Americans Want the U.S. to increase spending in almost every category

[Laodicean60]

Every President has taken vacations or spent weekends at their homes or resorts.

They need to! Has anyone noticed how aged an ex-president looks after leaving office? Obama stands out to me because we are similar in age.

 

[Laodicean60]

That link does not address the question of whether tax cuts for the wealthy actually help.

Define wealthy: individuals, corporations, or all.

 

[civilwarbuff]

You can easily Google them. They're a part of our history.

That's you job; it should be part of your post. Otherwise you are simply making it up.

 

[civilwarbuff]

You still do not address the question of tax breaks helping the economy.

I hope you are aware of the fact that the consumer is THE driver of the economy. The more money in their pockets the better the economy tends to do. Which is why cutting waste, fraud and abuse from the federal budget is so essential. It is imperative that we get out spending under control, pay off our debts and tax only the amount necessary to operate a functional government and leave the rest in the pocket of the taxpayer. I guess there are people that can argue with my position but.....oh well. I think we will all be far better off by doing this. And, as a nod to the OP, by doing so the government CAN spend more on the things the people believe important and NONE on that which political parties believe important (to get re-elected of course).

 

[SimplyMe]

I hope you are aware of the fact that the consumer is THE driver of the economy.

This is true. Unfortunately, the Consumer Confidence Index -- how consumers view the economy -- is dropping quickly and at a point that typically signals we are headed into a recession.

The more money in their pockets the better the economy tends to do. Which is why cutting waste, fraud and abuse from the federal budget is so essential.

The issue is that the cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse has, despite the claims from DOGE, been minimal. Worse, much of what they are doing may cost the US as much money (at least in the short term) as it saves. They are firing the new employees, who can be fired, but claiming it is for "performance" (when for many, they have had outstanding performance) and not following the process that US law requires to be followed when firing these employees (so courts are ordering them to be "rehired"). In some cases, it turns out that they are "mission critical" and have had to be immediately rehired.

We're seeing similar things with contracts, such as with the VA contracts that were cancelled, only to become "uncanceled" and put into a review to see which can be cancelled and not impact Veteran's services. Of course, in many cases little money is being saved as money has been paid already under the contracts and cancelling them often has a penalty -- either extra payments that must be made to cancel the contract (to protect the group contracted from losing money on the deal) or that most of the money has been paid out already, just the government will not get the full services the contract called for. And this doesn't count the mistakes -- which we've seen happen over and over when just a group of contracts are cancelled or workers are terminated -- where a contract will have to be remade for a needed service, where the old one was cancelled, with the new contract being more expensive due to inflation (and other possible reasons) since the old contract was signed.

It is imperative that we get out spending under control, pay off our debts and tax only the amount necessary to operate a functional government and leave the rest in the pocket of the taxpayer.

Which would be good but Congress is approving a budget that increases the deficit. As a general rule, Trump has shown no interest in lowering the deficit but just wants to change where the money is being spent. In his last term, Trump increased the deficits over what they were in Obama's last few years, despite the good economy where more money is coming in, and that was pre-COVID (meaning once COVID hit the deficit exploded).

I guess there are people that can argue with my position but.....oh well. I think we will all be far better off by doing this. And, as a nod to the OP, by doing so the government CAN spend more on the things the people believe important and NONE on that which political parties believe important (to get re-elected of course).

I won't argue with your position, I just don't see what you do. I see consumers fearful of the future, I seem government spending continuing to be out of control (just with different priorities) -- with the added issue that, we are also losing the world's confidence, with signs the dollar may stop being the world's reserve currency (with the issues that could cause for our economy).

 

[Fantine]

That's you job; it should be part of your post. Otherwise you are simply making it up.

This is not the news forum where links are required. I listen to a number of reliable, award-winning media sources so i believed these were common knowledge.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I hope you are aware of the fact that the consumer is THE driver of the economy. The more money in their pockets the better the economy tends to do. Which is why cutting waste, fraud and abuse from the federal budget is so essential. It is imperative that we get out spending under control, pay off our debts and tax only the amount necessary to operate a functional government and leave the rest in the pocket of the taxpayer. I guess there are people that can argue with my position but.....oh well. I think we will all be far better off by doing this. And, as a nod to the OP, by doing so the government CAN spend more on the things the people believe important and NONE on that which political parties believe important (to get re-elected of course).

But it doesn't work that way.

• Failed to deliver promised economic benefits. Trump Administration officials claimed their centerpiece corporate tax rate cut would “very conservatively” lead to a $4,000 boost in household income. New research shows that workers who earned less than about $114,000 on average in 2016 saw “no change in earnings” from the corporate tax rate cut, while top executive salaries increased sharply. Similarly, rigorous research concluded that the tax law’s 20 percent pass-through deduction, which was skewed in favor of wealthy business owners, has largely failed to trickle down to workers in those companies who aren’t owners. Like the Bush tax cuts before it, the 2017 Trump tax cut was a trickle-down failure.

The 2017 Trump Tax Law Was Skewed to the Rich, Expensive, and Failed to Deliver on Its Promises | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Policymakers and the public should understand that the 2017 Trump tax law was skewed to the rich, was expensive and eroded the U.S. revenue base, and failed to deliver promised economic benefits. A 2025 course correction is needed.

www.cbpp.org

 

[civilwarbuff]

The issue is that the cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse has, despite the claims from DOGE, been minimal.

We're seeing similar things with contracts, such as with the VA contracts that were cancelled, only to become "uncanceled" and put into a review to see which can be cancelled and not impact Veteran's services. Of course, in many cases little money is being saved as money has been paid already under the contracts and cancelling them often has a penalty -- either extra payments that must be made to cancel the contract (to protect the group contracted from losing money on the deal) or that most of the money has been paid out already, just the government will not get the full services the contract called for. And this doesn't count the mistakes -- which we've seen happen over and over when just a group of contracts are cancelled or workers are terminated -- where a contract will have to be remade for a needed service, where the old one was cancelled, with the new contract being more expensive due to inflation (and other possible reasons) since the old contract was signed.

Which would be good but Congress is approving a budget that increases the deficit. As a general rule, Trump has shown no interest in lowering the deficit but just wants to change where the money is being spent. In his last term, Trump increased the deficits over what they were in Obama's last few years, despite the good economy where more money is coming in, and that was pre-COVID (meaning once COVID hit the deficit exploded).

I won't argue with your position, I just don't see what you do. I see consumers fearful of the future, I seem government spending continuing to be out of control (just with different priorities) -- with the added issue that, we are also losing the world's confidence, with signs the dollar may stop being the world's reserve currency (with the issues that could cause for our economy).

It hasn't even been 8 weeks. Take a deep breath.....

 

[civilwarbuff]

This is not the news forum where links are required. I listen to a number of reliable, award-winning media sources so i believed these were common knowledge.

If all they give is progressive leftist positions then I would guess most progressive leftists are well informed. The rest of us.....we don't listen to progressive leftist media.....that's why the sources are necessary.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Failed to deliver promised economic benefits. Trump Administration officials claimed their centerpiece corporate tax rate cut would “very conservatively” lead to a $4,000 boost in household income. New research shows that workers who earned less than about $114,000 on average in 2016 saw “no change in earnings” from the corporate tax rate cut, while top executive salaries increased sharply. Similarly, rigorous research concluded that the tax law’s 20 percent pass-through deduction, which was skewed in favor of wealthy business owners, has largely failed to trickle down to workers in those companies who aren’t owners. Like the Bush tax cuts before it, the 2017 Trump tax cut was a trickle-down failure.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) is a progressive American think tank that analyzes the impact of federal and state government budget policies.[2] A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, the Center's stated mission is to "conduct research and analysis to help shape public debates over proposed budget and tax policies and to help ensure that policymakers consider the needs of low-income families and individuals in these debates."[3] wiki

I wouldn't expect them to say anything else......

 

[Fantine]

If all they give is progressive leftist positions then I would guess most progressive leftists are well informed. The rest of us.....we don't listen to progressive leftist media.....that's why the sources are necessary.

They give positions backed by facts and statistics.
Biden's economy worked--factually, statistically, historically.

 

[BPPLEE]

They give positions backed by facts and statistics.
Biden's economy worked--factually, statistically, historically.

It didn't work for me. No matter how great it was statistically it didn't work for a lot of people

 

[civilwarbuff]

They give positions backed by facts and statistics.
Biden's economy worked--factually, statistically, historically.

Because of the Trump Tax cuts....You have to understand that fundamental changes in tax law takes time to work its way through the economy. It is not a snap of the fingers thing.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) is a progressive American think tank that analyzes the impact of federal and state government budget policies.[2] A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, the Center's stated mission is to "conduct research and analysis to help shape public debates over proposed budget and tax policies and to help ensure that policymakers consider the needs of low-income families and individuals in these debates."[3] wiki

I wouldn't expect them to say anything else......

Which of their claims do you dispute and on what basis?

 

[Fantine]

Because of the Trump Tax cuts....You have to understand that fundamental changes in tax law takes time to work its way through the economy. It is not a snap of the fingers thing.

Tax cuts have been followed through the Reagan years with the same results. Tax cuts to the wealthy result in increased income inequality and high government deficits. Tax incentives to the middle and lower classes are an economic stimulus.
Biden's doubling the child tax credit (blocked by a Republican Congress the next year) cut child poverty in half.
The 2017 tax cuts never got to helping poor children.

 

[BPPLEE]

Tax cuts have been followed through the Reagan years with the same results. Tax cuts to the wealthy result in increased income inequality and high government deficits. Tax incentives to the middle and lower classes are an economic stimulus.
Biden's doubling the child tax credit (blocked by a Republican Congress the next year) cut child poverty in half.
The 2017 tax cuts never got to helping poor children.

Income inequality increased under Biden

Patrick Artus: 'Under Biden's presidency, there has been a considerable rise in income inequality, which may explain the middle class vote in favor of Trump'

COLUMN. A favorable economic record is not enough to win elections. You have to take into account voters' perceptions of inflation and immigration, writes the economist, who sees similarities between the situations in the US and France.

www.lemonde.fr

 

[Fantine]

Income inequality increased 17% under Trump.

You Can Thank Donald Trump If You’re Feeling Poorer Today - Inequality.org

inequality.org

 

[BPPLEE]

Income inequality increased 17% under Trump.

You Can Thank Donald Trump If You’re Feeling Poorer Today - Inequality.org

inequality.org

The rich got richer under Biden

American billionaires decried by Biden gained US$1.5 trillion during his term

The very richest Americans are among the biggest winners from United States president Joe Biden’s time in office. Find out more.

financialpost.com

 

[Always in His Presence]

It didn't work for me. No matter how great it was statistically it didn't work for a lot of people

That is one of the reasons why the Democrats lost.

 

[Fantine]

That is one of the reasons why the Democrats lost.

Remember, first of all, that the Democrats lost a very close election. 49.9% is not a majority, and the 1.6% margin between Trump and Harris votes was the smallest in decades.

I think that, next to immigration, the biggest reason Harris lost was the Israeli-Gaza War. People of conscience were appalled at our funding of Netanyahu's genocide. In Rashida Talib's district, she won by a huge margin, while Biden lost to Trump!

Democrats expressed their displeasure by voting for Jill Stein or staying home.

I thought this was absolutely crazy. Don't they know that Donald Trump will support Netanyahu's genocide even more strongly, I thought? The idea that he would try to level Gaza, displace the refugees in Eygpt and Syria, and turn it into the Gaza Riviera was so contemptible that I hadn't even envisioned that!

Democrats, next time you have to decide between what you consider to be the lesser of two evils, look at the magnitude of the greater of two evils, and vote!