Do Voters Share the Blame for Trump?

[Cooky]

...And it's because globalist Americans always try to copy off the Europeans, who famously mix their religion with their politics, and have never heard of separation of Church and State, but unsuspecting American globalists are likely oblivious to that.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Btw, what's happened to federal tax revenue since the changes in Dec 2017?

Not necessarily the right question.

Here is the tax revenue picture. As will be seen, revenues are up a touch as has been happening for several years now.

Here is the historical debt picture. It starts at 1929 so scroll way down. The first column after the year is the deficit - the difference between revenue and expenses. The second column is the debt increase, which includes the interest that will be paid on loans needed to cover the deficit. The next column is the deficit as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product. Notice that this has been increasing for several years. As the article points out, the deficit should be compared to the ability of the country to pay back the loans. As this gets riskier, higher yields must be paid to cover the increasing deficits and ultimately a tailspin happens. Personally, I think the percentage figure should be based on debt increase and not deficit, since this is what the country really has to pay.

A point briefly mentioned in the article is that part of the loans to cover the deficits come from Social Security Tax income. This goes into the Treasury first in the form of a loan from Social Security and Social Security payments are made by redeeming the loans. The thinking behind this was that because of the Baby Boom workers, SS revenue exceeded payouts by a large margin. With the Boomers retiring that idea needs to be rethought. Will it be? Of course not. As long as there is money to grab it will be grabbed.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not necessarily the right question.

Here is the tax revenue picture. As will be seen, revenues are up a touch as has been happening for several years now.

Although a revenue increase does make it harder to argue that taxes have
been cut, when the tax reform contains both increases & decreases.

Here is the historical debt picture. It starts at 1929 so scroll way down. The first column after the year is the deficit - the difference between revenue and expenses. The second column is the debt increase, which includes the interest that will be paid on loans needed to cover the deficit. The next column is the deficit as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product. Notice that this has been increasing for several years. As the article points out, the deficit should be compared to the ability of the country to pay back the loans. As this gets riskier, higher yields must be paid to cover the increasing deficits and ultimately a tailspin happens. Personally, I think the percentage figure should be based on debt increase and not deficit, since this is what the country really has to pay.

A point briefly mentioned in the article is that part of the loans to cover the deficits come from Social Security Tax income. This goes into the Treasury first in the form of a loan from Social Security and Social Security payments are made by redeeming the loans. The thinking behind this was that because of the Baby Boom workers, SS revenue exceeded payouts by a large margin. With the Boomers retiring that idea needs to be rethought. Will it be? Of course not. As long as there is money to grab it will be grabbed.

Debt increase is an issue separate from determining whether tax reform
results in a net increase or decrease in taxation. But regarding the debt &
deficit, I oppose the spending increases under Trump's (& others') reign.

 

[YmirGF]

Yet you cheerlead for the party that pushes the evangelical agenda...

What can I say? You have to work with what you've got available.

 

[Revoltingest]

What can I say? You have to work with what you've got available.

I've never seen you lead cheers for a party which isn't even in your country.
Perhaps it's a case of mistaken identity?

 

[youknowme]

Same with the left.
They Want To Use 'Hate Speech Laws' To Destroy Freedom Of Speech In America

But it's not actually left vs. right... It's those who are either unaware or don't care that they're imposing their own morals or "values" onto others.

We need to make a conscious effort as Americans to stop doing this IMO.

I always love it when people freely express that their freedom of expression is being oppressed.

 

[YmirGF]

I've never seen you lead cheers for a party which isn't even in your country.
Perhaps it's a case of mistaken identity?

That made my Christmas Day, @Revoltingest

I'm not really a cheerleader, as my position is that IF I were an American, I would likely be a Republican. I also like several high level Republican leaders over the years, more so than post-Kennedy Democrats, at least. It's not like I support all of their policies. *shrugs* I wish I could support the Democrats.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not really a cheerleader.....

Such things are oft said in error.
Those who personally loathe Trump tend to divide people into 2 groups....
- The righteous, who oppose Trump
- Ignorant bigoted supporters

When all is such categorization, there's no room for other perspectives.
They focus upon how they feel about him personally. How to make
them understand a focus upon policy rather than personality?

 

[youknowme]

Holy Hypocrisy, Batman.

 

[Father Heathen]

Same with the left.
They Want To Use 'Hate Speech Laws' To Destroy Freedom Of Speech In America

But it's not actually left vs. right... It's those who are either unaware or don't care that they're imposing their own morals or "values" onto others.

We need to make a conscious effort as Americans to stop doing this IMO.

Even though I lean left, I strongly oppose censorship and support freedom of speech. I also don't get too hung up on political correctness. The only "values" I want to "impose" is the preservation of people's rights, freedom, and equality. In other words, I believe that people should be able to think and speak as they wish, so long as they don't do things that actually victimize or violate the rights of others.

Also,I believe government and legislation should be honest, consistent, transparent, and scientifically sound.

 

[PureX]

I don't think you're looking at this the way I am.
Let's say you have a house with $50K/year property taxes.
And your mortgage loan has $50K/year in interest.
$50K -$10K + $50K -$10K = $80K of deductions lost.
This would mean a tax increase on the order of $25K/yr.
And there are other deductions lost which affect only
the landed gentry.

That would be the point: that the "landed gentry" pay a greater share because they HAVE a greater share from which to pay it. I think anyone receiving more than 10 million a year in income should pay 100% in taxes on the overage. Simply because no single human's contribution to society, through their 'work' in commerce, is worth that much more than everyone else's.

 

[wellwisher]

Trump is clearly way below par for what we should want out of a US President. Someone like him should never be put into the office of the President, but yet it happened. So did the system fail us? Did the voters fail? What do you think and why? And how do we prevent something like this from happening again?

I think the question is, should all the voters get credit for picking Trump? Trump has accomplished more in two years that any president in history. Fake news does not report this so as to reinforce their distorted picture of Trump. Trump, the President, is different from the cartoon figure of Trump, that fake news is trying to create. If you placed anyone under the constant negative spot light and never mention any of their accomplishments, you can turn anyone into a cartoon villain. The left thinks this cartoon is real.

This situation reminds me of the story of General Ulysses Grant and President Lincoln. The other Generals hated Grant because Grant was loud, crude and liked to drink too much whiskey. He was not considered a proper dignified general and analogous to cartoon Trump. The other generals politicked against him.

Lincoln saw this and said, if drinking and swearing made all my generals as competent as Grant, I would buy the booze. Lincoln did not judge by Grant's by his rough surface and lack of pretense, but rather by his talent as his best general in battle. Trump is battle tested and has held back the swamp even with traitors in his ranks, undermining him.

No other President in history could fend off the entire swamp and fake news complex and still accomplish so much. He can't do the normal cheating the Democrats got away with during Obama, but he still accomplished many things. Picture if fake news supported and covered for Trump as much as they did Obama. Or Say Trump got to use the FBI and Justice department against the Democrats, like Obama and the Clintons did against him. America would have been transformed already.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I've no argument against such a quantified rebuttal.

Of course! All is just Peachy-Keen among CONservitives, who don't give a sh-- that a known Criminal/Rapist is in the White House.

So long as all the richest of the rich get their mega-tax cuts, as is the case now.

 

[Revoltingest]

That would be the point: that the "landed gentry" pay a greater share because they HAVE a greater share from which to pay it. I think anyone receiving more than 10 million a year in income should pay 100% in taxes on the overage. Simply because no single human's contribution to society, through their 'work' in commerce, is worth that much more than everyone else's.

Now you're venturing into what the level of taxation should be.
I disagree with 100% taxation, but that isn't a real world issue.

 

[Nous]

Trump is clearly way below par for what we should want out of a US President. Someone like him should never be put into the office of the President, but yet it happened. So did the system fail us? Did the voters fail? What do you think and why? And how do we prevent something like this from happening again?

The most important and direct thing any of us can do to avoid a repeat of results such as happened with the 2016 election is to advocate to our state representatives and in public fora to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Once a sufficient number of states adopt the NPVIC, the winner of the national popular vote will be the candidate who is awarded the office. Many states have already adopted the NPVIC. It's possible that a sufficient number of states will adopt it in order to go into effect for the 2020 election.

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course! All is just Peachy-Keen among CONservitives, who don't give a sh-- that a known Criminal/Rapist is in the White House.

So long as all the richest of the rich get their mega-tax cuts, as is the case now.

Those claims are also hard to address.
It's like when posters talk of "libtards" or "Dumbocrats".
Where would one even start to counter such things?

I think this tax reform isn't perfect, but it's a step in the
right direction, & much better than what we saw under
recent prior presidents. I'd rather eliminate all personal
deductions, eliminate taxes for low wage earners.
But no one in government ever asks me.

 

[Nous]

As is commonly pointed out by Trump supporters, the USA doesn't elect the president. POTUS is appointed by the governments of states.
Many state governments have opted for democracy, but so far, not enough to change the current system.

Read more at:

Answering Myths

and

National Popular Vote

I believe that the lack of democratic process in the presidential elections has a lot to do with the USA's apathetic and ill informed electorate.
Tom

I didn't read beyond the OP, didn't know you had mentioned the NPVIC. Thank you for doing so. Too few people know about it.

 

[Cooky]

The most important and direct thing any of us can do to avoid a repeat of results such as happened with the 2016 election is to advocate to our state representatives and in public fora to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Once a sufficient number of states adopt the NPVIC, the winner of the national popular vote will be the candidate who is awarded the office. Many states have already adopted the NPVIC. It's possible that a sufficient number of states will adopt it in order to go into effect for the 2020 election.

That sounds like a terrible idea.

 

[PureX]

Now you're venturing into what the level of taxation should be.
I disagree with 100% taxation, but that isn't a real world issue.

Why would you accept 90% (or some other percentage) and not 100%? The purpose is exactly the same, and the reasoning is exactly the same, regardless of the percentage.

 

[youknowme]

I think the question is, should all the voters get credit for picking Trump? Trump has accomplished more in two years that any president in history. Fake news does not report this so as to reinforce their distorted picture of Trump. Trump, the President, is different from the cartoon figure of Trump, that fake news is trying to create. If you placed anyone under the constant negative spot light and never mention any of their accomplishments, you can turn anyone into a cartoon villain. The left thinks this cartoon is real.

This situation reminds me of the story of General Ulysses Grant and President Lincoln. The other Generals hated Grant because Grant was loud, crude and liked to drink too much whiskey. He was not considered a proper dignified general and analogous to cartoon Trump. The other generals politicked against him.

Lincoln saw this and said, if drinking and swearing made all my generals as competent as Grant, I would buy the booze. Lincoln did not judge by Grant's by his rough surface and lack of pretense, but rather by his talent as his best general in battle. Trump is battle tested and has held back the swamp even with traitors in his ranks, undermining him.

No other President in history could fend off the entire swamp and fake news complex and still accomplish so much. He can't do the normal cheating the Democrats got away with during Obama, but he still accomplished many things. Picture if fake news supported and covered for Trump as much as they did Obama. Or Say Trump got to use the FBI and Justice department against the Democrats, like Obama and the Clintons did against him. America would have been transformed already.

Almost as if it came straight out of Trump's own lying mouth. . . .