Oh. Look who’s suddenly a level headed, middle of the road, responsible (but not responsible) independent!
You seem to have trouble understanding how congress works. Nothing even comes up for a vote without the approval of republican leadership in the persons of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Also, Congress writes legislation, not the president, so Trump couldn't "up the spending to get Dems to go for it" even if he wanted to because the bill was written entirely in republican controlled congressional committees. I have no idea where you are coming up with this stuff but it's pure fantasy, none of it ever happened.
newfie
Well-Known Member
You're in total denial. So I guess when the dems get a 5 vote majority in the house you will loudly blame them for spending deficits?
newfie
Well-Known Member
Proves you don't really engage here other then to fire shots. I have been blaming both sides from GW on and I gave both sides credit for deficit reduction in the nineties.
And you don't seem to realize that there's not a huge Republican majority in either house, and that if enough Republicans balk at the spending bills put forth by the White House with the Republican leadership's blessing, the bills won't pass unless Democrats are brought onboard. Not too difficult to get Republican votes these days because of how well things are going, but Trump had to make a deal with Democrats to get that initial budget bill passed. Too many Republicans were saying no, but enough said yes along with Democrat support to get it through.
Why would you want to hurt the finances of millions of people?
moreluck
golden ticket member
jealousy!!
1989
Well-Known Member
Everybody like a good buying opportunity. Unfortunately you just want to send in the commies
You don't need a huge majority to pass a budget bill, just a simple majority which republicans have. If you want to say that the root of the problem is that republicans are incapable of writing a bill that gets the support of their own party that's fine, but how is that the democrats fault? Be that as it may this is a budget bill that was written by republican committee members, put forward for a vote by republican leadership, and passed with majority republican support in both houses. Trying to characterize it as some sort of deal between Trump and the democrats isn't just a little bit wrong, it's completely divorced from reality. You're trying to make it sound like Trump and the democrats got together and wrote a budget bill and then republicans somehow got bamboozled into voting for it. That's just straight out nonsense.
Not to mention that it was passed AFTER the tax cuts so that ALL the deficit hating conservatives that voted for it KNEW they were accelerating deficit spending.
Non sequitur
Well-Known Member
So if we emulate the German economy with manufacturing export dominance, won't revenues exceed expenses? Rebalancing to a home team approach will have some hiccups. Get the Big picture folks.
Non sequitur
Well-Known Member
WE ARE IN A DECISIVE MOMENT OF OUR HISTORY. TYRANNY HAS BEEN DEFEATED. THE HAPPINESS IS IMMENSE. HOWEVER, THERE IS STILL MUCH TO BE DONE. LET’S NOT DECEIVE OURSELVES BELIEVING THAT FROM NOW ON EVERYTHING WILL BE EASY. PERHAPS EVERYTHING FROM NOW ON WILL BE MORE DIFFICULT. Fidel Castro
Government revenue is up after the tax cuts so the tax cuts didn't accelerate anything.
You obviously didn't see what went down. The Dems were against everything Trump did and were voting party line on everything. A small coalition of Republicans were determined to get all spending down because of concerns about the ever growing debt. Between them and the Democrats the Republican leadership didn't have the votes necessary to make a majority. The dissenting Republicans refused to yield. So Trump made an offer to Democrats because he dearly wanted more defense spending. Democrats went along after generous spending concessions. That's how the bill was passed and we ended up with a massive spending bill comparable to Obama era spending.
Did the tax cuts “pay for themselves”?
Non sequitur
Well-Known Member
So my understanding is that the growth isn't the problem, it's the retiree's expenses. Why not keep the revenue side healthy while exploring out of the box solution's for future retiree's budget problems.
A Comprehensive Federal Budget Plan to Avert a Debt Crisis | Manhattan Institute
A Comprehensive Federal Budget Plan to Avert a Debt Crisis | Manhattan Institute
i think half the pop owns no stock, and most of it is owned by top 10% or so.
its kinda like the rest of the economy.
social security is a regressive tax after 110k. if you get rid of that its good for 75 years.
bc we are over due for a recession / depression and i prefer these events over the normality of the current economy, and mostly rich people own most of the stock market anyways.
