The 2017 tax reform from an economic point of view

[NYcarbineer]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

It will be interesting to see if the recently passed tax bill plus renegotiated trade deals will keep us at #1. I am pretty sure that is the President's hope for the new year.

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

I disagree. It's not our job as tax payers to support one over the other, big versus small. If we have a low regulation low tax environment there's no way the top 1% can get a hold of anything they don't compete for. There will always be a smaller faster more innovative option. Just keep the taxes and regulations down and things will get better. There's no reason to use tax dollars to help either one.

Take taxation out of it and just look at the economic situation. The big dogs are buying everything. Yeah we will get the occasional “Facebook” or innovative small business that goes big. But local Mom and pop opperations are getting swallowed up and the comet ion becomes a pee wee team vs a NFL team. That’s only going to lead to an even more lopsided society than we already have.

Do you want to spend your hard-earned money in a mom and pop store and get 5 items or go to Walmart and get 10 items for the same amount? I can tell you what the answer is for most of us with an annual income south of $50k, depending on where you live. It's called economies of scale I think, it ain't nice but it's real. That said, yes the gov't has to be making sure there's no unfair business practices going on, nobody is getting cheated. And as far as I'm concerned a particularly sharp eye needs to be on mergers and acquisitions to make sure the benefit to the consumer is paramount; IMHO there's gotta be a significant boost in benefit to everyone rather than just the big corp that want to get bigger.

You make great points and your Walmart example shows the power that corporations have over the Mom and pop shops and why so many are shutting down. They can’t compete or they need to go boutique and sell to the rich or niche markets. I’d like to go to a Mom and pop shop and by 10 items for the same price as buying the same 10 items from Walmart. How’s that?

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start. America is a great nation that true patriots appreciate for all the right reasons, but it has been in decline for some time now. He was elected for his vision and the objectives/goals he saw as necessary for America to regain its former greatness.

I am sure that he is not looking at the just passed tax bill as the whole deal. I think he looks at it as just the beginning of true and complete reform that is greatly needed in order to benefit all the people.

The haters criticize it because it is only a partial fix and won't benefit this person or that person and/or it benefits 'the rich'. The patriots see it as opportunity to move forward and continue to improve.

I'm guessing you thought Reagan and Bush's budget busting tax bills were 'patriotic' as well.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

It will be interesting to see if the recently passed tax bill plus renegotiated trade deals will keep us at #1. I am pretty sure that is the President's hope for the new year.

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

WTF is a "heavily regulated" trade deal? Is that a trade deal with no stipulations in it?
Are you stupid?

A trade deal that imposes a government mandated 35% tariff on imports, something Trump once promised.

Wow. You ARE stupid. Go put on your big boy panties and join the real world.

Just for the record let's hear you say that Trump never advocated a 35% tariff on imports.

 

[task0778]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

It will be interesting to see if the recently passed tax bill plus renegotiated trade deals will keep us at #1. I am pretty sure that is the President's hope for the new year.

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

Take taxation out of it and just look at the economic situation. The big dogs are buying everything. Yeah we will get the occasional “Facebook” or innovative small business that goes big. But local Mom and pop opperations are getting swallowed up and the comet ion becomes a pee wee team vs a NFL team. That’s only going to lead to an even more lopsided society than we already have.

Do you want to spend your hard-earned money in a mom and pop store and get 5 items or go to Walmart and get 10 items for the same amount? I can tell you what the answer is for most of us with an annual income south of $50k, depending on where you live. It's called economies of scale I think, it ain't nice but it's real. That said, yes the gov't has to be making sure there's no unfair business practices going on, nobody is getting cheated. And as far as I'm concerned a particularly sharp eye needs to be on mergers and acquisitions to make sure the benefit to the consumer is paramount; IMHO there's gotta be a significant boost in benefit to everyone rather than just the big corp that want to get bigger.

You make great points and your Walmart example shows the power that corporations have over the Mom and pop shops and why so many are shutting down. They can’t compete or they need to go boutique and sell to the rich or niche markets. I’d like to go to a Mom and pop shop and by 10 items for the same price as buying the same 10 items from Walmart. How’s that?

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start. America is a great nation that true patriots appreciate for all the right reasons, but it has been in decline for some time now. He was elected for his vision and the objectives/goals he saw as necessary for America to regain its former greatness.

I am sure that he is not looking at the just passed tax bill as the whole deal. I think he looks at it as just the beginning of true and complete reform that is greatly needed in order to benefit all the people.

The haters criticize it because it is only a partial fix and won't benefit this person or that person and/or it benefits 'the rich'. The patriots see it as opportunity to move forward and continue to improve.

Well that’s a very friendly and optimistic view. But if we are oooking objectively at the plan I think we see a very clear effort to put billions of dollars back in the accounts of corporations. That is clear and that is a supported position from many people as they believe it will create jobs and grow wages. But let’s be honest about it. And let’s be honest that what the bill does runs in contrast to how it is being presented by Trump.

He says it’s the biggest tax cut in American history, not true, Reagan took the tax rate from 70% to 28%. He also says it is a bill centered around the middle class. Again, not true. It gave $1000-$2000 a year to middle class families in some areas and a break even in other areas while Millions go into the accounts of top earners and corporations.

I actually like some of what Trump campaigns for, but I’m not seeing it translated. He is proving, to me, to be more of a talker than a doer who displays a strong understanding of details. He is a salesman

Trump is one helluva talker, I'll give you that. But all pols are pretty good at blowing their own horn, something he might have a natural talent for. If you're not seeing some progress from his policies then maybe you're not really looking. GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama, and we haven't yet seen the effects kick in of the new tax bill. He's been cutting regulations and changing many gov't policies to be more business friendly and competitive with foreign interests, and the economy is getting stronger as a result. Don't know how anyone can deny that.

You see this tax bill as primarily putting billions back into the accounts of big corps, but I see it as leveling the international playing field. We are bringing our corp tax rate down to the point where it is about on par with most of our trading partners, or close to it. Are you going to tell me you don't see the benefits of doing that? What about the tax cuts for the middle class, who contrary to what the MSM says IS in fact getting the lions share of the tax cuts on the individual side. According to the Joint Committee on Taxes, the % change from the current tax code to the new one is greatest for the 3 groups between $40k -100k. So what's wrong with that. Look, you've GOT to incentivize investments if you want economic growth, and as a result the people with the most money to invest are going to do very well. That's just the way it is, if you want more investing then youlower the taxes on it.

 

[task0778]

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

i understand what you are saying and agree with your point about lower cost for consumer goods. I also, regrettably, shop at Walmart at times.i want things to be as cheap as possible like I think most people do when looking at it from a consumers perspective. But I’m looking at the big picture and identifying issues with our economic system and how they will effect us in the future. I get it. You don’t have a lot of money and want easy access to cheap goods, the Walmarts provide that so it’s good for you. Thats understandable but it is also short term thinking. I’m trying to analysis the big picture for the long term. We are in a real mess

Short term thinking is pretty much the position that a whole lot of people are in these days, and have been since the recession. The idea that we should pay more for the same thing so we can save the world from Walmart just isn't going to fly, it's just not. There is no way in hell that I and many others will voluntarily lower our standard of living to fix the big picture, it just ain't going to happen. Maybe I'm missing some of what you're trying to say, but whatever ideas you have to address certain issues with our economy are going to have to work without sacrificing our purchasing power.

Just because most people think short term and seek instant gratification that doesn’t mean it is the smart way to do things. I think the needs of those people definatley need to be considered but if we want to grow a strong, stable, and prosperous society with a healthy economy then we need to start having an honest conversation about what’s happening and what kind of projected path we are on. Otherwise we could find us up shit creek without a paddle 20 years from now

I'm ready to have that conversation when you are. Not in this thread though.

This thread is about which elements in the tax code benefit us the most from an economic point of view. It is pretty appropriate to discuss how economic elements effect our society so we can see where the tax code policy fits in. Happy to talk about it with you some other time though.

I think this thread is more narrowly focused on that tax bill, what we're talking about discussing is somewhat wider in scope. I just didn't want to hijack her thread. I'll get around to starting a new thread to broaden the debate unless you beat me to it or someone else does.

 

[AntonToo]

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start.

Quote him saying ANYTHING like that.

That A.D.D riddled man could not give two shits about what he is signing and how it differs from what he promises.

 

[AntonToo]

GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama

Bullshit, it is 2.5% for the year to date. (1.2%, 3.1%, 3.2%)

 

[Foxfyre]

i understand what you are saying and agree with your point about lower cost for consumer goods. I also, regrettably, shop at Walmart at times.i want things to be as cheap as possible like I think most people do when looking at it from a consumers perspective. But I’m looking at the big picture and identifying issues with our economic system and how they will effect us in the future. I get it. You don’t have a lot of money and want easy access to cheap goods, the Walmarts provide that so it’s good for you. Thats understandable but it is also short term thinking. I’m trying to analysis the big picture for the long term. We are in a real mess

Short term thinking is pretty much the position that a whole lot of people are in these days, and have been since the recession. The idea that we should pay more for the same thing so we can save the world from Walmart just isn't going to fly, it's just not. There is no way in hell that I and many others will voluntarily lower our standard of living to fix the big picture, it just ain't going to happen. Maybe I'm missing some of what you're trying to say, but whatever ideas you have to address certain issues with our economy are going to have to work without sacrificing our purchasing power.

Just because most people think short term and seek instant gratification that doesn’t mean it is the smart way to do things. I think the needs of those people definatley need to be considered but if we want to grow a strong, stable, and prosperous society with a healthy economy then we need to start having an honest conversation about what’s happening and what kind of projected path we are on. Otherwise we could find us up shit creek without a paddle 20 years from now

I'm ready to have that conversation when you are. Not in this thread though.

This thread is about which elements in the tax code benefit us the most from an economic point of view. It is pretty appropriate to discuss how economic elements effect our society so we can see where the tax code policy fits in. Happy to talk about it with you some other time though.

I think this thread is more narrowly focused on that tax bill, what we're talking about discussing is somewhat wider in scope. I just didn't want to hijack her thread. I'll get around to starting a new thread to broaden the debate unless you beat me to it or someone else does.

The thread is not intended to focus on the tax bill however much the Trump haters and critics want to make it about that. But the tax bill can be used to illustrate the principles/concepts listed in the poll and OP.

I would very much appreciate getting back to the topic instead of this becoming just another I hate Trump/Republicans/conservatives/Hillary/Democrats/leftists thread.

 

[task0778]

GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama

Bullshit, it is 2.5% for the year to date. (1.2%, 3.1%, 3.2%)

Which is quite a bit higher than Obama's average yearly growth in GDP, which was south of 2%. And projected by many to grow more next year .

Added: Sorry Foxy, I'll drop this nonsense.

 

[Slade3200]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

It will be interesting to see if the recently passed tax bill plus renegotiated trade deals will keep us at #1. I am pretty sure that is the President's hope for the new year.

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

Do you want to spend your hard-earned money in a mom and pop store and get 5 items or go to Walmart and get 10 items for the same amount? I can tell you what the answer is for most of us with an annual income south of $50k, depending on where you live. It's called economies of scale I think, it ain't nice but it's real. That said, yes the gov't has to be making sure there's no unfair business practices going on, nobody is getting cheated. And as far as I'm concerned a particularly sharp eye needs to be on mergers and acquisitions to make sure the benefit to the consumer is paramount; IMHO there's gotta be a significant boost in benefit to everyone rather than just the big corp that want to get bigger.

You make great points and your Walmart example shows the power that corporations have over the Mom and pop shops and why so many are shutting down. They can’t compete or they need to go boutique and sell to the rich or niche markets. I’d like to go to a Mom and pop shop and by 10 items for the same price as buying the same 10 items from Walmart. How’s that?

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start. America is a great nation that true patriots appreciate for all the right reasons, but it has been in decline for some time now. He was elected for his vision and the objectives/goals he saw as necessary for America to regain its former greatness.

I am sure that he is not looking at the just passed tax bill as the whole deal. I think he looks at it as just the beginning of true and complete reform that is greatly needed in order to benefit all the people.

The haters criticize it because it is only a partial fix and won't benefit this person or that person and/or it benefits 'the rich'. The patriots see it as opportunity to move forward and continue to improve.

Well that’s a very friendly and optimistic view. But if we are oooking objectively at the plan I think we see a very clear effort to put billions of dollars back in the accounts of corporations. That is clear and that is a supported position from many people as they believe it will create jobs and grow wages. But let’s be honest about it. And let’s be honest that what the bill does runs in contrast to how it is being presented by Trump.

He says it’s the biggest tax cut in American history, not true, Reagan took the tax rate from 70% to 28%. He also says it is a bill centered around the middle class. Again, not true. It gave $1000-$2000 a year to middle class families in some areas and a break even in other areas while Millions go into the accounts of top earners and corporations.

I actually like some of what Trump campaigns for, but I’m not seeing it translated. He is proving, to me, to be more of a talker than a doer who displays a strong understanding of details. He is a salesman

Trump is one helluva talker, I'll give you that. But all pols are pretty good at blowing their own horn, something he might have a natural talent for. If you're not seeing some progress from his policies then maybe you're not really looking. GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama, and we haven't yet seen the effects kick in of the new tax bill. He's been cutting regulations and changing many gov't policies to be more business friendly and competitive with foreign interests, and the economy is getting stronger as a result. Don't know how anyone can deny that.

You see this tax bill as primarily putting billions back into the accounts of big corps, but I see it as leveling the international playing field. We are bringing our corp tax rate down to the point where it is about on par with most of our trading partners, or close to it. Are you going to tell me you don't see the benefits of doing that? What about the tax cuts for the middle class, who contrary to what the MSM says IS in fact getting the lions share of the tax cuts on the individual side. According to the Joint Committee on Taxes, the % change from the current tax code to the new one is greatest for the 3 groups between $40k -100k. So what's wrong with that. Look, you've GOT to incentivize investments if you want economic growth, and as a result the people with the most money to invest are going to do very well. That's just the way it is, if you want more investing then youlower the taxes on it.

View attachment 168219

I agree that the economy is in good shape. I think Trump is taking more credit than he is due and touting about it more than he should but thats what he does. Take unemployment for example. Trump takes credit for having one of the lowest unemployment rates in decades. But lets look at the historical trend and see where credit should be given:

GDP
You brought up GDP. Again lets just look at the historical chart and see how the Trump "explosion" has compared to past years:

Regulations
I'm all for cutting unnecessary regulations but I also recognize the danger in cutting too much. Reagan is praised by many for all the regulations he cut, but look what came from his deregulation of the financial industry... Ponzi schemes, mass corruption and thievery from wall street and in conjunction with Clinton and the democrats we saw the recent housing crisis destroy our economy and livelihood of many Americans.

 

[boedicca]

In addition to 1 - 5, I have a few others:

- A strong work ethic
- A sense of thrift (valuing saving and investing over instant gratification) - paying oneself first by adding to savings
- Avoidance of debt for consumption
- Living within one's means "use it up, wear it out, make do, do without" (and not getting caught up in the Keeping up with the Jones rat race)
- Buying a home that one can afford with a proper down payment, and paying off the mortgage
- Getting an education/learning a trade prior to getting married
- Delaying children until after marriage
- Avoiding addictions

 

[Foxfyre]

In addition to 1 - 5, I have a few others:

- A strong work ethic
- A sense of thrift (valuing saving and investing over instant gratification) - paying oneself first by adding to savings
- Avoidance of debt for consumption
- Living within one's means "use it up, wear it out, make do, do without" (and not getting caught up in the Keeping up with the Jones rat race)
- Buying a home that one can afford with a proper down payment, and paying off the mortgage
- Getting an education/learning a trade prior to getting married
- Delaying children until after marriage
- Avoiding addictions

I sure can't argue with any of that as you are absolutely singing my song. IMO that is ONLY way some demographics are ever going to significantly improve their circumstances. I had all that in mind when I put No. 5 - personal responsibility/accountability on the poll choices. But you broke it down into its most important components. I would add one more. Marry a responsible partner and stay married.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Short term thinking is pretty much the position that a whole lot of people are in these days, and have been since the recession. The idea that we should pay more for the same thing so we can save the world from Walmart just isn't going to fly, it's just not. There is no way in hell that I and many others will voluntarily lower our standard of living to fix the big picture, it just ain't going to happen. Maybe I'm missing some of what you're trying to say, but whatever ideas you have to address certain issues with our economy are going to have to work without sacrificing our purchasing power.

Just because most people think short term and seek instant gratification that doesn’t mean it is the smart way to do things. I think the needs of those people definatley need to be considered but if we want to grow a strong, stable, and prosperous society with a healthy economy then we need to start having an honest conversation about what’s happening and what kind of projected path we are on. Otherwise we could find us up shit creek without a paddle 20 years from now

I'm ready to have that conversation when you are. Not in this thread though.

This thread is about which elements in the tax code benefit us the most from an economic point of view. It is pretty appropriate to discuss how economic elements effect our society so we can see where the tax code policy fits in. Happy to talk about it with you some other time though.

I think this thread is more narrowly focused on that tax bill, what we're talking about discussing is somewhat wider in scope. I just didn't want to hijack her thread. I'll get around to starting a new thread to broaden the debate unless you beat me to it or someone else does.

The thread is not intended to focus on the tax bill however much the Trump haters and critics want to make it about that. But the tax bill can be used to illustrate the principles/concepts listed in the poll and OP.

I would very much appreciate getting back to the topic instead of this becoming just another I hate Trump/Republicans/conservatives/Hillary/Democrats/leftists thread.

IOW you wanted the thread to be a Trump lovefest. lol, big surprise.

 

[Foxfyre]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

It will be interesting to see if the recently passed tax bill plus renegotiated trade deals will keep us at #1. I am pretty sure that is the President's hope for the new year.

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

You make great points and your Walmart example shows the power that corporations have over the Mom and pop shops and why so many are shutting down. They can’t compete or they need to go boutique and sell to the rich or niche markets. I’d like to go to a Mom and pop shop and by 10 items for the same price as buying the same 10 items from Walmart. How’s that?

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start. America is a great nation that true patriots appreciate for all the right reasons, but it has been in decline for some time now. He was elected for his vision and the objectives/goals he saw as necessary for America to regain its former greatness.

I am sure that he is not looking at the just passed tax bill as the whole deal. I think he looks at it as just the beginning of true and complete reform that is greatly needed in order to benefit all the people.

The haters criticize it because it is only a partial fix and won't benefit this person or that person and/or it benefits 'the rich'. The patriots see it as opportunity to move forward and continue to improve.

Well that’s a very friendly and optimistic view. But if we are oooking objectively at the plan I think we see a very clear effort to put billions of dollars back in the accounts of corporations. That is clear and that is a supported position from many people as they believe it will create jobs and grow wages. But let’s be honest about it. And let’s be honest that what the bill does runs in contrast to how it is being presented by Trump.

He says it’s the biggest tax cut in American history, not true, Reagan took the tax rate from 70% to 28%. He also says it is a bill centered around the middle class. Again, not true. It gave $1000-$2000 a year to middle class families in some areas and a break even in other areas while Millions go into the accounts of top earners and corporations.

I actually like some of what Trump campaigns for, but I’m not seeing it translated. He is proving, to me, to be more of a talker than a doer who displays a strong understanding of details. He is a salesman

Trump is one helluva talker, I'll give you that. But all pols are pretty good at blowing their own horn, something he might have a natural talent for. If you're not seeing some progress from his policies then maybe you're not really looking. GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama, and we haven't yet seen the effects kick in of the new tax bill. He's been cutting regulations and changing many gov't policies to be more business friendly and competitive with foreign interests, and the economy is getting stronger as a result. Don't know how anyone can deny that.

You see this tax bill as primarily putting billions back into the accounts of big corps, but I see it as leveling the international playing field. We are bringing our corp tax rate down to the point where it is about on par with most of our trading partners, or close to it. Are you going to tell me you don't see the benefits of doing that? What about the tax cuts for the middle class, who contrary to what the MSM says IS in fact getting the lions share of the tax cuts on the individual side. According to the Joint Committee on Taxes, the % change from the current tax code to the new one is greatest for the 3 groups between $40k -100k. So what's wrong with that. Look, you've GOT to incentivize investments if you want economic growth, and as a result the people with the most money to invest are going to do very well. That's just the way it is, if you want more investing then youlower the taxes on it.

View attachment 168219

I agree that the economy is in good shape. I think Trump is taking more credit than he is due and touting about it more than he should but thats what he does. Take unemployment for example. Trump takes credit for having one of the lowest unemployment rates in decades. But lets look at the historical trend and see where credit should be given:
View attachment 168223
GDP
You brought up GDP. Again lets just look at the historical chart and see how the Trump "explosion" has compared to past years:

Regulations
I'm all for cutting unnecessary regulations but I also recognize the danger in cutting too much. Reagan is praised by many for all the regulations he cut, but look what came from his deregulation of the financial industry... Ponzi schemes, mass corruption and thievery from wall street and in conjunction with Clinton and the democrats we saw the recent housing crisis destroy our economy and livelihood of many Americans.

So what is too much? Is it really necessary to spend millions on environmental studies before construction on a manufacturing plant that will employ hundreds or thousands can be built?

Is it really necessary that a small business man or even a large corporation has to fill out forms and information providing essentially the same information to five to ten different government agencies when one form could be completed, sent to a central office who would distribute it to everybody else?

What is so horrible about the states deciding what is best and most profitable and beneficial for their people instead of the federal government dictating sometimes conflicting rules and regulations from Washington?

The morass of rules and regulations, often overlapping or contradicting each other, among the huge, monstrous, overwhelming, and unmanageable federal bureaucracy is so massive that nobody could read them all in a lifetime. And don't think the lawyers and permanent political class don't know that when they use the probability of enforcing a law that somebody inevitably broke or threaten commerce and industry with new ones in order to extort contributions to campaign coffers and super pacs.

What if we had a President who is doing his damndest to correct that situation?

Which would be more beneficial to the people?

 

[boedicca]

In addition to 1 - 5, I have a few others:

- A strong work ethic
- A sense of thrift (valuing saving and investing over instant gratification) - paying oneself first by adding to savings
- Avoidance of debt for consumption
- Living within one's means "use it up, wear it out, make do, do without" (and not getting caught up in the Keeping up with the Jones rat race)
- Buying a home that one can afford with a proper down payment, and paying off the mortgage
- Getting an education/learning a trade prior to getting married
- Delaying children until after marriage
- Avoiding addictions

I sure can't argue with any of that as you are absolutely singing my song. IMO that is ONLY way some demographics are ever going to significantly improve their circumstances. I had all that in mind when I put No. 5 - personal responsibility/accountability on the poll choices. But you broke it down into its most important components. I would add one more. Marry a responsible partner and stay married.

BINGO - responsibility and trust in one's partner are key. I'll also add financial compatibility - that is often cited as a hallmark of a successful marriage.

 

[Slade3200]

You're harping on the 'free market' while advocating heavily regulated trade deals? lol

That'd be great, but it ain't reality. The little guys cannot match the big guys in the price cuz they cannot match them for the costs of supply. Wish they could, we'd be better off with more competition, I'd rather see 10 or 20 smaller enterprises than 1 or 2 huge ones. BUT, I and millions of other low income folks have to go to Walmart to stretch our dollars as far as we can.

So, back to the thread on the benefits of this Trump tax cut, what the cuts in corp tax rates means is that more American businesses will stay here rather than leave the country to avoid the ridiculously high taxes, and that helps keep more jobs here rather than losing them. AND, it ought to help the pass throughs compete better with the big boys if their tax burden is reduced. Heck, the big boys can afford to hire tax experts, lawyers, and accountants to cut their tax liability anyway, so this looks to me like an leveling of the playing field a little bit. Coulda been better, maybe the Congress will make it better in the coming months.

As I previously posted (in this thread I think but I am not sure), President Trump got about 1/4th of what he actually wanted in this tax bill. I am sure he is looking at it as a start. America is a great nation that true patriots appreciate for all the right reasons, but it has been in decline for some time now. He was elected for his vision and the objectives/goals he saw as necessary for America to regain its former greatness.

I am sure that he is not looking at the just passed tax bill as the whole deal. I think he looks at it as just the beginning of true and complete reform that is greatly needed in order to benefit all the people.

The haters criticize it because it is only a partial fix and won't benefit this person or that person and/or it benefits 'the rich'. The patriots see it as opportunity to move forward and continue to improve.

Well that’s a very friendly and optimistic view. But if we are oooking objectively at the plan I think we see a very clear effort to put billions of dollars back in the accounts of corporations. That is clear and that is a supported position from many people as they believe it will create jobs and grow wages. But let’s be honest about it. And let’s be honest that what the bill does runs in contrast to how it is being presented by Trump.

He says it’s the biggest tax cut in American history, not true, Reagan took the tax rate from 70% to 28%. He also says it is a bill centered around the middle class. Again, not true. It gave $1000-$2000 a year to middle class families in some areas and a break even in other areas while Millions go into the accounts of top earners and corporations.

I actually like some of what Trump campaigns for, but I’m not seeing it translated. He is proving, to me, to be more of a talker than a doer who displays a strong understanding of details. He is a salesman

Trump is one helluva talker, I'll give you that. But all pols are pretty good at blowing their own horn, something he might have a natural talent for. If you're not seeing some progress from his policies then maybe you're not really looking. GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama, and we haven't yet seen the effects kick in of the new tax bill. He's been cutting regulations and changing many gov't policies to be more business friendly and competitive with foreign interests, and the economy is getting stronger as a result. Don't know how anyone can deny that.

You see this tax bill as primarily putting billions back into the accounts of big corps, but I see it as leveling the international playing field. We are bringing our corp tax rate down to the point where it is about on par with most of our trading partners, or close to it. Are you going to tell me you don't see the benefits of doing that? What about the tax cuts for the middle class, who contrary to what the MSM says IS in fact getting the lions share of the tax cuts on the individual side. According to the Joint Committee on Taxes, the % change from the current tax code to the new one is greatest for the 3 groups between $40k -100k. So what's wrong with that. Look, you've GOT to incentivize investments if you want economic growth, and as a result the people with the most money to invest are going to do very well. That's just the way it is, if you want more investing then youlower the taxes on it.

View attachment 168219

I agree that the economy is in good shape. I think Trump is taking more credit than he is due and touting about it more than he should but thats what he does. Take unemployment for example. Trump takes credit for having one of the lowest unemployment rates in decades. But lets look at the historical trend and see where credit should be given:
View attachment 168223
GDP
You brought up GDP. Again lets just look at the historical chart and see how the Trump "explosion" has compared to past years:

Regulations
I'm all for cutting unnecessary regulations but I also recognize the danger in cutting too much. Reagan is praised by many for all the regulations he cut, but look what came from his deregulation of the financial industry... Ponzi schemes, mass corruption and thievery from wall street and in conjunction with Clinton and the democrats we saw the recent housing crisis destroy our economy and livelihood of many Americans.

So what is too much? Is it really necessary to spend millions on environmental studies before construction on a manufacturing plant that will employ hundreds or thousands can be built?

Is it really necessary that a small business man has to fill out forms and information providing essentially the same information to five to ten different government agencies when one form could be completed, sent to a central office who would distribute it to everybody else?

What is so horrible about the states deciding what is best and most profitable and beneficial for their people instead of the federal government dictating sometimes conflicting rules and regulations from Washington?

So what is too much? Is it really necessary to spend millions on environmental studies before construction on a manufacturing plant that will employ hundreds or thousands can be built?
I think there can be a healthy effort to invest and focus on both the environment and infrastructure. This isn't an either or game.

Is it really necessary that a small business man has to fill out forms and information providing essentially the same information to five to ten different government agencies when one form could be completed, sent to a central office who would distribute it to everybody else?
No, that isn't necessary and those regulations and systems should absolutely be reviewed and improved for efficiency.

What is so horrible about the states deciding what is best and most profitable and beneficial for their people instead of the federal government dictating sometimes conflicting rules and regulations from Washington?
Nothing horrible about that at all. State should be free to work that way and the Feds make national laws only when circumstances call for it.

 

[AntonToo]

GDP is up quite a bit over what it was under Obama

Bullshit, it is 2.5% for the year to date. (1.2%, 3.1%, 3.2%)

Which is quite a bit higher than Obama's average yearly growth in GDP, which was south of 2%. And projected by many to grow more next year .

Added: Sorry Foxy, I'll drop this nonsense.

LOL, yes of course when you dishonestly throw in Great Recession growth into Obama's lap his AVERAGE numbers don't looks so good.

But when you HONESTLY look at the GDP growth 2017 looks very much in line with past 6 years.

 

[NightFox]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

Ummm...no

The speculation is that China's share of global output adjusted for purchasing power parity will surpass that of the United States in 2018 not that the size of Chinas Economy will surpass that of the United States in 2018, the speculation on that prospect happening is sometime after 2030.

That depends on who you ask, and I honestly don't have any means to determine that so I am as dependent on what others write/say just like most others here.

"BusinessInsider" says in 11 years which would put it around 2028.

This article in Forbes says 2018.
China's Economy Will Overtake The U.S. In 2018

2028 isn't 2018 and the consensus for China's nominal GDP exceeding that of the United States appears to be sometime after 2030, could be 2028, could be 2050, could be never but it's a very safe bet that it won't be in 2018.

There's no perfectly accurate way to determine that since unforeseen events affecting economic growth are as any economist will tell you, unforeseeable.

Who do you believe? I personally think economists, like weather forecasters, at best can make educated long range estimates, but I do believe we can safely say that China's economy is expanding at a much faster rate than ours and, given their far less oppressive regulation and taxation policies on commerce and industry, they no doubt will surpass us unless we rethink how we do things and stop clinging to the status quo.

The growth rate of China's economy is significantly higher than ours due a number of factors a few of which are: it's still significantly smaller (around 61% of US Nominal GDP) and thus can maintain higher growth rates at lower inflation risk, less complex, has a higher savings rate and has significant comparative advantage in a number of areas (e.g. manufacturing) which allows it to offset the deferred consumption of it's labor force with exports and thus maintain its high level of capital investment.

At the end of the day if/when China's nominal output exceeds that of the United States, it's not the end of the world as long as trade relations between the two countries remain positive and the United States Government doesn't further stifle the competitiveness of domestic producers any more than it already has.

Trade creates wealth for all parties involved over the long term comparative advantage will iron out who trades what with whom and how much of it.​

 

[Aldo Raine]

I totally agree that the gop should have ended corporate tax expenditures in exchange for corp tax cuts, but Wall St didn't want that

100% correct, expenditures for individuals and corporations should be ended. All tax rates could be cut and after debt paid off everybody's rates could be lowered again.

 

[Foxfyre]

I totally agree that the gop should have ended corporate tax expenditures in exchange for corp tax cuts, but Wall St didn't want that

100% correct, expenditures for individuals and corporations should be ended. All tax rates could be cut and after debt paid off everybody's rates could be lowered again.

Tax expenditures are a strange animal. But if you end them:

If you live in your own apartment that you own, you will pay tax on the amount of rent that you are not paying to yourself plus you lose your deductions on your mortgage insurance and real estate taxes which would greatly lower the little guys ability to buy and own real property. That would shift a whole bunch of wealth to that top 1% in a hurry.

Employers who can now deduct their costs of helping to finance 401Ks, healthcare plans, and other employee benefits will be taxed on that money which would greatly reduce their ability and incentive to provide them.

Depreciation would be gone as well as deductions for charitable contributions. That would almost certainly result in less acquisition and further strain social services.

The topic of this thread is benefit to the people. How does eliminating means of the people to keep more of their own money that they work for and earn benefit them?

 

[Foxfyre]

It has been widely speculated that China's economy will pass the USA in 2018 and the USA will lose it's designation as the world's biggest/strongest economy. Good thing? Bad thing?

Ummm...no

The speculation is that China's share of global output adjusted for purchasing power parity will surpass that of the United States in 2018 not that the size of Chinas Economy will surpass that of the United States in 2018, the speculation on that prospect happening is sometime after 2030.

That depends on who you ask, and I honestly don't have any means to determine that so I am as dependent on what others write/say just like most others here.

"BusinessInsider" says in 11 years which would put it around 2028.

This article in Forbes says 2018.
China's Economy Will Overtake The U.S. In 2018

2028 isn't 2018 and the consensus for China's nominal GDP exceeding that of the United States appears to be sometime after 2030, could be 2028, could be 2050, could be never but it's a very safe bet that it won't be in 2018.

There's no perfectly accurate way to determine that since unforeseen events affecting economic growth are as any economist will tell you, unforeseeable.

Who do you believe? I personally think economists, like weather forecasters, at best can make educated long range estimates, but I do believe we can safely say that China's economy is expanding at a much faster rate than ours and, given their far less oppressive regulation and taxation policies on commerce and industry, they no doubt will surpass us unless we rethink how we do things and stop clinging to the status quo.

The growth rate of China's economy is significantly higher than ours due a number of factors a few of which are: it's still significantly smaller (around 61% of US Nominal GDP) and thus can maintain higher growth rates at lower inflation risk, less complex, has a higher savings rate and has significant comparative advantage in a number of areas (e.g. manufacturing) which allows it to offset the deferred consumption of it's labor force with exports and thus maintain its high level of capital investment.

At the end of the day if/when China's nominal output exceeds that of the United States, it's not the end of the world as long as trade relations between the two countries remain positive and the United States Government doesn't further stifle the competitiveness of domestic producers any more than it already has.

Trade creates wealth for all parties involved over the long term comparative advantage will iron out who trades what with whom and how much of it.​

Well, within a year, we will know whether you or at least the guy at Forbes is correct.

Like you, I don't see how China's 1.3 billion people producing more than our 330 million people would necessarily mean that the American people lose benefits UNLESS it includes a cost in American jobs, opportunity, prosperity. I am glad we have a President who understands that and who intends that free trade not include unfair trade and who knows that American commerce and industry must be allowed to be more competitive in a global market.