductions paid. When I was working I wanted to know where the goal line was. I'd sooner budget my pay (variable deductions) and keep the retirement age constant.Index to 9 percent means that would be the percent of the US population collecting Social Security and Medicare.
That way, as the average life expectancy climbs, so the eligibility age would rise commensurately.
If we start living to 100, we cannot afford to have everyone collecting SS for a third of their lives!
Right now, 16 percent are over 65 compared to 5.7 percent in 1935. A smaller and smaller percentage of Americans are carrying a larger and larger percentage of Americans. This is unsustainable.
I picked the 9 percent figure because that is what percent of Americans were over 65 when Medicare was enacted.
Yes, even the standard deduction. Our politicians are playing a con game on you. They created the Standard Deduction and then raise the tax rate to offset the cost of that deduction on revenues.
That's how ALL tax expenditures work. Every dollar you deduct has to be offset by taxing someone else an extra dollar.
Deductions, exemptions, and credits are theft. They are a socialist redistribution of wealth.
They are also government intervention in the free market.
You are taxed more for not taking out a mortgage. You are taxed more for not having kids. You are even taxed more if you don't have ENOUGH kids. You are taxed more for not buying the right kind of refrigerator or the right kind of electricity.
Your house cost about 27 percent more because of the mortgage interest deduction.
Ask yourself who profits from your house and your mortgage costing more and you will begin to understand why the real estate industry spends over $100 million a year on lobbying. Not to mention those who build houses and lumber and so on.
Somebody is paying our politicians to put all these tax expenditures in the tax code to the tune of nearly one new tax expenditure a day being added for decades now.
The biggest offenders are Republicans. This is their stealth method of increasing spending compared to the Democrats blatant spending.
We accepted all this blindly. We let it happen.
So it wasn't a big leap to tax you more for not having the right health insurance when Obama came along.
There is a direct correlation between tax rates and tax expenditures.1. Instead of indexing the retirement age, index the deductions paid. When I was working I wanted to know where the goal line was. I'd sooner budget my pay (variable deductions) and keep the retirement age constant.
2. If there were no deductions the Federal Income Tax paid would be huge. You seem to be rearranging the numbers, but the net government revenue is the same. Example, if local taxes are deductible, people in NY & NJ are happy but people in low tax states lose out. If there were no deductions people couldn't afford to live in blue states. Losing tax deductions and paying higher taxes could gain tax revenue, but for people to keep a few dollars the tax rates would need to be reduced. I'm not seeing where there is a net revenue gain for the government. Its all smoke and mirrors. I agree that we need to cut spending, so I'm recommending a "Grace Commission II" to study the government and recommend where cost savings can be realized.
Then they need to cut their budgets.You see, the way a government budget works, to put it simply, is it collects taxes (revenues) and then pays for highways and entitlements and free puppies for hookers and such.
If the government spends more than it collects, it has to borrow the difference. From China, and the UK, and the Social Security Trust Fund, and such.
If the government decides to collect even less, by way of tax cuts on corporations, say, then it has to borrow even more money to make up the difference, and thus the debt grows even faster.
