Political Roundtable Part XVII

[popper]

Fiscal responsibility including a balanced budget except in times of national emergencies

Weren't you in favor of the tax cuts? Lol

I was. I’ve also posted here in support of a wealth tax above a certain level (say 25 million) if we can do it without scaring wealth offshore. Do you want to LoL at that too. Why laugh at all? Why not just try to understand? Trump inherited a structural annual deficit of approx 700 billion. I think CBO says the tax cut adds 10 to 20 percent to that annual deficit. It’s a no brainer to me because IMO the economy should boom. Once the boom is fully underway then let’s see where we are. As you know the CBO is almost always wrong.

[popper]

Self Defense - I believe our military should be able to fight and win two simultaneous wars

How do you even measure this? And two? Why two?

The reason to plan for two is because of lessons learned from history and because that’s the situation we faced in the 1940’s. Germany to our east and Japan to our west. History shows that multiple adversaries often strike simultaneously on different fronts to gain military advantage. How do we measure our capability to achieve this objective? Consult the experts and independent think tanks and then apply common sense.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

I just have to quote this again just because.....

[Wizardspride]

Real talk imo

Watch on YouTube

[dckingsfan]

Fiscal responsibility including a balanced budget except in times of national emergencies

Weren't you in favor of the tax cuts? Lol

I was. I’ve also posted here in support of a wealth tax above a certain level (say 25 million) if we can do it without scaring wealth offshore. Do you want to LoL at that too. Why laugh at all? Why not just try to understand? Trump inherited a structural annual deficit of approx 700 billion. I think CBO says the tax cut adds 10 to 20 percent to that annual deficit. It’s a no brainer to me because IMO the economy should boom. Once the boom is fully underway then let’s see where we are. As you know the CBO is almost always wrong.

The structure of our tax policy was broken and unfair before the "new" tax policy. I think it is more broken and less fair now. But the biggest drivers of the "unfairness" are the carveouts that were in place before this administration lost its chance to do a meaningful rewrite. But, the changes in the corporate tax structure were at least a stab at reality - our corporate tax rate was ridiculous and only levied meaningfully on our non-global corporations (the rest already had low rates, gifts from both parties). I guess I give it a grade of D but it is no more fiscally irresponsible than the prior 16 years of governance.

As to if it will drive the deficits. My guess is yes - I don't think the economy can heat up more without some additional changes (productivity + number of workers). And this tax policy didn't put anything meaningful to incent business investment (IMO). So, my guess is the CBO is probably correct in this case.

I would like to point out that the CBO is actually much more right than wrong. However, you could obfuscate this by pointing out that it is often difficult or impossible to determine, the incremental impact on the budget of a particular piece of legislation.

The CBO prepares the cost estimates for legislation when bills are reported by committees of the House or Senate. Most of the time the legislation is changed after their estimates. So, are the estimates right or wrong?

Most of the cost estimates that CBO completes are for legislative proposals that are not enacted, so it is not possible to determine their accuracy either.

[popper]

Weren't you in favor of the tax cuts? Lol

I was. I’ve also posted here in support of a wealth tax above a certain level (say 25 million) if we can do it without scaring wealth offshore. Do you want to LoL at that too. Why laugh at all? Why not just try to understand? Trump inherited a structural annual deficit of approx 700 billion. I think CBO says the tax cut adds 10 to 20 percent to that annual deficit. It’s a no brainer to me because IMO the economy should boom. Once the boom is fully underway then let’s see where we are. As you know the CBO is almost always wrong.

The structure of our tax policy was broken and unfair before the "new" tax policy. I think it is more broken and less fair now. But the biggest drivers of the "unfairness" are the carveouts that were in place before this administration lost its chance to do a meaningful rewrite. But, the changes in the corporate tax structure were at least a stab at reality - our corporate tax rate was ridiculous and only levied meaningfully on our non-global corporations (the rest already had low rates, gifts from both parties). I guess I give it a grade of D but it is no more fiscally irresponsible than the prior 16 years of governance.

As to if it will drive the deficits. My guess is yes - I don't think the economy can heat up more without some additional changes (productivity + number of workers). And this tax policy didn't put anything meaningful to incent business investment (IMO). So, my guess is the CBO is probably correct in this case.

I would like to point out that the CBO is actually much more right than wrong. However, you could obfuscate this by pointing out that it is often difficult or impossible to determine, the incremental impact on the budget of a particular piece of legislation.

The CBO prepares the cost estimates for legislation when bills are reported by committees of the House or Senate. Most of the time the legislation is changed after their estimates. So, are the estimates right or wrong?

Most of the cost estimates that CBO completes are for legislative proposals that are not enacted, so it is not possible to determine their accuracy either.

Mostly agree except for “didn’t do anything meaningful to incent business investment”. I think we’ll see a significant increase in business investment. Time will tell.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

I just have to quote this again just because.....

2018 midterms. You guys have the power to change this.

[stilldropin20]

Read on Twitter

[stilldropin20]

Real talk imo

Watch on YouTube

over 100,000(11K just in this tweet) people have found this line of questioning bullying and wondering of booker has a problem with women. Misogynist anyone???? One type of "ism" for another? With some hypocrisy sprinkled on top?

A lot of women are going to ask themselves if Corey Booker is fit to serve the US senate. I mean. He wasn't questioning any type of criminal or anyone with any type of criminal accusations and she had answered the same questions to 3 different senators. To the contrary of her being any type of criminal, he was questioning the sitting US depart of homeland security secretary. Unlike trump, this was public meeting/hearing. With the cameras rolling. he should be ashamed of himself. He owes her a proportionate apology. and if he doesn't apologize to her and all women, frankly, he should resign or be censored by the Senate. Perhaps removed. That type of behavior is suppose to be over. #timesup. #metoo.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

and finally

Read on Twitter

[stilldropin20]

Read on Twitter

[closg00]

Read on Twitter

Actor Don Cheadle, a witness to the real and racist DJT

[closg00]

Watch on YouTube

Former Trump real estate agent describing the rental policies that ended in the Trumps settling that discrimination case. Right, DJT "is the least racist person"

[dckingsfan]

Mostly agree except for “didn’t do anything meaningful to incent business investment”. I think we’ll see a significant increase in business investment. Time will tell.

What I mean by that - there aren't new incentives for investment - faster write-offs of capital projects. It slanted more toward interest deductions and the like.

But, it could - most CFOs/CPAs are still figuring out their strategies and those will then influence corporations actions.

An example is the rash of bonuses to employees - we would rather see investment in infrastructure to boost productivity.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

Actor Don Cheadle, a witness to the real and racist DJT

Fake news obviously....

[Wizardspride]

Real talk imo

Watch on YouTube

over 100,000(11K just in this tweet) people have found this line of questioning bullying and wondering of booker has a problem with women. Misogynist anyone???? One type of "ism" for another? With some hypocrisy sprinkled on top?

A lot of women are going to ask themselves if Corey Booker is fit to serve the US senate. I mean. He wasn't questioning any type of criminal or anyone with any type of criminal accusations and she had answered the same questions to 3 different senators. To the contrary of her being any type of criminal, he was questioning the sitting US depart of homeland security secretary. Unlike trump, this was public meeting/hearing. With the cameras rolling. he should be ashamed of himself. He owes her a proportionate apology. and if he doesn't apologize to her and all women, frankly, he should resign or be censored by the Senate. Perhaps removed. That type of behavior is

LOL...c'mon man. Not buying this.

Have you ever watched any of these hearings before?

People are GRILLED. Both men and women. Both parties.

But if that's the way you want to play this game I expect the same reaction from you when a female member of the opposition party is being questioned.


But ignoring that, did you see the ENTIRE hearing?

I did and what irked Booker and many others is that she blatantly lied over and over again.

Ok. well if she didn't lie then she's showing the signs of early dementia and should resign.


Sen Booker was right, including what he said about Trump's words.


Donald J Trump is a racist.

If you can support someone like that, more power to you.

I can't and won't.

Sorry.


One other thing: Did you read about what lead up to the meeting in the WH on immigration?

Well basically, Trump had a deal with Durbin/Graham and literally flipped within two hours.

I only bring this up because your manta for months has been "Give Trump what he wants. Work with him. He's dying to make a deal".

And this isn't the first time he's pulled this. Did it with Schumer and Pelosi as well.

So I pose the question to you: Why should the Democrats enter into any agreement with Trump if he's already showing that his word doesn't mean much?

[FAH1223]

Read on Twitter

Watch on YouTube

[FAH1223]

That sliver of optimism extends to the top of the Republican leadership who are hopeful that Trump’s disruptive effect on the political landscape can once again surprise the nation this fall.

“Who knows what 2018 will be like? Nobody called 2016, right?” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the second-ranking Republican in that chamber. “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was going to get elected and that Chuck Schumer was going to be the majority leader. And none of that turned out to be true.”

In private conversations, Trump has told advisers that he doesn’t think the 2018 election has to be as bad as others are predicting. He has referenced the 2002 midterms, when George W. Bush and Republicans fared better after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, these people said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/new-alarm-among-republicans-that-democrats-could-win-big-this-year/2018/01/13/9be31acc-f8a8-11e7-beb6-c8d48830c54d_story.html?utm_term=.8f8a04836556

[dckingsfan]

So I pose the question to you: Why should the Democrats enter into any agreement with Trump if he's already showing that his word doesn't mean much?

You always negotiate - but a deal isn't a deal until it is signed into law. That goes with any negotiation between parties. Until an agreement is reached - there is no agreement.

This is what irked me about the relationship between the Rs and Obama. The Rs wouldn't sit down at the table to see if there were issues that they both agreed on and could move forward.

That one party would back-track on an agreement - I would say that is part of the process but does show that there is ongoing dialog.

[Wizardspride]

So I pose the question to you: Why should the Democrats enter into any agreement with Trump if he's already showing that his word doesn't mean much?

You always negotiate - but a deal isn't a deal until it is signed into law. That goes with any negotiation between parties. Until an agreement is reached - there is no agreement.

This is what irked me about the relationship between the Rs and Obama. The Rs wouldn't sit down at the table to see if there were issues that they both agreed on and could move forward.

That one party would back-track on an agreement - I would say that is part of the process but does show that there is ongoing dialog.

Maybe I should rephrase that:

Why should the Democrats TRUST Trump to keep his end of the bargain?

Yeah, no deal is offical until its on paper but if you have someone who makes a habit out reneging....

[closg00]

Read on Twitter

Watch on YouTube

An individual with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) (Trump), can pass the cognitive test.