Politics Thread

[Strange Brew]

By continuing the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% and corporations is "this administration. . .trying to do something about it"? More bluff from The Trumpster and the weaklings in the Rethuglican caucus!

I believe (could be wrong on the exact number) the Feds are projected to extract 5.1T in taxes for last year. You’re going to have to explain why the Fed Gov’t needs more. Remember, that does not include State & Local taxes.

[hoopster68]

I believe (could be wrong on the exact number) the Feds are projected to extract 5.1T in taxes for last year. You’re going to have to explain why the Fed Gov’t needs more. Remember, that does not include State & Local taxes.

SB: Yours is a very fair question. My explanation is that the US, with 335M +/- people has major obligations: defense, social welfare, infrastructure, etc., etc. Numerous Congress' led by both parties have spent more than the Treasure takes in (Clinton was the last Prexy to have a budget surplus). Since Reagan the average taxes for individuals and corporations has declined resulting in deficits almost every year. The Trump tax cuts add significantly to the deficit over ten years. It is only "common sense" as the president likes to say to ask the top earners to pay more while proposing cuts to spending. Unfortunately I don't see the Rethuglican caucus able to accept such a compromise; some members are so afraid of being primaried by even more extreme candidates that they've moved away from responsible fiscal policies. Speaker Johnson faces a tough week; doubt the Dems will bail him out. Rethuglicans created this fiscal crisis and soon they will own it.

[Xville]

SB: Yours is a very fair question. My explanation is that the US, with 335M +/- people has major obligations: defense, social welfare, infrastructure, etc., etc. Numerous Congress' led by both parties have spent more than the Treasure takes in (Clinton was the last Prexy to have a budget surplus). Since Reagan the average taxes for individuals and corporations has declined resulting in deficits almost every year. The Trump tax cuts add significantly to the deficit over ten years. It is only "common sense" as the president likes to say to ask the top earners to pay more while proposing cuts to spending. Unfortunately I don't see the Rethuglican caucus able to accept such a compromise; some members are so afraid of being primaried by even more extreme candidates that they've moved away from responsible fiscal policies. Speaker Johnson faces a tough week; doubt the Dems will bail him out. Rethuglicans created this fiscal crisis and soon they will own it.

While I agree with some of what you said here, it is simply disingenuous to say that the Republicans created this fiscal crisis and own it. Every politician and both parties created this mess and "own it." This mess has been going on for decades thru numerous administrations on both sides of the aisle. They all share the blame from pet projects at the extremes to misallocation of funds on the "bright side." Pointing fingers at one side is something that Lou does, lets collectively be better than that.

[GoMuskies]

The top earners pay plenty IMO. I think there's a tweak here and there that could be made for top earners to pay a LITTLE bit more, but 37% is pretty substantial. I feel like it used to be 39 or 39.5%? That would be fine. And I could also see having the highest earners resume paying SS tax after a SUBSTANTIAL donut (like stop paying SS portion of FICA from current $176,100 limit up to $500k or $750k when they'd resume paying again), but overall I think under the current system high earners can certainly say with a straight face that they pay their fair share. There's a substantial group who pay nothing, and I think that's a bit of a dangerous situation, with that group really having ZERO skin in the game and no reason to care what the government spends its money on.

[paulxu]

There's a substantial group who pay nothing, and I think that's a bit of a dangerous situation, with that group really having ZERO skin in the game and no reason to care what the government spends its money on.

That also applies to some of our largest corporations, and others like farmers/oil companies we actually give tax credits to. Should be some balance somewhere. As noted above, Clinton was able to achieve a surplus.

[Strange Brew]

Apple just announced 20,000 US jobs and $500B in investment due to Chineese tariffs. That’s a lot of new taxes coming to the Feds and the States.

[bjf123]

As noted above, Clinton was able to achieve a surplus.

With a Republican House led by Newt Gingrich where both sides made concessions. What a novel concept! Neither side wants to make concessions today to appease their lunatic fringes. They have to beat down the other side of the aisle. What’s the result? Not a damned thing. Meanwhile, the bureaucracy continues to grow unchecked throwing more money down the proverbial toilet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[paulxu]

The UN passed a resolution today condemning the war in Ukraine and calling for a return of Ukraine's territory.

Russia, North Korea, Iran...and the United States voted against the resolution.

MAGA.

[xubrew]

Read the idiot's Xpost. Demands a response,from every federal emplyees, and if he doesn't get one, it's a resignation.
Of course it's going out from OPM; who earlier had said there was no requirement ever to respond to their emails.
And some departments are telling their people to ignore the emails.

Children let loose in our government.
(for the unenlightened, soldiers are federal employees.)

On its face, this doesn't seem THAT outrageous to me. Perhaps his approach is a little over-abrasive, but I would actually consider it a good idea for a new supervisor to meet with everyone, ask them to explain what it is they do, and ask what a typical week is like for them. Now, I also think it's kind of stupid to just start firing everyone. Identifying things that need to be done that they can do seems a little more sensible than just canning everybody. You may figure out that you need them back later on. But, asking them to sum up what they do seems like a sensible thing for a new boss to do.

Now, it's fair to ask why Elon Musk is that new boss and why he suddenly has this type of access and authority?? Sure. I think it's a little strange that he was given the role that he was given. But to take issue with someone who's new to being in charge that simply wants to know what everyone does seems a little overly sensitive to me.

[paulxu]

Natalie Bara, president of the FBI Agents Association, wrote in an internal newsletter to members sent Sunday before Bongino’s selection was announced that Patel had agreed during a January meeting with her that the FBI deputy director “should continue to be an on-board, active Special Agent as has been the case for 117 years for many compelling reasons, including operational expertise and experience, as well as the trust of our Special Agent population.”

Not sure a let-go Fox personality pod caster fits that promise. Then again, why would you ever trust Kash Patel. You need to be smarter than that.