Reminder that Donald Trumps tax plan will put us $10 trillion in debt. He wants to lower the taxes on the richest from 39% to 25%. He also wants to get rid of the estate tax, which only applies to people with a net worth of over 3 million.
Hillary Clinton wants none tax raises on people making under 250k, and will raise it on the ones making more than that.
Hillary = Less debt
Trump = 10+ trillion more debt
He says he'll pay for the across-the-board tax cuts by closing loopholes and shit like that.
IDK, I'm kinda suspicious of the math too...
>>67974470
Everyone can say they're going to do that.
Rarely do Republicans ever.
He also wants to get rid of the alternative minimum tax which is meant to punish tax evaders.
>>67974470
The 10 trillion (over 10 years) deficit number includes the money made back by closing loopholes. If you didn't include that, it would be closer to 15 trillion in deficit.
>>67974313
Can we grow up and stop using muh national debt as an argument. Jesus christ. Deficits are just a residual determined by private saving decisions and interest-bearing bond issuance is just a monetary policy choice.
What ACTUALLY MATTERS is keeping unemployment low as possible, productivity & real wages growing, inflation between approximately 2-3% etc, or any other economic policy goals you might have.
It triggers me so hard to see retards, even those on the so-called "liberal left", displaying this disgusting ignorance about the monetary system.
>>67974313
Lowering taxes on the rich will bring SO MUCH BUSINESS back into America it will more than make up the difference.
Why don't liberals understand that lowering taxes on job creators ALWAYS WITHOUT FAIL enhances the economy?
>>67975255
I don't see how decreasing government revenue by that much will do any good.
>>67974470
>le loopholes meme
Literally every presidential candidate over the past 16 years has trotted out that line. It's horseshit.
Faaaagggggooooootttttttttt
>>67975336
Top kek.
I forget there's people like this still around. Embarrassing...
Trump is for the people!!! He's not a con artist pandering to the angry masses! No, he'll help the """"""middle class"""""" working folk!
>>67975341
You call it government revenue. I call it fiscal drag.
For the federal government, the most important function of tax is to "create unemployment" so that resources can be brought into the public sector. If there is high unemployment, the appropriate response is to either cut some taxes or spend some more.
The term "revenue" is misleading because it implies that the government takes in some large number of dollar bills, throws them in a sack, trucks them off to the government's vault and then spends them. In truth it's more accurate to say that the government spends the dollars and then taxes some back - and the difference over any particular time period is called the deficit, or in other words, the net saving of the non-government sector. Everyone wants to net save, so most of the time, the government should and does run a deficit.
It may be that spending more on public initiatives is the better way to go, but we shouldn't criticise Trump on the basis that he would increase the deficit. Any decent economic policy right now would probably increase the deficit, whether it's massive infrastructure spending from Sanders or massive tax cuts from Trump. So yeah, basically people should stop whining about the deficit and whine a hell of a lot more about unemployment.
>>67974313
The Estate tax is still doubling dipping, fuck off.
>>67976128
Aussies are either the shittiest posters or the most eloquent, theres no in between
Under Hilary Clinton all the hardcore gun owners are going to become LE/Government to keep their rights.
The rest of you plebs will have to deal with the civil unrest and crime spike, as well as swatting and raids of family homes to take guns.
I'll do it, i'll take peoples guns.
Also when ever I have to deal with a liberal, I am going to remember who helped create this cuck world Hilary created.
America will be Merkel fucked.
Keep in mind that the US debt is paid by the taxpayer. So giving us more debt to pay while simultaneously decreasing taxes, and therefore decreasing the amount forcibly taken from our paychecks to pay that very debt is okay by me. Clinton might reduce the debt, but she can only do that by increasing the amount of money she takes out of our paychecks to pay that fucking debt.
Frankly, I would rather pass the buck and have the tax break now. What we really need to do to get the debt under control is not have budget surpluses. It's dismantle the fucking federal reserve. Since no current presidential candidate is actually going to do that, I'd rather have the one that saves me significant money now.
>>67976547
Keep shilling for the rich, maybe they'll care about you if you work hard enough!
>>67976711
>gun LARPers
Embarrassing...
>>67976847
Keep shilling for the state, maybe they won't detach you from your autismbux if you stay complacent!
>>67976847
>durr you're just a pawn for the rich!
And you're just a pawn for the state.
>Oh donald, thank you for the cash!
>oh hillary, don't mention it! It is always my pleasure to give you money! You are the best hillary - you are my best friend, and it is my honor to give to your "foundation" AND get a tax cut *wink*wink* AHAHAHAHAHA!
.
>AHAHAHAHAHA! Say donnie boy, do you mind if melania sucks my dick? Just the tip would be fine, you know I haven't had my dick sucked since monica.
>JUST WAIT RIGHT THERE BILL YOU BASTARD! You went too far! melania can and WILL suck your dick, but only if I get to watch!
>AHAHAHAHAHA! Oh Donnie you're a riot!
>>67977117
>>67977054
>libertarians
you must be 18 years or older to post on this site
>>67977261
>statists
>>>/reddit/ is that way
>>67974660
>He also wants to get rid of the alternative minimum tax which is meant to punish tax evaders.
Sauce?
>>67976847
you know Obongo's supreme court nominee is a gun grabber, right?
>>67977360
specifically the
>alternative minimum tax which is meant to punish tax evaders.
>>67977360
Tax plan on his site
They need more money so they can keep throwing money at problems
>>67976710
I've been lurking here off and on for a few weeks and have come to the same conclusion
>>67977505
clarified in >>67977491
>>67974660
amt isn't meant to punish tax evaders though. It is a minimum tax that reduces future taxes so no one can claim that they didn't pay taxes. It is a tax that exist for cosmetic purposes.
>>67974313
If this man's tax plan was passed the closed loop holes alone pay for it. They are going to cut social programs too, are you fucking retarded?
>>67977261
Then why are you posting?
>>67974313
His tax plan is the best one for every single American except the most elite, why do you think they don't want to him to be in office, because he said he doesn't want Muslims to immigrate into the US? Pull your head out of your ass.
>>67977491
AMT was intended to target the ultra-rich. It was designed in the 60s in response to about 100 households that didn't pay any income tax at all because of their deductions.
But it absolutely does not punish tax evaders. The AMT threshold did not keep pace with inflation, and as a result it hits people making low six figures, like 1-200k. These are not tax evaders. This is the sweet spot for hard working people "making it", and these are the people who already pay the most taxes out of anyone. It should be eliminated.
>>67974313
haha fucking delusion
the question is, are you willing to shit on other countries for profit like so far it has been done to aid usas economy?
if so, then stop pretending to be the good guy and make clear declarations of war upon other countries
if you how ever you want to be the good guy as so many whte people stil are eager to be, then stay out of other countries businesses and let them battle out their differences on their own soils, you stay inside yours and defend your own.
no double standards allowed
>>67975255
>keeping unemployment low as possible
Gonna be hard to do that since general purpose automation is going to bear fruit in the next decade.
If you aren't planning for a steadily increasing unemployment rate you are either foolish or a luddite.
Hillary is literally Osama bin Laden.
>>67974313
ur rite, we shuld just take all them richies' munny, they'll be glad to foot the bill with no questions asked.
>>67978147
Automation of existing jobs doesn't mean unemployment must permanently rise. There will still be "useful" things for people to do. It will take a smart government, not a short-sighted or corrupt one, to deal with that.
I certainly hope we see automation take over (in other words, productivity through the roof) and appropriate fiscal policy to deal with it. My focus is always on the real world not these problems we create for ourselves by pretending we can't afford full employment etc.
>>67977969
thanks famalam
>>67978672
>Automation of existing jobs doesn't mean unemployment must permanently rise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
Automation is the end game, it is what we have been seeking in our pursuit of technology. Unemployment will permanently rise if we do not embrace luddite policies.
>>67974313
I voted for Bernie in the primary but his redditor supporters and annoying kids are starting to make me consider jumping to Hillary. I also respect the OP for going after Trump's economic plans instead of name calling. The gun stuff is the main reason I can't fully embrace Hillary. Bernie is not pro-2A, but he is less enthusiastic about gun grabbing.
>>67977231
Are they swingers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ-Y7tn7_3o
>>67979183
Well if everything can be automated and we no longer need to work at all, then unemployment will no longer exist because nobody will want to work anyway.
That's getting into futuristic post-scarcity utopia talk and I would prefer to discuss the problems of here and now.
GREAT DEALS
>>67979776
That is the here and now. There will likely be at least 50% unemployment in the lifetime of the average 4chan user.
If you believe the singularity will happen in the middle of the century then that number is closer to 100%.
Assuming this image is correct, shouldn't we slow down on Medicare/social security or at least make it cheaper to the government somehow? I really have no idea how we would go about lowering our deficit; if someone would enlighten me that'd be great.
>>67980059
>There will likely be at least 50% unemployment in the lifetime of the average 4chan user.
Only if governments choose to neglect the workforce even more than they've been doing since the early 70s. It's simply a matter of whether or not we waste the available labour that is freed up by automation.
If there's no work, at all, to be done by the unemployed - which is to say all of humanity's needs are met, and a large number of people still aren't even working - then the only problem is distribution. We could basically just implement full socialism at that point and focus on space exploration or something.
>>67975071
It doesn't account for increased revenue as a result of the economy growing though, which would be huge under Trump's tax plan.
>>67980513
It's worse than that, thanks to government short sightedness not only will they continue to neglect the workforce but they will continue 'business as usual'. They will encourage and supplement population growth because it's 'good for the economy' while the categories of jobs that humans can still work in competitively decrease.
Current projections have the US population around 500 million by 2050, thanks largely to immigration and that doesn't include the undocumented ones
>focus on space exploration
Space exploration is done much better by robots anyways. Outer space is full of ionizing radiation that just passes right through space craft. Human space exploration is just a novelty.
>>67980275
>Assuming this image is correct,
It's not, because that's not how government finance works.
See my post earlier >>67976128
>The term "revenue" is misleading because it implies that the government takes in some large number of dollar bills, throws them in a sack, trucks them off to the government's vault and then spends them. In truth it's more accurate to say that the government spends the dollars and then taxes some back - and the difference over any particular time period is called the deficit, or in other words, the net saving of the non-government sector.
If I may add, the big bad red box labelled Interest on Debt is a completely voluntary policy choice by the government. Bonds are issued to private banks to help the Fed set interest rates. This could be done in other ways such as paying interest on reserves, or not at all, starting tomorrow, if Congress decided that public debt issuance is unnecessary (which I believe it is) and told the Fed to change its procedures.
>>67974313
hillary wants to double capital gains tax and force share holders to hold onto shares for 2 months. it would cripple wallstreet
the term mass exodus isnt thrown around a lot but its probably the most accurate way to describe what would happen. international investors would probably pour into brazil... again
>>67981055
The only problem I'm seeing there is unsustainable population growth.
Policy neglect is a shame but we can avoid it if we don't vote like morons.
1) It appears Trump does not have any stake at prolonging the military industrial complex, compared to every other candidate that absolutely does have a stake, so he'd probably actually accomplish something and justify reducing spending, which we need more than anything.
2) His tax plan makes us competitive and strong in the international and domestic economy, boosting multiple levels of capital growth.
3) Trump also appears to have no stake in creating big government, and therefore could cut a lot of government subsidies that are raping our economy and boosting the debt.
4) Hillary Clinton is always a liar.
>>67981435
The problem is we are reaching the end of 'growth' and need to shift to 'improvement'. Our economics only cares about 'growth' though and has no metric to measure 'improvement'.
That being the case there is no such things as unsustainable population growth in economics, that's just more labor supply and any problems that result will just get put on a scapegoat.
>>67981844
I don't really care what certain shill economists think. If society functions better and our standard of living is better then it's a good outcome.
>>67981121
Do you really think that Congress would ever tell the Fed to change the way they do things when it's the Fed that writes their paychecks?
>>67982521
Modern economics is basically a religion, they won't give it up just because standards of living might rise.
>>67982869
I don't write long responses to stupid bait. Sorry.
>>67983376
It was an honest question. I don't think they would either.
