One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Trump's Attacks on the Working Class 2 - The Tax Cuts
Page <<first <prev 3 of 7 next> last>>
May 24, 2018 14:56:38   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
straightUp wrote:
First of all I'm not "missing" the big picture. I'm pointing out one particular pattern INSIDE the big picture. What you're doing here jack, is your trying to side-step the issue. It's like trying to deny that a patient has colon cancer by pointing out how healthy his other parts are. Well, I'm not talking about the overall health of the economy, jack. I'm talking specifically about the corporate stock buybacks that hit a record $178 billion in the first three months of 2018 while average hourly earnings for American workers are up only 67 cents over the past year.

So far, the knee-jerk responses from the OPP guardians of Trump's eggshell image completely miss this particular trend. All the reactions (not counting insults) fall into only two basic arguments... One is that Harley-Davidson is struggling (which does little to explain their $700 million in buybacks) and the other is that the economy over all is looking good (which has no bearing on the pattern in question).

I'm not actually expecting any real argument here and I'd be surprised of this thread get's past 3 pages. I expect people on the right to abandon the argument like they did with my previous thread about Trump's attacks on working class Americans, when I mentioned the fiduciary rule. None of the Trump supporters had a counter argument, nor did they show any indication that they even understood the issue. They just walked away because they didn't like the conversation.

This is why I am bringing these issues up. Not only to show how little Trump supporters actually understand about what the Trump administration (and the Republican Party) is doing, but how little they care to know. I choose these issues in particular because they are simple enough on their own to make conclusions without involving unproven theories, complicated relations or speculation. I'm not discounting the possibility that I could be wrong either, but so far no one has shown this to be the case. If there is something I am missing it has yet to be mentioned.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with buybacks either. Buybacks are an effective way to increase the value of shares by reducing the number of shares in the market (supply and demand). The point is that we can't make the assumption that much of the money a company saves from a tax cut will trickle down to the worker which is really the entire premise of the conservative argument that led people to support the tax cut. Noting the record breaking buybacks in contrast to the tiny uptick in wages is a pretty clear indication that more of the tax savings is going to the investors on Wall Street than to the workers on Main Street.

Neither the descriptions of Harley-Davidson as a struggling company or the overall economy as a bull market have any impact on this rather simple conclusion.
First of all I'm not "missing" the big p... (show quote)




You failed when you stated if one company laid off workers than the Trump tax cuts failed.
What dies that say about your critical thinking skills.

Should a ceo operate off an ideology, policies and agendas, with ten companies growing, expanding, adding jobs, but one files bankruptcy. Under your narrow thinking you would focus on the company that filed bankruptcy, fire the ceo claiming his ideology, policies and agendas are a complete failure.
To further your narrow thinking you accused basically "getting off topic" and defending Trump even when wrong, but it is your narrow thinking and disregard of the successes. Just as disregarding the multiple benifits to Americas security and economy of steel tariffs. To condense your cut and paste, a representative of your beliefs, it misses the mark with narrow optics of discrediting president Trumps accomplishments.

Reply
May 24, 2018 15:27:46   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
son of witless wrote:
" It's not much of a point if you can't explain it. "
I gave you an explanation.

No you didn't. Your point was that I don't "seem to have a clue how free enterprise works." You didn't explain why it seems that way.

son of witless wrote:

I cannot give you an understanding of what I said.

LOL, ain't THAT the truth!

son of witless wrote:

" I never said taking care of their investors is a bad thing. Once again, you're arguing with your own misconceptions about what I'm actually saying. Besides, Harley-Davidson didn't have to buy $700 million in shares just to "take care of their investors". "

Their investors are the owners. They are in business to reward their shareholders. When they fail to do that they are out of business. If they chose to buy $ 700M in shares, that is their business.

Are you going to spend this whole conversation stating the obvious but irrelevant? I'm very impressed that you have a 101 understanding of basic capitalism, but none if this has any bearing on my argument. I already said taking care of the investors is not bad thing, you even quoted me on that. So what exactly are you arguing here?

I tell you what, I got a lot to do today, so I'm not going to read the rest of your rather long post... No offense but the first points you make seem rather pointless given my argument. How about you take another approach and stop assuming that I'm one of those 20-something hippies with a bag of weed and a subscription to left-wing rhetoric and realize that I'm a successful 50-something businessman who has co-founded three tech companies over his career, has NEVER registered Democrat in his life and simply doesn't agree with the prevailing rhetoric on the right? Maybe then we can have a better conversation about what I'm actually saying.

son of witless wrote:

" If you don't know what their basic problem IS, how do you know what it ISN'T? "

I see I failed to make myself clear, my mistake. I do not know why they have suffered a decline in sales. I do not ride motorcycles. That however is their basic problem.

I'm not sure riding motorcycles will make the problem any clearer for you, but it's easy enough to verify that slumping sales is evident. But again, this has no bearing on my argument. If you read my original post you might realize that Harley-Davidson is only an example of the problem I am presenting, which isn't about blaming anyone for slumping performance. I'm not saying Trump's tax cuts caused the problem Harley-Davidson is having. I'm saying Trump's tax cuts aren't really fixing the problem either which is exactly what Trump and Ryan were suggesting would happen.

Do YOU think spending $700 million on stock buybacks is going to help with this basic problem? Wouldn't some of that money be better spent on market research or factory redesign for more cost effective production? Or is Harley-Davidson hoping the investors themselves will all start buying hogs with all the money they're getting? I know one thing for sure, the slump in sales has resulted in a decline in their stock value and the buybacks are one way that investors can cut their losses through an increase in value per share and there's no reason why they can't divest after that like grabbing as much cash as you can before jumping off a sinking ship. You're correct in saying companies have an obligation to their investors but what seem to get so little attention among conservatives is that investors have no obligation to the company.

son of witless wrote:

" You really aren't putting the pieces together, are you? You keep trying to portray Harley-Davidson as a company struggling with sales (I guess thinking it will somehow excuse the layoffs) while completely missing the fact that they just spent $700 million on stock buybacks. Do you not see the irony here? "

WHAT ? ? ? ? Do you think that a company struggling with sales should not do a $ 700 M buy back ? Is that your IRONY ?

Again, I NEVER said a company struggling with sales should not do a $700 M buyback. The irony is the simple fact that a company can lay off 350 workers because of slumping sales and yet spend $700 million on buybacks.

son of witless wrote:

" To be clear, I am not blaming Fatass or his tax policy for the job cuts. I did point out that the tax policy didn't SAVE the jobs like Trump was suggesting they would, but that's not the same thing as blaming his policy FOR the job cuts. "

So if the Trump tax cuts fail to save jobs at even one company, then they are a failure ? Gezz ole Willockers you are a tough hombre.

I didn't say that either. I've made it pretty clear all along that Harley-Davidson is only one example. It was the statement in my original post that I highlighted in red, that shows the total for ALL the buyouts throughout the U.S. economy and the total average increase in wages nation-wide that drills the point I am making. You're so hung up on bickering about the example that you totally miss the bigger argument.

son of witless wrote:

" I don't think "America" is "in economic wars" against other countries. I know that's what your fat-daddy wants you to think because it makes his trade wars appear "patriotic" but I would have thought with all your massive knowledge about free-enterprise, you would know a little more about how globally integrated our economy really is. For instance, when your dreamy white knight slapped tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, he injured the American aerospace industry as a consequence by making their materials more expensive. "

Just because you " don't think "America" is "in economic wars" against other countries " does not make what you think correct.
br " I don't think "America" is &q... (show quote)

I never said I did... the reason why I said "I don't think" is to clearly indicate it's an opinion and that it differs from your opinion that America *is* in an economic war, which is no more provable.

son of witless wrote:

how globally integrated our economy really is " have to do with anything ? ? ?

When the economy is globally integrated, which it is (and that's not my opinion, that *IS* a fact) supply-chains cross borders, a situation that depends on economic cooperation between nations not economic wars. I think (as in this is my opinion) that Trump's trade wars is like hand-to-hand combat with grenades where every attack has as much potential to harm you and your friends as it does your foes.

son of witless wrote:

The Chinese along with the rest of our trading partners take screwing America over on trade very seriously.

Well they do NOW thanks to Trump's belligerence.

son of witless wrote:

President Trump is the first pro American Trade President of the post WW2 era.

That has yet to be proven. Like I said, hand-to-hand combat with grenades... Trump's tariffs are pretty reckless and though he might score some points with specific industries he is nevertheless doing a LOT of damage to American trade in the process.

son of witless wrote:

A lot of what has gone on had to do with America taking care of nations like
W. Germany and Japan during the Cold War because they had lost their traditional markets.

That's actually not true. If you knew anything about the Marshal Plans you would know these were not the charitable give-aways as described by cold-war propaganda. They were business deals in which the U.S. leveraged the advantage of being the only developed nation that didn't get consumed by the war (too far to be bombed - only fought half the war) to secure economic advantages. Japan for instance, as part of the Marshal Plan was only allowed to buy oil from U.S. suppliers. Both Japan and Germany had paid the U.S back for all the money they borrowed plus interest way back in the 70's, but the propaganda just kept playing that "everyone owes the U.S." tune and it's become a pillar of conservative folklore.

son of witless wrote:

Then when China was opened up we allowed them to screw us on trade so as to engage them peacefully and to take advantage of cheap Chinese labor. In the post Cold War World, those strategies are killing us and Trump is discontinuing them.

China wasn't actually screwing us. They were just one of the few trading partners with the power to NOT be screwed by America. You're right to assume that conditions have changed in the post Cold War era. During the Cold War, a large part of the world was underdeveloped. The U.S. used something called free-trade to leverage our economic advantages over these third world countries by getting them to give up their protections and open their markets to the highest bidders, which of course wouldn't be the poor people of said country but wealthy investors from America and Europe. Many countries refused this unfair situation and decided to protect their industries anyway. The U.S. response was a three step process where the upon the failure of one step the next step is taken... These steps are generally public diplomacy, private negotiations (economic hitmen) and military intervention. China was one of the few countries that was able to stand up to all three approaches.

But things HAVE changed... You're right... Much of the third world is developing so the financial advantages in a free-market are no longer guaranteed to favor American business. So now that the free-market isn't as convenient for us we are doing the same thing that we used to attack other countries for doing... protecting our industries. The only differences are that we don't have a super-power threating to destroy us for our policies and as I've said, the economy is far more integrated globally now than it was during the Cold War, which make protectionism a lot less sensible that it used to be.

Trump has found a supporting base among the people that think our unfair Cold War advantages was just us being "great" and he is blowing sunshine up their asses about how we can be "great" again by being hard-asses. But it's going to be impossible for us to play that role as effectively as we did 30 years ago because we simply don't have the same advantages that we did then. Honestly, we could do a lot better for ourselves if we start earning respect like Obama was instead of acting like we still have this big stick and we're going to beat them up with it if they don't submit, especially when the whole world knows better.

I gotta go... I might catch the rest of you post later...

Reply
May 24, 2018 18:19:42   #
son of witless
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
Hey pal, he makes good points but then has a spin on others. Perhaps his own hate towards Trump or the material he is reading, authored by Trump haters.

You stated our iron and aluminum (in other words) production was nearly non existent. That was factual. He stated that because of Trumps actions our Aerospace industry would be hurt, which is also factual. But what he misses in the big picture are many things. One being, since 80% of our metals come from China, how hard hit would our aerospace companies be, when China decides to cut off our supply if we don't allow them to take over Taiwan or force their military presence over Japan, or a hundred other reasons I can't think of right now. What would happen to our commercial builders not having steel? What would happen to our infrastructure plans to rebuild, or our auto makers. Then the big one is our military infrastructure, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to know a whole lot of steel is required to produce an aircraft carrier, attack or support ship.
Trump stated how important bringing back our steel industry is, and already new steel plants are opening. Ahead of his steel tariff on China, Trump relaxed regulations that (save the planet liberals put in place) strangled the ability to open more strip mines, and cost burdens on the few operating strip mines in America. Under Trump expect many more once protected government lands to open and begin mining, as well as steel factories opening. What the liberal leftist ignore is steel is every but as important to America as oil independence, something Trump understands. Not to mention the tens of thousands of higher paying jobs, plus the tens of thousands of jobs that will be created to support the industry.
Hey pal, he makes good points but then has a spin ... (show quote)


Straight up is an excellent example of what Alexander Pope meant when he said. " A little learning is a dangerous thing " . He knows just enough to be dangerous, which is far less than what he needs to know to make sound judgements on economics and politics.

Up until
Trump won, the Liberals and the Russians were bestest buddies. When the Hilly Beast was slain by Donald J. Trump $ Billionaire, the Liberals needed a villain, a scapegoat to appease their suicidal zombie street thugs. The Russians won that honor by being in the right place at the right time. It is true the Russians tried to interfere in the election. The fact is, they always do. It was their bad luck this time that the Democrats desperately needed a Patsy. Not that the Russians do not deserve to be vilified.

However, the Russians are no longer our number one rival in the World. Russia's military is being rebuilt and has some very good people, but Russia will always be hamstrung by their backward economy. With Putin in charge that is not changing for the foreseeable future. He will never allow the freedoms necessary to reform his economy. China has the economy and the manpower to challenge us. We have allowed them to virtually destroy vital industries that we will need if we ever have to fight them. Trump is trying to bring back those industries while still engaging China in trade and diplomacy.

Straight up's problem is he has no knowledge of history. As far as he is concerned the universe came into being on the day he was born. If you want to understand today's World you have to look back at the 19th Century. Back then England was the Superpower that America is. France and Russia early on were in the position that Russia and China occupy today. Gradually France and Russia moved away from being England's enemies and became allies because a new power rose when Germany became a united country. Going into WW1 you had England, France and Russia allied against Germany and Austria Hungary.

Today's World is the same as back then. Only the technology and the countries have changed.

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2018 18:44:28   #
son of witless
 
straightUp wrote:
China wasn't actually screwing us. They were just one of the few trading partners with the power to NOT be screwed by America. You're right to assume that conditions have changed in the post Cold War era. During the Cold War, a large part of the world was underdeveloped. The U.S. used something called free-trade to leverage our economic advantages over these third world countries by getting them to give up their protections and open their markets to the highest bidders, which of course wouldn't be the poor people of said country but wealthy investors from America and Europe. Many countries refused this unfair situation and decided to protect their industries anyway. The U.S. response was a three step process where the upon the failure of one step the next step is taken... These steps are generally public diplomacy, private negotiations (economic hitmen) and military intervention. China was one of the few countries that was able to stand up to all three approaches.

But things HAVE changed... You're right... Much of the third world is developing so the financial advantages in a free-market are no longer guaranteed to favor American business. So now that the free-market isn't as convenient for us we are doing the same thing that we used to attack other countries for doing... protecting our industries. The only differences are that we don't have a super-power threating to destroy us for our policies and as I've said, the economy is far more integrated globally now than it was during the Cold War, which make protectionism a lot less sensible that it used to be.

Trump has found a supporting base among the people that think our unfair Cold War advantages was just us being "great" and he is blowing sunshine up their asses about how we can be "great" again by being hard-asses. But it's going to be impossible for us to play that role as effectively as we did 30 years ago because we simply don't have the same advantages that we did then. Honestly, we could do a lot better for ourselves if we start earning respect like Obama was instead of acting like we still have this big stick and we're going to beat them up with it if they don't submit, especially when the whole world knows better.

I gotta go... I might catch the rest of you post later...
China wasn't actually screwing us. They were just ... (show quote)


We are both getting far too long in our answers. Lets us see if we can give abridged versions of our brilliant discussion.

" How about you take another approach and stop assuming that I'm one of those 20-something hippies with a bag of weed and a subscription to left-wing rhetoric and realize that I'm a successful 50-something businessman who has co-founded three tech companies over his career, has NEVER registered Democrat in his life and simply doesn't agree with the prevailing rhetoric on the right? Maybe then we can have a better conversation about what I'm actually saying. "

My mistake. By the phrases you used and the tone of your rhetoric my impression of you was that YES you are " one of those 20-something hippies with a bag of weed and a subscription to left-wing rhetoric ". I am used to conversing with Socialists and Marxists. You talk the talk, so I assumed you also walked the walk. Or rather you quack like a Marxist-Socialist.

" I'm not sure riding motorcycles will make the problem any clearer for you, but it's easy enough to verify that slumping sales is evident. But again, this has no bearing on my argument. "

How can it not ? You bash Trump and Harley because of the closing of a plant and the fact that Trump's tax cuts did not save it and it's jobs. I pointed out that Harley is in a sales slump. I admit I do not know why they can't sell Harleys, but I sure as shooting know that if they don't they have to close plants.

Why is that fact so hard to fathom for a guy who is a " successful 50-something businessman who has co-founded three tech companies over his career " ? WELL ?????

Reply
May 24, 2018 19:01:50   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
son of witless wrote:
Straight up is an excellent example of what Alexander Pope meant when he said. " A little learning is a dangerous thing " . He knows just enough to be dangerous, which is far less than what he needs to know to make sound judgements on economics and politics.

Up until
Trump won, the Liberals and the Russians were bestest buddies. When the Hilly Beast was slain by Donald J. Trump $ Billionaire, the Liberals needed a villain, a scapegoat to appease their suicidal zombie street thugs. The Russians won that honor by being in the right place at the right time. It is true the Russians tried to interfere in the election. The fact is, they always do. It was their bad luck this time that the Democrats desperately needed a Patsy. Not that the Russians do not deserve to be vilified.

However, the Russians are no longer our number one rival in the World. Russia's military is being rebuilt and has some very good people, but Russia will always be hamstrung by their backward economy. With Putin in charge that is not changing for the foreseeable future. He will never allow the freedoms necessary to reform his economy. China has the economy and the manpower to challenge us. We have allowed them to virtually destroy vital industries that we will need if we ever have to fight them. Trump is trying to bring back those industries while still engaging China in trade and diplomacy.

Straight up's problem is he has no knowledge of history. As far as he is concerned the universe came into being on the day he was born. If you want to understand today's World you have to look back at the 19th Century. Back then England was the Superpower that America is. France and Russia early on were in the position that Russia and China occupy today. Gradually France and Russia moved away from being England's enemies and became allies because a new power rose when Germany became a united country. Going into WW1 you had England, France and Russia allied against Germany and Austria Hungary.

Today's World is the same as back then. Only the technology and the countries have changed.
Straight up is an excellent example of what Alexan... (show quote)



I would agree, leaving out important factors began with an ignorant journalist, then passed on by straightUp. One cannot rationalize the tax cuts being a failure based on one company, then when you or I point out the bigger picture or how scary to think what America would or could do if China turned off our steel imports. The liberals would just hand America over to the U. N. In exchange for help, Trump foresees our future based on our past, just as you said.
Remember when auto manufacturers, bicycle, toys or anything made from steel, production nearly stopped? America needed to focus any and all steel into tanks, guns, ships ect. Americans were combing through any resource they could think of in finding, then turning in scrap metal. It will take several years to bring back our iron independence, but as you point out, based on history China is also aware of, China could hamstring America if Trump didn't follow through with tariffs.
Is this overly complicated, to complex for understanding? You get it, but he seems incapable. I think he is blinded by hate towards Trump and accepts even lying to himself in order to preserve his beliefs.

Reply
May 24, 2018 19:16:23   #
emarine
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
I would agree, leaving out important factors began with an ignorant journalist, then passed on by straightUp. One cannot rationalize the tax cuts being a failure based on one company, then when you or I point out the bigger picture or how scary to think what America would or could do if China turned off our steel imports. The liberals would just hand America over to the U. N. In exchange for help, Trump foresees our future based on our past, just as you said.
Remember when auto manufacturers, bicycle, toys or anything made from steel, production nearly stopped? America needed to focus any and all steel into tanks, guns, ships ect. Americans were combing through any resource they could think of in finding, then turning in scrap metal. It will take several years to bring back our iron independence, but as you point out, based on history China is also aware of, China could hamstring America if Trump didn't follow through with tariffs.
Is this overly complicated, to complex for understanding? You get it, but he seems incapable. I think he is blinded by hate towards Trump and accepts even lying to himself in order to preserve his beliefs.
I would agree, leaving out important factors began... (show quote)




It all sounds good Jack but you missed the point...it's not one company its ...corporate stock buybacks hit a record $178 billion in the first three months of 2018; average hourly earnings for American workers are up 67 cents over the past year... .67 cents almost covers the price increase in fuel over the same time period... guess who's benefiting from Trumps tax cuts ...

Reply
May 24, 2018 20:05:34   #
buffalo Loc: Texas
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
I would agree, leaving out important factors began with an ignorant journalist, then passed on by straightUp. One cannot rationalize the tax cuts being a failure based on one company, then when you or I point out the bigger picture or how scary to think what America would or could do if China turned off our steel imports. The liberals would just hand America over to the U. N. In exchange for help, Trump foresees our future based on our past, just as you said.
Remember when auto manufacturers, bicycle, toys or anything made from steel, production nearly stopped? America needed to focus any and all steel into tanks, guns, ships ect. Americans were combing through any resource they could think of in finding, then turning in scrap metal. It will take several years to bring back our iron independence, but as you point out, based on history China is also aware of, China could hamstring America if Trump didn't follow through with tariffs.
Is this overly complicated, to complex for understanding? You get it, but he seems incapable. I think he is blinded by hate towards Trump and accepts even lying to himself in order to preserve his beliefs.
I would agree, leaving out important factors began... (show quote)


Can one rationalize the tax cut and jobs act as being a win for the middle class and working poor based on a few, very few, corporations announcing small bonuses and raises, especially since some of the raises were already scheduled BEFORE the act was passed due to raises in minimum wage laws in some states? And, most of the bonuses announced were merely public relations stunts. The $1,000 bonuses announced by WalMart was a farce. $1,000 went only to the few employees with 20 or more years. The average bonus WalMart doled out was $190.00. $400 MILLION in bonuses for 2.1 MILLION employees as compared to 2017 pre-tax PROFITS of $20.5 BILLION. At the same time it annouced the closing of 63 Sam's Club stores.

After Walmart’s announcement, the bonuses now amount to 0.13 percent of the value of the tax cuts to corporate America over 10 years.

Billions of the tax cut savings is going to stock buy backs and increase dividends for most Fortune 500 corporations. Fully 99% of the tax cut is not being passed onto workers in the form of bonuses or raises. Corporate America is generating good press for themselves and President Trump for what is effectively a rounding error.

Trickle down is a scam!

Reply
 
 
May 24, 2018 21:36:33   #
emarine
 
buffalo wrote:
Can one rationalize the tax cut and jobs act as being a win for the middle class and working poor based on a few, very few, corporations announcing small bonuses and raises, especially since some of the raises were already scheduled BEFORE the act was passed due to raises in minimum wage laws in some states? And, most of the bonuses announced were merely public relations stunts. The $1,000 bonuses announced by WalMart was a farce. $1,000 went only to the few employees with 20 or more years. The average bonus WalMart doled out was $190.00. $400 MILLION in bonuses for 2.1 MILLION employees as compared to 2017 pre-tax PROFITS of $20.5 BILLION. At the same time it annouced the closing of 63 Sam's Club stores.

After Walmart’s announcement, the bonuses now amount to 0.13 percent of the value of the tax cuts to corporate America over 10 years.

Billions of the tax cut savings is going to stock buy backs and increase dividends for most Fortune 500 corporations. Fully 99% of the tax cut is not being passed onto workers in the form of bonuses or raises. Corporate America is generating good press for themselves and President Trump for what is effectively a rounding error.

Trickle down is a scam!
Can one rationalize the tax cut and jobs act as be... (show quote)



Reply
May 24, 2018 21:41:48   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
son of witless wrote:
Interesting how many facts you left out of your posting. Like the fact that Harley Davidson is having a 4 year sales decline. Now I wonder why an honest poster such as yourself would leave out an important fact such as that ? Any company suffering such a sales decline might be forced into a consolidation of it's manufacturing capacity. I know that what you did was simply an over sight and I am sure it will not happen in the future.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/30/harley-davidson-kansas-city-plant-motorcycle-sales-fall/1078008001/
Interesting how many facts you left out of your po... (show quote)


Or the fact one of their own said it wasn’t Trump, its the company~~~

You give the bases for it right here..

Reply
May 24, 2018 22:23:31   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
emarine wrote:
It all sounds good Jack but you missed the point...it's not one company its ...corporate stock buybacks hit a record $178 billion in the first three months of 2018; average hourly earnings for American workers are up 67 cents over the past year... .67 cents almost covers the price increase in fuel over the same time period... guess who's benefiting from Trumps tax cuts ...


In context of the last year it matters. Medium income is up 3%, which is huge.

We grew accustomed to wages falling while inflation grew, this is a great change.

Still I believe we as a nation are in big trouble. Consider if you will that every decision Trump made and makes were walk on water perfect. It dose not effect the now two hundred trillion dollar unfunded liabilities or some of the world's largest economy's departing the Petro dollar T-bills, for China's Verdon of Americas Federal reserve. Or the fact Americas economy is intertwined in the global economy and nations are hanging by a thread. Then there is the super bubbles far, far greater than 08/09. My point is our economy is better than it has been in decades, but it's a surface current fighting decades of corrupt government, our congress and the senate, among other players and regardless what decisions Trump makes or any other president, the surface current cannot fight against the deeper giant currents. The better we are doing will only temporarily delay the inevitable.

Reply
May 24, 2018 22:26:14   #
son of witless
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
I would agree, leaving out important factors began with an ignorant journalist, then passed on by straightUp. One cannot rationalize the tax cuts being a failure based on one company, then when you or I point out the bigger picture or how scary to think what America would or could do if China turned off our steel imports. The liberals would just hand America over to the U. N. In exchange for help, Trump foresees our future based on our past, just as you said.
Remember when auto manufacturers, bicycle, toys or anything made from steel, production nearly stopped? America needed to focus any and all steel into tanks, guns, ships ect. Americans were combing through any resource they could think of in finding, then turning in scrap metal. It will take several years to bring back our iron independence, but as you point out, based on history China is also aware of, China could hamstring America if Trump didn't follow through with tariffs.
Is this overly complicated, to complex for understanding? You get it, but he seems incapable. I think he is blinded by hate towards Trump and accepts even lying to himself in order to preserve his beliefs.
I would agree, leaving out important factors began... (show quote)



Reply
 
 
May 24, 2018 22:39:18   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
You failed when you stated if one company laid off workers than the Trump tax cuts failed.
What dies that say about your critical thinking skills.

'Thing is jack... I never said that. I suggest you go back to my original post and read it again.

jack sequim wa wrote:

Should a ceo operate off an ideology, policies and agendas, with ten companies growing, expanding, adding jobs, but one files bankruptcy. Under your narrow thinking you would focus on the company that filed bankruptcy, fire the ceo claiming his ideology, policies and agendas are a complete failure.

This is you telling me how I think based on your own misunderstanding of what I said.

jack sequim wa wrote:

To further your narrow thinking you accused basically "getting off topic" and defending Trump even when wrong, but it is your narrow thinking and disregard of the successes. Just as disregarding the multiple benifits to Americas security and economy of steel tariffs. To condense your cut and paste, a representative of your beliefs, it misses the mark with narrow optics of discrediting president Trumps accomplishments.

So what this comes down to is that you don't like my attitude toward Trump. Why don't you just be honest and say so instead of trying to make this elaborate case about my supposedly "narrow views" which you base on lies about what I said?

Reply
May 24, 2018 23:10:41   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
son of witless wrote:
Straight up is an excellent example of what Alexander Pope meant when he said. " A little learning is a dangerous thing " . He knows just enough to be dangerous, which is far less than what he needs to know to make sound judgements on economics and politics.

At least I can SPELL judgment.

son of witless wrote:

Up until Trump won, the Liberals and the Russians were bestest buddies.

If they were best buddies why were the Russians so interested in making sure Trump won?

son of witless wrote:

When the Hilly Beast was slain by Donald J. Trump $ Billionaire, the Liberals needed a villain, a scapegoat to appease their suicidal zombie street thugs.

hang on... 'gotta get some popcorn for this one.

son of witless wrote:

The Russians won that honor by being in the right place at the right time. It is true the Russians tried to interfere in the election. The fact is, they always do.

Oh, so now we're admitting Russian interference, as long as Trump isn't implicated right?

son of witless wrote:

It was their bad luck this time that the Democrats desperately needed a Patsy.

The Democrats were never in need of a patsy witless, the moment Trump won the electoral vote, they already had one... Hillary even came up with a name for them... "deplorables". Why blame the Russians when the deplorables were the ones that voted for the idiot?

son of witless wrote:

Not that the Russians do not deserve to be vilified.

Be careful witless... for you know, this site could be run by Russians.

son of witless wrote:

However, the Russians are no longer our number one rival in the World. Russia's military is being rebuilt and has some very good people, but Russia will always be hamstrung by their backward economy. With Putin in charge that is not changing for the foreseeable future. He will never allow the freedoms necessary to reform his economy.

I would LOVE to hear you try to describe their economy. I bet you think they're still 100% communist.

son of witless wrote:

China has the economy and the manpower to challenge us. We have allowed them to virtually destroy vital industries that we will need if we ever have to fight them. Trump is trying to bring back those industries while still engaging China in trade and diplomacy.

Yeah, he's a busy bee running around putting out fake fires everywhere. Always the showman.

son of witless wrote:

Straight up's problem is he has no knowledge of history.

I think the fantasy you just spun more than disqualifies you from making any assessments about anyone else's command of history witless. LOL

son of witless wrote:

As far as he is concerned the universe came into being on the day he was born. If you want to understand today's World you have to look back at the 19th Century. Back then England was the Superpower that America is. France and Russia early on were in the position that Russia and China occupy today. Gradually France and Russia moved away from being England's enemies and became allies because a new power rose when Germany became a united country. Going into WW1 you had England, France and Russia allied against Germany and Austria Hungary. Today's World is the same as back then. Only the technology and the countries have changed.
br As far as he is concerned the universe came in... (show quote)

A little over simplified but at least you got the general idea... very good (clap, clap, clap) Of course none of this conflicts with anything I've said so if you have a point I'm sure I don't know what it is. Are you just trying to let people know you're not as ignorant as you seem when I constantly thrash your arguments?

Reply
May 25, 2018 02:58:20   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
lindajoy wrote:
Or the fact one of their own said it wasn’t Trump, its the company~~~

You give the bases for it right here..

"basis"

Also, your focus on "the company" betrays your failure to understand the point being made in the original post which applies to the nation-wide economy, not just one company. Don't feel too bad, your friends didn't do any better.

Reply
May 25, 2018 03:04:32   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
buffalo wrote:
Can one rationalize the tax cut and jobs act as being a win for the middle class and working poor based on a few, very few, corporations announcing small bonuses and raises, especially since some of the raises were already scheduled BEFORE the act was passed due to raises in minimum wage laws in some states? And, most of the bonuses announced were merely public relations stunts. The $1,000 bonuses announced by WalMart was a farce. $1,000 went only to the few employees with 20 or more years. The average bonus WalMart doled out was $190.00. $400 MILLION in bonuses for 2.1 MILLION employees as compared to 2017 pre-tax PROFITS of $20.5 BILLION. At the same time it annouced the closing of 63 Sam's Club stores.

After Walmart’s announcement, the bonuses now amount to 0.13 percent of the value of the tax cuts to corporate America over 10 years.

Billions of the tax cut savings is going to stock buy backs and increase dividends for most Fortune 500 corporations. Fully 99% of the tax cut is not being passed onto workers in the form of bonuses or raises. Corporate America is generating good press for themselves and President Trump for what is effectively a rounding error.

Trickle down is a scam!
Can one rationalize the tax cut and jobs act as be... (show quote)


At least *some* of us are getting this... LOL

Of course with the focus on the private (corporate) handling of funds, calling this a Trump attack on the working class might seem like a stretch until we consider the impact these "gifts" to Wall Street have on the federal safety nets that most working families depend on.





calling this an attack on the working class takes a little

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 7 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.