Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Manic Moran

He has better tax lawyers than I do. I’d genuinely be surprised if he pays a lower dollar value, I would not be surprised if he pays a lower percentage value. Him, Bernie, Biden, Bezos, Zuckerberg, or anyone else with multiple zeros in their bank account.

The tax code is insane. It’s not a matter of “tax the rich more”, the damned statutes are thicker than a telephone book. (Seriously, there are photos).



That’s 72,000 pages.


And that’s the Federal code, don’t forget we pay State taxes on top of that, and not necessarily just on the state you live. I pay Federal, TX and CA this year. In theory NV as well, but as NV’s income tax rate is 0, I don’t have to file.

That gets simplified, everybody wins. Except those who are employed by tax accounting firms, perhaps, and those who can afford tax lawyers.

Few people seem to be talking about this for the individual, they talk about rates at brackets. “The rich should pay 70%” or whatever. The only good news is that the Trump tax change laws did reduce the amount of folks who need to pay for an itemized tax service by increasing the threshold at which it becomes “complicated”, but that doesn’t affect the effective percentage paid by the folks at the top end.

It would be nice if someone put forward a plan for that.

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

He has better tax lawyers than I do. I’d genuinely be surprised if he pays a lower dollar value, I would not be surprised if he pays a lower percentage value. Him, Bernie, Biden, Bezos, Zuckerberg, or anyone else with multiple zeros in their bank account.

The tax code is insane. It’s not a matter of “tax the rich more”, the damned statutes are thicker than a telephone book. (Seriously, there are photos).



That’s 72,000 pages.


And that’s the Federal code, don’t forget we pay State taxes on top of that, and not necessarily just on the state you live. I pay Federal, TX and CA this year. In theory NV as well, but as NV’s income tax rate is 0, I don’t have to file.

That gets simplified, everybody wins. Except those who are employed by tax accounting firms, perhaps, and those who can afford tax lawyers.

Few people seem to be talking about this for the individual, they talk about rates at brackets. “The rich should pay 70%” or whatever. The only good news is that the Trump tax change laws did reduce the amount of folks who need to pay for an itemized tax service by increasing the threshold at which it becomes “complicated”, but that doesn’t affect the effective percentage paid by the folks at the top end.

It would be nice if someone put forward a plan for that.

In other words while you don't like it you have already accepted it.

Again, perhaps instead of spending his time fantasizing about space ships, he could actually come up with a plan to deal with this tax mess.

I note he started by reducing the tax payable by the rich, including massive reduction in inheritance. But any day now I suppose.

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

In other words while you don't like it you have already accepted it.

Again, perhaps instead of spending his time fantasizing about space ships, he could actually come up with a plan to deal with this tax mess.

I note he started by reducing the tax payable by the rich, including massive reduction in inheritance. But any day now I suppose.

The two are not connected. You may as well compare the time the Democrat house has spent working on impeachment vs the time they have spent improving the tax code.

It needs work. Doesn’t seem to be anybody’s priority, though. That increase in tax regulation has kept increasing no matter which party is in the White House or has Congress.

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

The two are not connected. You may as well compare the time the Democrat house has spent working on impeachment vs the time they have spent improving the tax code.

It needs work. Doesn’t seem to be anybody’s priority, though. That increase in tax regulation has kept increasing no matter which party is in the White House or has Congress.

Not directly connected, but we know Trump can only stay focused on limited things. He has no ability to read long documents or understand complex items. So since he is now all about Buck Rodgers we know he is not focused on Tax.

Why bring up the Dems? They just helped get the latest budget passed despite the obstruction of an investigation, despite Trump calling them out each day, despite the GOP Senate failing to carry out its duty without partisanship.

Trump is POTUS, he could change it. But you are seemingly happy to offer him every excuse. So why would he bother, you are going to defend it no matter what.

Which did you think is more important. Dealing with the failing military, dealing with the tax code mess, or a space force?

Itssoeasy

NBC news is reporting that new emails released through a freedom of information request that the hold on Aid to Ukraine was requested literally hours after the July 25th call. Mike Duffey from the OMB emailed both the OMB(mulvaney ?) and the pentagon.

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

Which did you think is more important. Dealing with the failing military, dealing with the tax code mess, or a space force?

Why do you insist on making it an either/or question when they all need addressing?

Dealing with one item does not negate the need to deal with the others. Conversely, the merit to dealing with that item neither increases nor decreases depending on what happens with the others.

You ask which is more important? That probably depends on your perspective. Space Force may seem pretty trivial or silly right now, until the day comes that we discover that we really should have had a specialised force some time before it because really bloody obvious that we needed after an adversary took advantage of our lack of foresight.

Space is important to the US interest. Really frigging important.You won't find many people who argue this point.

TomOnBoard

Manic Moran wrote: »

Why do you insist on making it an either/or question when they all need addressing?

Dealing with one item does not negate the need to deal with the others. Conversely, the merit to dealing with that item neither increases nor decreases depending on what happens with the others.

You ask which is more important? That probably depends on your perspective. Space Force may seem pretty trivial or silly right now, until the day comes that we discover that we really should have had a specialised force some time before it because really bloody obvious that we needed after an adversary took advantage of our lack of foresight.

Space is important to the US interest. Really frigging important.You won't find many people who argue this point.

Its true that it ought not be seen as a single-item agenda. And in a political system that works, there ought to be many hundreds and indeed thousands of policies that a functioning system can/should deal with at the same time. Again, in a properly functioning system, many of those policies ought to receive broad support across all parties because they are seen as being crucial to the national interest. And that's where the political systems in many so-called democracies have become unfit for purpose. And this is applicable to the U.S. situation today under the Republican Presidency, supported in lock-step fashion by a hugely partisan Republican Senate under the 'leadership' of Mitch Mc Connell.

When politics ceases to operate on a bi-partisan basis and every issue is dealt with on strictly partisan lines, many exceedingly good policies get voted down, not because they are bad or wrong, but because they are brought to the table by 'the other crowd'.

The Democrat controlled House has passed over 400 bills, not including Resolutions so far in 2019. Some 80% of those bills are being ignored by Republicans in the Senate, and are spinning their wheels in Moscow Mitch's legislative 'graveyard' while he put ALL his efforts into using the Senate to confirm Republican judges, rather than passing bills into law.

So, the issue is not an 'either/or' on a policy or legislative agenda. However, Mc Connell has made it an 'either/or' on judges vs political and legislative progress. So its clear where that's headed. The Republican autocracy has no interest in moving the country forward for the benefit of all its people. Rather, it is only interested in 'stacking the deck' so that the hitherto independent judiciary will reflect Republican thinking in its decision- making for generations to come.

Sad situation for anyone who will expect 'justice' for decades ahead.

listermint

Manic Moran wrote: »

Why do you insist on making it an either/or question when they all need addressing?

Dealing with one item does not negate the need to deal with the others. Conversely, the merit to dealing with that item neither increases nor decreases depending on what happens with the others.

You ask which is more important? That probably depends on your perspective. Space Force may seem pretty trivial or silly right now, until the day comes that we discover that we really should have had a specialised force some time before it because really bloody obvious that we needed after an adversary took advantage of our lack of foresight.

Space is important to the US interest. Really frigging important.You won't find many people who argue this point.

There in is the single problem with the states. Space is important to US interests.... They've been saying that since the 60s

That length of time.


How about sorting out your health care system. Perhaps fixing the brain drain where you are murdering innovation by putting hundreds of thousands of young people into decades of debt just to get an education.

What about that tax pile image you posted , have you considered it's so complex because it's been added to every year to make add in more loopholes and dodges to get certain sectors out of the tax system. Ever expanding ever growing depending on which lobby group get involved.


Your priorities are incredibly messed up if you are shouting about shiny things like space force yet you yourself moved states to get away from the absymal tax systems.


Haven't a breeze about what's important....

aloyisious

While one can say the Space Force founding and Tax relief moves are relative to Don in respect to his actions while POTUS, the Space Force is a long term project, something that will cover several POTUS office terms before its becomes a real deal thing in space. Re taxes, Don made it clear when he became president that tax was his expertise "I wrote the book on it" yet he hasn't got together with the two parties to get the tax book rewritten to make it his legacy that all would remember him for, above all else.

eire4

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Its true that it ought not be seen as a single-item agenda. And in a political system that works, there ought to be many hundreds and indeed thousands of policies that a functioning system can/should deal with at the same time. Again, in a properly functioning system, many of those policies ought to receive broad support across all parties because they are seen as being crucial to the national interest. And that's where the political systems in many so-called democracies have become unfit for purpose. And this is applicable to the U.S. situation today under the Republican Presidency, supported in lock-step fashion by a hugely partisan Republican Senate under the 'leadership' of Mitch Mc Connell.

When politics ceases to operate on a bi-partisan basis and every issue is dealt with on strictly partisan lines, many exceedingly good policies get voted down, not because they are bad or wrong, but because they are brought to the table by 'the other crowd'.

The Democrat controlled House has passed over 400 bills, not including Resolutions so far in 2019. Some 80% of those bills are being ignored by Republicans in the Senate, and are spinning their wheels in Moscow Mitch's legislative 'graveyard' while he put ALL his efforts into using the Senate to confirm Republican judges, rather than passing bills into law.

So, the issue is not an 'either/or' on a policy or legislative agenda. However, Mc Connell has made it an 'either/or' on judges vs political and legislative progress. So its clear where that's headed. The Republican autocracy has no interest in moving the country forward for the benefit of all its people. Rather, it is only interested in 'stacking the deck' so that the hitherto independent judiciary will reflect Republican thinking in its decision- making for generations to come.

Sad situation for anyone who will expect 'justice' for decades ahead.

You make a very good and important point there about the Republican's and what they are doing to basically stack the deck as you say with the judiciary and as the damage that the Republican controlled Supreme court has shown with its rullings that now allow company's and wealthy individuals to buy politicians this ending of an independent judiciary can and does not a very profound effect. In this case the supreme court playing a major role in turning the US into an oligarchy as things stand now. Clearly the long term goal is to end judicial independence at all federal levels in favour of judges who will do what the Republican party and their financial backers want.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1208914983045795840?s=19

Another Christian publication sides against Trump.

Igotadose

everlast75 wrote: »

Another Christian publication sides against Trump.

Conservative, yes, Christian, no. Founded by William F. Buckley Jr. in the '50s, strongly 'mainline GOP' for decades.

Still, it's fun to see the pile-on from the right wing. More to come, wait till the trial when the fur starts to fly.

PropJoe10

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1208914983045795840?s=19

Another Christian publication sides against Trump.

Not surprising. He is hardly a man of God.

aloyisious

Does that mean that it might affect Don's share of the next presidential vote if it relies on a renewed understanding of Christian Right religious ethical-morality guidance positions in respect of some of his POTUS activities [due to the re-discovery season we're in] as against those from the Christian Right political ethical-morality guidance position in respect of the same activities? I'm of the opinion that some of the former are not in the least bit genuinely ethical or moral Christians or whatever faith beliefs they espouse.

Todays Irish Indo has an article about Don's Executive Order from Sept limiting the number of Aliens/refugees to be let into the US for resettlement within the states as it leaves the actual decision up to the state governors on refusal or not, with a time/date end-line for the governors to apply for federal funding to cover the resettlement costs if they want to. The article is about the quandary GOP Governors in approx 20+ states find themselves in re refugee settlement and the same for cities who are agreeable to taking in the refugees [or not to - as the case may be].

Regretfully the following link is firewalled but its available in the print version in shops. https://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/president-trump/trump-leaves-governors-to-decide-if-states-take-refugees-38808850.html

pixelburp

So what are reckoning? 24 hours max before that publication gets re-badged as left wing, never Trumper?

everlast75

pixelburp wrote: »

So what are reckoning? 24 hours max before that publication gets re-badged as left wing, never Trumper?

Unless of course he comes out and incorrectly slates an alien. E.T. got it last time.

aloyisious

pixelburp wrote: »

So what are reckoning? 24 hours max before that publication gets re-badged as left wing, never Trumper?

Or Social Justice Warrior magazine?

amandstu

He doesn't understand religion because he is above all that ....more of a profit or a later day Saint.

This is backing evidunce M'lord

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2y2hil4L3o

I think he is slightly tilting.(prepping the insanity defence?)

Brian?

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Amy_Siskind/status/1208914983045795840?s=19

Another Christian publication sides against Trump.

Won’t matter a damn to his supporters. Let’s not forget Hilary was an actual Christian and it didn’t matter a damn in 2016, the evangelicals chose a twice divorced adulterer over an a pretty conservative Christian to get Mike Pence as Veep and control of the SCOTUS.

pixelburp

Brian? wrote: »

Won’t matter a damn to his supporters. Let’s not forget Hilary was an actual Christian and it didn’t matter a damn in 2016, the evangelicals chose a twice divorced adulterer over an a pretty conservative Christian to get Mike Pence as Veep and control of the SCOTUS.

Also, given Trump is a wealthy man this automatically makes him a good Christian in the eyes of evangelicals, given god provides wealth and health to the true believers. It's quite neat, as specious reasoning goes. All part of god's plan n all, I daresay even if Trump was revealed to have forced an abortion he'd not lose support among the Americo-Christian right (though that might push it for some)

Itssoeasy

The prosperity gospel is imo utterly perverse. I understand that people have different opinions on religion and the existence of god and all that, but to me the prosperity gospel is a way to pray of people's desperation for a better life. And these pastors seem to be anything but people of god as they claim.

Wanderer78

Itssoeasy wrote:

The prosperity gospel is imo utterly perverse. I understand that people have different opinions on religion and the existence of god and all that, but to me the prosperity gospel is a way to pray of people's desperation for a better life. And these pastors seem to be anything but people of god as they claim.

Maybe gods into con (wo)men

Itssoeasy

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Maybe gods into con (wo)men

Ah but the mental gymnastics the evangelical crowd do would have made a young Romanian gymnast in 1976 falter.

aloyisious

How many sectors does the GOP fanbase have: rustbelt, industrial, religious, urban, disenfranchised, fire-arms law lovers, actually supporting Don as a combined group? If they are not working as a combined group, its worth the Dems energy stopping using the term fanbase and work on them individually to whittle down the public image that Don is promoting that his base is a group with the power to control the future of the US body politic. We've seen the public image of what is supposed to be the base for the religious right splitting with attacks on Don promoting his being removed from office via the constitution. I don't think the GOP is a monolith, but rather a disparate group of voters who were upset in 2016.

The question now is has Don burst the GOP mindset bubble which he and the GOP have been using to hoodwink the GOP voter into thinking Hillary was a war-mongering criminal, and with her out of the picture, the latest boogieman is Joe Biden.

It seems to me that we should be actually asking how many posters here are from what seems to be the GOP set are actually pro Don or just pro GOP, and how many of those GOP-ers posting here will actually vote for Don next year, if another GOP candidate [incl the present V/P] was available to them ? Which of those options would you honestly vote for as your candidate next year? When are you going to stop dissembling about what is facing the GOP? The Dems are NOT the powerset in charge of the US, the GOP is.

aloyisious

I see Mitch McConnell has allegedly not ruled out the appearance of witnesses at the trial of Don Trump by the Senate. I doubt if he would ever honour such an offer. The news report of McConnells statement is approx. 3 hours old. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/23/mcconnell-gop-hasnt-ruled-out-witnesses-in-trump-impeachment-trial.html

This is after the appearance of an Email [with a sent-time on it] to put the block on the Senate funding for re-armament of Ukraine of approx [edit] 90 minutes after the end of the "do me a favour" phone call between Don and President Zelensky, the timing of which is all pure coincidence of course.

Itssoeasy

aloyisious wrote: »

I see Mitch McConnell has allegedly not ruled out the appearance of witnesses at the trial of Don Trump by the Senate. I doubt if he would ever honour such an offer. The news report of McConnells statement is approx. 3 hours old. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/23/mcconnell-gop-hasnt-ruled-out-witnesses-in-trump-impeachment-trial.html

This is after the appearance of an Email [with a sent-time on it] to put the block on the Senate funding for re-armament of Ukraine of approx 30 minutes after the end of the "do me a favour" phone call between Don and President Zelensky, the timing of which is all pure coincidence of course.

It was 90 minutes if it's the same story from NBC news yesterday. I mean the trump administration aren't even trying to do a competent job at being the US government at this stage. A complete and utter coincidence Aloyisious and any attempt to link the two is a [insert baddie of the day] plot. Btw I'm being sarcastic what that last line.

spacecoyote

Would appreciate a little Mod discretion on this one. Given it's the Christmas season, it seems wholly appropriate:

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1209227187519393794

TomOnBoard

Fox News is working overtime to undermine the House's Impeachment of the President..

The propaganda war is now in full swing. Truth is defined by one's beliefs and opinions. Lies have become the projectiles of day to day warring between the parties. Honesty is dead, and anyone who seeks truth can only be disappointed or duped.

Liars are sacrificing the rights of the people to the gods of power on the alter of spin and bull****..

Carcharodon

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Fox News is working overtime to undermine the House's Impeachment of the President..

The propaganda war is now in full swing. Truth is defined by one's beliefs and opinions. Lies have become the projectiles of day to day warring between the parties. Honesty is dead, and anyone who seeks truth can only be disappointed or duped.

Liars are sacrificing the rights of the people to the gods of power on the alter of spin and bull****..

The impeachment charge is too boring, it needs to be sexier for the general public to be more engaged in, fight now its the same old same old, doesn’t matter what the charge is, it needed to be something that really stoood out, this charge falls reallly flat, sad but true

everlast75

Carcharodon wrote: »

The impeachment charge is too boring, it needs to be sexier for the general public to be more engaged in, fight now its the same old same old, doesn’t matter what the charge is, it needed to be something that really stoood out, this charge falls reallly flat, sad but true

You're 100% correct! Totally boring.

Maybe his next one might perk your interest?

https://twitter.com/MaddowBlog/status/1209224494755307520?s=19