Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Wanderer78

the debate of Communism v's capitalism is rather boring and two dimensional, in our multi dimensional world, our reality is a lot more complex than either of these two ideologies

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The solution is to restrict lobbying, like trump did in his first quarter in office. It does need to be restricted further and also less government means less people to lobby.

Did he? What specificly did he do, and actually follow through on? Given that he attempted to use his position to advance his own company and that of his daughter I find it very hard to think anyone believes he is against lobbying.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And yet again, I oppose government spending and believe military spending should be reduced just like all the other spending. We're not here to discuss my feelings on george bush at all, sure Obama continued those wars and now people are going mad because trump wants to pull the troops out.

Yet the 1st thing Trump did was massively increase military spending, without any reviews. Trump is basically your worst mightmare.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

They don't have to outspend their takings though, George W Bush and Obama completely undid the surplus clinton left behind and bloated the civil service and government quangos to the point that regardless of who is in charge , a massive spending cut is the only way to get the deficit under control.

Government shouldnt punish rich people for years of mismanagement.

What has Trump done to reduce government spending? Of the top of my head is is currently spending $12bn to bailout the farmers due to his policies.

He wasted millions sending the army down South for PR porposes. He has cost the country millions in protecting Mar-a-Lago. His wife cost the country millions by staying in NY for months.

Eric Cartman

Leroy42 wrote: »

Did he? What specificly did he do, and actually follow through on? Given that he attempted to use his position to advance his own company and that of his daughter I find it very hard to think anyone believes he is against lobbying.



Yet the 1st thing Trump did was massively increase military spending, without any reviews. Trump is basically your worst mightmare.



What has Trump done to reduce government spending? Of the top of my head is is currently spending $12bn to bailout the farmers due to his policies.

He wasted millions sending the army down South for PR porposes. He has cost the country millions in protecting Mar-a-Lago. His wife cost the country millions by staying in NY for months.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1442/enact-5-year-ban-white-house-and-congressional-off/ promissed a ban on former members of congress, compromised to one on white house staff

I have disagreed with the farmers bailout and the increased military spending many times. Most of the money the US government spends is a waste. I wouldnt say its my 'worst nightmare' as sadly I don't think there has been any politician in recent US history who would actually have the balls to do what needs to be done in cutting spending, but as much as I don't agree with Trumps spending , I cant think of anyone who wouldn't be worse at it. Atleast theres the tax cut half of the equation done.

listermint

Eric Cartman wrote: »

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1442/enact-5-year-ban-white-house-and-congressional-off/ promissed a ban on former members of congress, compromised to one on white house staff

I have disagreed with the farmers bailout and the increased military spending many times. Most of the money the US government spends is a waste. I wouldnt say its my 'worst nightmare' as sadly I don't think there has been any politician in recent US history who would actually have the balls to do what needs to be done in cutting spending, but as much as I don't agree with Trumps spending , I cant think of anyone who wouldn't be worse at it. Atleast theres the tax cut half of the equation done.

So he did nothing on lobbying basically.


Which holds up my point.

Cheers.

Midlife

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the deficit is because the government spend too much, it is there because they over spend. Surely you know by now how against government spending I am and how government spending and the taxation to fund it is incredibly far from my economics.

The solution to the deficit problem is to cut spending , massively, Politicians on any side of the aisle seem to never see that option for some reason.

But they spend less in terms of proportion of GDP than countries like Holland, Germany, Australia.

These countries don't run a defecit. Or if they do, it's like 1 or 2%.

The truth is that Amercia is set up for wealthy people. You said yourself a while back that's it's a **** place to live for anyone making less than 100,000.

The reason you were correct about that is that they take less tax than the countries I've mentioned. Countries which win in pretty much any 'quality of life' metric you can produce.

These countries tax people more, support people more, and have objectivly better societies. It's actually really really simple.

Your solution to the problem that America doesn't take in enough in tax is to spend less money.

The solution that some would suggest is to bring America's tax up.

Eric Cartman

listermint wrote: »

So he did nothing on lobbying basically.


Which holds up my point.

Cheers.

Well an executive order to prevent white house employees lobbying their office is something, it might not be huge but its something, should have carried it through congress and got the full ban but sure theres still time left.

Still though i think we've veered on this topic a bit. Your personal dislike of Donald Trump does not make Ocasio Cortez competent, economically literate or the marxism she believes in not bullsh*t that should be resigned to the past.

Can I also ask, what republican candidate would you rather was US president right now and why, what republican do you actually like and would vote for.

Eric Cartman

Midlife wrote: »

But they spend less in terms of proportion of GDP than countries like Holland, Germany, Australia.

These countries don't run a defecit. Or if they do, it's like 1 or 2%.

The truth is that Amercia is set up for wealthy people. You said yourself a while back that's it's a **** place to live for anyone making less than 100,000.

The reason you were correct about that is that they take less tax than the countries I've mentioned. Countries which win in pretty much any 'quality of life' metric you can produce.

These countries tax people more, support people more, and have objectivly better societies. It's actually really really simple.

Your solution to the problem that America doesn't take in enough in tax is to spend less money.

The solution that some would suggest is to bring America's tax up.

Not necessarily, Those countries all still have their problems, America was set up by wealthy people fleeing taxation from the UK, its the point of America. You can't just force rich people to keep paying to look after everyone and support everyone.

Wanderer78

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Not necessarily, Those countries all still have their problems, America was set up by wealthy people fleeing taxation from the UK, its the point of America. You can't just force rich people to keep paying to look after everyone and support everyone.

creating an economic system that openly encourages tax evasion and avoidance creates a stable society by.....

Eric Cartman

Wanderer78 wrote: »

creating an economic system that openly encourages tax evasion and avoidance creates a stable society by.....

To be fair id just preffer a flat tax society where nobody had to engage in that just to keep theor money. The welfare state is a failed idea, a 10-20% flat tax is all any county should ever need, across the board from 1 dollar/euro/rupee to 10 billion dollars etc.. governments worldwide need to trim their spending to get to this.

Tax avoision is perfectly legal and to he enouraged.

relax carry on

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Tax avoision is perfectly legal and to he enouraged.

As with pretty much everything in taxation, not really at all.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/self-assessment-and-self-employment/tax-avoidance/what-is-tax-avoidance.aspx

Wanderer78

Eric Cartman wrote: »

To be fair id just preffer a flat tax society where nobody had to engage in that just to keep theor money. The welfare state is a failed idea, a 10-20% flat tax is all any county should ever need, across the board from 1 dollar/euro/rupee to 10 billion dollars etc.. governments worldwide need to trim their spending to get to this.

Tax avoision is perfectly legal and to he enouraged.

flat taxation has been tried, and funnily enough, failed, depending on which side of the fence you fall on of course, economist Micheal Hudson has done some good work on this, showing that flat taxation generally results in wealthy individuals simply paying far less taxation than the rest as they can afford to do it, overall resulting in lower tax revenues, and all that entails.

Midlife

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Not necessarily, Those countries all still have their problems, America was set up by wealthy people fleeing taxation from the UK, its the point of America. You can't just force rich people to keep paying to look after everyone and support everyone.

No, but where you get them to do it in a first world country you have the highest standards of living in the world.

Just saying

Leroy42

So You bring up Trump dealing with lobbying, and when it's pointed out he didn't follow through on it you simply claim there's still time!

So he has done nothing to deal with government spending. He has massively increased military spending, is currently handing out $bns in aid to farmers.

He has cost the country millions on his own holidays and his wife's living arrangements.

Trump, the great businessman, has led to a massive increase in the deficit, which will ultimately require an increase in taxes.

But still, Hilary or Obama I suppose

Eric Cartman

relax carry on wrote: »

As with pretty much everything in taxation, not really at all.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/self-assessment-and-self-employment/tax-avoidance/what-is-tax-avoidance.aspx

basically legalising shifting the goalposts as they see fit, what a scummy law.

Midlife

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The welfare state is a failed idea, a 10-20% flat tax is all any county should ever need

Top first world countries by tax rates (as a % of GDP)

Norway, Finland, Denmark, Sweden (all 50%+) Failed ideas you say?


On to your proposal...

List of countries with less than 20% tax

Russia, Senegal, Mauritius, Gambia, Kenya, Cameroon



In fairness, Eric, you're talking out your hoop.

Eric Cartman

Leroy42 wrote: »

So You bring up Trump dealing with lobbying, and when it's pointed out he didn't follow through on it you simply claim there's still time!

So he has done nothing to deal with government spending. He has massively increased military spending, is currently handing out $bns in aid to farmers.

He has cost the country millions on his own holidays and his wife's living arrangements.

Trump, the great businessman, has led to a massive increase in the deficit, which will ultimately require an increase in taxes.

But still, Hilary or Obama I suppose

I re entered this thread to respond to a post about Ocasio Cortez, at no point did I condone trumps spending and actually posted about how I disagreed with it. Never through Hillary into any of it,

it may ultimately require the much needed decrease in spending.....

is banning whitehouse employees from lobbying something - yes, that was my point.

his millions on holidays and spending could be helped by cutting the billions in benefits to illegal immigrants -
https://nypost.com/2018/03/10/cutting-welfare-to-illegal-aliens-would-pay-for-trumps-wall/
Sadly he hasnt done this , I don't know if its just lack of awareness or would it just be blocked.

listermint

Midlife wrote: »

Top first world countries by tax rates (as a % of GDP)

Norway, Finland, Denmark, Sweden (all 50%+) Failed ideas you say?


On to your proposal...

List of countries with less than 20% tax

Russia, Senegal, Mauritius, Gambia, Kenya, Cameroon



In fairness, Eric, you're talking out your hoop.

His failed ideas as he puts them probably Brought him into the world. Il presume he was born in Ireland where everyone else paid for his birth in a public hospital and where he was educated in a primary school again with other peoples money. Its folks like him that love to harp on about social assistance when it's really them just pulling the ladder up behind them.

Economic migrants from Ireland to the US do the same for Mexicans.

Its actually quite amusing how they will dance around in circles trying to explain the difference when there is none.

relax carry on

Eric Cartman wrote: »

basically legalising shifting the goalposts as they see fit, what a scummy law.

You know we have governments for a reason right? It's their job to enact legislation which includes protecting the tax take of the state. You must be aware that specific anti avoidance provisions are increasingly common worldwide as well as GAAR?

Christy42

That just turns it into who had the richest parents (well even more so than it is now).

The welfare state is obviously successful. Just look across Europe.

Most of the western EU has turned high quality workforce from public spending into a larger proportion of high paying jobs.

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I re entered this thread to respond to a post about Ocasio Cortez, at no point did I condone trumps spending and actually posted about how I disagreed with it. Never through Hillary into any of it,

I brought her as an example of something else to blame as I cannot understand why you support Trump when pretty much every point you raise turns out to be false. So I am trying to work out why you support a person that by your own standards in failing.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

it may ultimately require the much needed decrease in spending.....

Then why not start there? Why decrease the government revenue first before dealing with spending? GOP controlled all three parts yet he never even tried.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

is banning whitehouse employees from lobbying something - yes, that was my point.

Wow, the man brought in to drain the swamp brings in the smallest of meaningless changes

Eric Cartman wrote: »

his millions on holidays and spending could be helped by cutting the billions in benefits to illegal immigrants -
https://nypost.com/2018/03/10/cutting-welfare-to-illegal-aliens-would-pay-for-trumps-wall/
Sadly he hasnt done this , I don't know if its just lack of awareness or would it just be blocked.

So he can spend what he likes once he can find it from somewhere else? Really. So why are you against government spending when in fact you are clearly happy with it once it is spent on things you don't dislike.

The issue of the wall is not the money, $20bn is not, in US terms that massive. It is the fact that it won't work, is clearly nothing but a white elephant to his ego. You could spend that money on extra border patrols. Won't float with Trump as he has boxed himself in to a single line. Beefing up the FBI, CIA intelligence gathering. Foreign aid to decrease the need to people to move. There are plenty of ways to deal with the border.

Eric Cartman

Leroy42 wrote: »

I brought her as an example of something else to blame as I cannot understand why you support Trump when pretty much every point you raise turns out to be false. So I am trying to work out why you support a person that by your own standards in failing.



Then why not start there? Why decrease the government revenue first before dealing with spending? GOP controlled all three parts yet he never even tried.



Wow, the man brought in to drain the swamp brings in the smallest of meaningless changes



So he can spend what he likes once he can find it from somewhere else? Really. So why are you against government spending when in fact you are clearly happy with it once it is spent on things you don't dislike.

The issue of the wall is not the money, $20bn is not, in US terms that massive. It is the fact that it won't work, is clearly nothing but a white elephant to his ego. You could spend that money on extra border patrols. Won't float with Trump as he has boxed himself in to a single line. Beefing up the FBI, CIA intelligence gathering. Foreign aid to decrease the need to people to move. There are plenty of ways to deal with the border.

And yet another post where I repeat , the government should cut spending, and I don't know why nobody on either side of the aisle ever does that. They all talk about the deficit and then give nothing up.

Who ever said I supported him. I still believe he was a better pick than the alternative on election night and a lot of his ideas I would support if they panned out , but at no point have I ever said I support him. Not joining in the circle jerk of calling him bad all the time is hardly support.

I linked that article to do with benefits to illegal immigrants and the cost. Im not here to talk about the wall, I have always maintained that it was unrealistic.

Foreign aid, the reason america doesnt want them is that they cost money and resources , giving them money somewhere else does nothing for it.

relax carry on

It's hard to remember exactly how much has gone on in Trumps first two years and why exactly he's so unfit for the office. If anyone has the time, the below New York Times opinion piece is a summary of why Trump is so unfit for the office he holds and where things may be heading with him.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/opinion/sunday/trump-impeachment.html

Wanderer78

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And yet another post where I repeat , the government should cut spending, and I don't know why nobody on either side of the aisle ever does that. They all talk about the deficit and then give nothing up.

Who ever said I supported him. I still believe he was a better pick than the alternative on election night and a lot of his ideas I would support if they panned out , but at no point have I ever said I support him. Not joining in the circle jerk of calling him bad all the time is hardly support.

I linked that article to do with benefits to illegal immigrants and the cost. Im not here to talk about the wall, I have always maintained that it was unrealistic.

Foreign aid, the reason america doesnt want them is that they cost money and resources , giving them money somewhere else does nothing for it.

its interesting to know that wealth has been moving from developing countries towards developed countries such as america for decades now, strange but true

Leroy42

Yes but why do you think he was better than the alternative on the night? He has achieved nothing, by your own standards he is failing.

Would HC have increased spending on the military by $58bn? Would she have started a trade war requiring at least $12bn in handouts> Would she have cost $mns in holidays costs?

I have no idea, none of us will ever know, but what we do know is that Trump, by your own standards, is failing. Claiming others might do worse is a pretty low bar.

Eric Cartman

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes but why do you think he was better than the alternative on the night? He has achieved nothing, by your own standards he is failing.

Would HC have increased spending on the military by $58bn? Would she have started a trade war requiring at least $12bn in handouts> Would she have cost $mns in holidays costs?

I have no idea, none of us will ever know, but what we do know is that Trump, by your own standards, is failing. Claiming others might do worse is a pretty low bar.

Well she pledged to loosen immigration to allow families of immigrants into the US, a massive increase in federal infrastructure funding , ending college tuition fees for families on i think it was less than 100k , there was 100% more than 70 billion of additional spending in there. As corrupt as people want to level trump as, she is much more connected with corporate donors, a paid shill for some of the biggest banks and domestic terrorist movements like BLM and Occupy had her ear through some of their 'activists'

BabyCheeses

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The solution is to restrict lobbying, like trump did in his first quarter in office. It does need to be restricted further and also less government means less people to lobby.

And yet again, I oppose government spending and believe military spending should be reduced just like all the other spending. We're not here to discuss my feelings on george bush at all, sure Obama continued those wars and now people are going mad because trump wants to pull the troops out.

You want to tell people what they can and can't spend their money on? Calm down Stalin.

everlast75

Eric Cartman wrote: »

she is much more connected with corporate donors, a paid shill for some of the biggest banks and domestic terrorist movements like BLM and Occupy had her ear through some of their 'activists'

If she is so politically naive, as you called her or words to that effect, you'd wonder why some of the biggest banks would invest in her???? Something doesn't sit right.

This is gaslighting, pure and simple, accuse others of what you're doing yourself.

Trump is swampier than the swamp, in the pockets of Russia and Saudi Arabia, in the pockets of big business, in the pocket too of Dutche bank, the NRA, right wing evangelicals, all while creaming cash into his private businesses.

It is absolute nonsense to think otherwise.

batgoat

everlast75 wrote: »

If she is so politically naive, as you called her or words to that effect, you'd wonder why some of the biggest banks would invest in her???? Something doesn't sit right.

This is gaslighting, pure and simple, accuse others of what you're doing yourself.

Trump is swampier than the swamp, in the pockets of Russia and Saudi Arabia, in the pockets of big business, in the pocket too of Dutche bank, the NRA, right wing evangelicals, all while creaming cash into his private businesses.

It is absolute nonsense to think otherwise.

Eric is all good with certain crimes, Eg financial ones by wealthy people.

mcmoustache

Eric Cartman wrote: »

there should be no tax rate over 49.9% on anything.

This is actually something I could agree with myself. Unfortunately, everything else that you've said later in this thread is basically pushing a nonsensical ideology that doesn't take into account the self-organising emergent behaviour of people within a nation state. It's the same trap that proponents of marxism fall into.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Whatever people want to think of trump, she's the biggest idiot to enter the US political sphere this decade.

Ah now, she might be a lefty but there are a lot of idiots in congress. To say that she's the biggest idiot in the last few years is something that one could only do it they only knew a few of congress's gobshítes.

Water John

Shur they have another woman to call out. First was Clinton, then Pelosi now Cortez. Anyone spot the pattern?