One of the great ironies of the Trump election

A

archives

Verified User
is the very Red States that elected Trump are going to be the ones that experience the consequences of his policies. Since Red States now pay less Federal Tax yet receive disproportionately more Federal aid, any cut in Federal spending matched by less Federal revenue to spend is going to effect those States the greatest. The poorest States are about to become poorer

Watch the Governors and State Legislatures of those States start to scramble in a year or two when the reality sinks in, their all going to start modeling Kansas's current difficulties
 
Nothing can be more asinine than the argument that the citizens of a state need to be beholding to the Federal Government. They'll do much better than the leftist Government dependent idiots living in the urban sewers of Blue State Cities.
 
$20,000,000,000,000 in debt ?.....Yep, the gravy train is gonna come to an end......
 
"$20,000,000,000,000 in debt ?.....Yep, the gravy train is gonna come to an end......" #4
Click to expand...
I hope so.
I wouldn't count on it.
Trump is famous for many things. Frugality is not one of them.
He's been promising, and appears with his crony capitalism to have already begun delivering on promises to lower taxes.

Cutting taxes is dandy! Cut them to $Zero if you like.

BUT !!

Cut $spending farther FIRST!!

And the way Trump's talking, he wants to reduce government revenue, and simultaneously increase government spending. "I'm gunna build a wall.
And Mexico is gunna pay for it."
"Nothing can be more asinine than" TD #2
Click to expand...
hmmm
Trump superlative exaggeration disorder.
I didn't know it was contagious.
"the argument that the citizens of a state need to be beholding to the Federal Government." TD #2
Click to expand...
The word is "beholden".
And while I understand our Bill of Rights has an Article #10, the body of our Constitution also has an Art.6 Sect.2, which includes The Supremacy Clause.

And by that legally binding standard, it's not a guideline, it's enforceable law, U.S. citizens are indeed bound by U.S. federal law, especially: "ARTICLE 6. Sect.2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; ... under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
 
sear said:
I hope so.
I wouldn't count on it.
Trump is famous for many things. Frugality is not one of them.
He's been promising, and appears with his crony capitalism to have already begun delivering on promises to lower taxes.

Cutting taxes is dandy! Cut them to $Zero if you like.

BUT !!

Cut $spending farther FIRST!!

And the way Trump's talking, he wants to reduce government revenue, and simultaneously increase government spending. "I'm gunna build a wall.
And Mexico is gunna pay for it."

hmmm
Trump superlative exaggeration disorder.
I didn't know it was contagious.

The word is "beholden".
And while I understand our Bill of Rights has an Article #10, the body of our Constitution also has an Art.6 Sect.2, which includes The Supremacy Clause.

And by that legally binding standard, it's not a guideline, it's enforceable law, U.S. citizens are indeed bound by U.S. federal law, especially: "ARTICLE 6. Sect.2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; ... under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Click to expand...

I am amused by the argument that cutting taxes somehow leads to lower revenue; do you have any data to support such a claim? I have a LOT of data that proves this claim to be a massive pile of bullshit. I can explain why it is as well.

How about you?
 
sear said:
I hope so.
I wouldn't count on it.
Trump is famous for many things. Frugality is not one of them.
He's been promising, and appears with his crony capitalism to have already begun delivering on promises to lower taxes.

Cutting taxes is dandy! Cut them to $Zero if you like.

BUT !!

Cut $spending farther FIRST!!

And the way Trump's talking, he wants to reduce government revenue, and simultaneously increase government spending. "I'm gunna build a wall.
And Mexico is gunna pay for it."

hmmm
Trump superlative exaggeration disorder.
I didn't know it was contagious.

The word is "beholden".
And while I understand our Bill of Rights has an Article #10, the body of our Constitution also has an Art.6 Sect.2, which includes The Supremacy Clause.

And by that legally binding standard, it's not a guideline, it's enforceable law, U.S. citizens are indeed bound by U.S. federal law, especially: "ARTICLE 6. Sect.2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; ... under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Click to expand...

Dear idiot on steroids; the States are not beholden to the Federal Government. Tax cuts NEVER lead to lower revenue. Arguments that suggest we have a revenue problem are based on fantasy, not fact.

I am amused that Liberals who supported the most divisive and dimwitted President in our history never cared about the massive accumulation of debt he was party to but now suddenly are concerned about debt. You people really are the most dishonest hypocrites on the planet.
 
Archives, did you even look at that chart before you posted it? That's from a different election and a number of states Trump won are blue on there and ones he lost red.
 
Truth Detector said:
Nothing can be more asinine than the argument that the citizens of a state need to be beholding to the Federal Government. They'll do much better than the leftist Government dependent idiots living in the urban sewers of Blue State Cities.
Click to expand...

^^^^In fucking denial big time. Sit back and enjoy the show. It's a "house of cards" that will fall on your big fucking head sooner than later.
 
archives said:
is the very Red States that elected Trump are going to be the ones that experience the consequences of his policies. Since Red States now pay less Federal Tax yet receive disproportionately more Federal aid, any cut in Federal spending matched by less Federal revenue to spend is going to effect those States the greatest. The poorest States are about to become poorer

Watch the Governors and State Legislatures of those States start to scramble in a year or two when the reality sinks in, their all going to start modeling Kansas's current difficulties
Click to expand...

when a red president gives a blue state a taste of life with lower taxes, will the blue state stay blue?.....
 
"I am amused by the argument that cutting taxes somehow leads to lower revenue; do you have any data to support such a claim? I have a LOT of data that proves this claim to be a massive pile of bullshit. I can explain why it is as well.
How about you?" #7
Click to expand...
a) Thank you so much for an on-topic comment. It is most welcome.

b) Yes.
It's strongly influenced by the Laffer Curve.
" I can explain why it is as well. " TD
Click to expand...
Oh yes! Please do! In full detail if you please sir!
" Tax cuts NEVER lead to lower revenue. " TD
Click to expand...
Reductio ad absurdum:
if your groundless assertion was true, then no matter what the level of taxation is, it would make sense to cut even further.
Follow that to logical conclusion, and zero% taxation would be the optimal rate.

It isn't.
Therefore your premise is wrong.

In broad strokes:
- 100% taxation is slavery
- 0% taxation is anarchy (no $money to fund government)
Therefore the optimum is somewhere in between.

Check the Laffer Curve to understand better where a sensible tax rate belongs.
"I am amused that Liberals who supported the most divisive and dimwitted President in our history" #8
Click to expand...
Liberals supported President Bush (younger)?!

I did not know that.
 
archives said:
is the very Red States that elected Trump are going to be the ones that experience the consequences of his policies. Since Red States now pay less Federal Tax yet receive disproportionately more Federal aid, any cut in Federal spending matched by less Federal revenue to spend is going to effect those States the greatest. The poorest States are about to become poorer

Watch the Governors and State Legislatures of those States start to scramble in a year or two when the reality sinks in, their all going to start modeling Kansas's current difficulties
Click to expand...

Correct. THE PEOPLE can fire anyone they hired. I fail to see your point.....as there can be no objective evidence to base any opinion upon as the term in office does not start until Jan. 20, 2017.

You can hope in one hand....and defecate in the other....come back in 2 years and tell us which one was filled quicker? LMAO :) You characters have such a fine track record in making predictions.....I'd wager on hand number 2.....the one containing the crap you are attempting to peddle. :palm: On the bright side....you could apply as a reporter or editor for the NY TIMES. I don't know how long they will be in business, but..any port in the storm, beats foodstamps.

And the grinding, gnashing of teeth and HISSSSSSSSSSSing continue. Priceless.
 
archives said:
is the very Red States that elected Trump are going to be the ones that experience the consequences of his policies. Since Red States now pay less Federal Tax yet receive disproportionately more Federal aid, any cut in Federal spending matched by less Federal revenue to spend is going to effect those States the greatest. The poorest States are about to become poorer

Watch the Governors and State Legislatures of those States start to scramble in a year or two when the reality sinks in, their all going to start modeling Kansas's current difficulties
Click to expand...


i am glad that i live in california. although ca if on his hit list for voting against him...if he can hold that thought long enough...

oh well
 
Truth Detector said:
Dear idiot on steroids; the States are not beholden to the Federal Government. Tax cuts NEVER lead to lower revenue. Arguments that suggest we have a revenue problem are based on fantasy, not fact.

I am amused that Liberals who supported the most divisive and dimwitted President in our history never cared about the massive accumulation of debt he was party to but now suddenly are concerned about debt. You people really are the most dishonest hypocrites on the planet.
Click to expand...

Correct....the poor things simply can't make it on the 7 trillion in collected taxes each and every year, according to them people are starving on the streets, and crippled children can't walk because there is not enough money spent in this nation on R&D. The left will always have their hat in their hand approaching any public mike and proudly ask, "More soup please....." Spending other peoples is their base of power, as they hold it out as a carrot to those their policies have impoverished. They have no shame when it comes to the power of the purse string and its ability to purchase political power.
 
Truth Detector said:
Your sources are bullshit; but then, you stupidly believe that States need the Federal Government more than the Feds need the states. Truly a moronic argument at the least. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

Everything from school lunches to highways, you stupid fuck.

It's going to be a good chuckle to watch the red states try to fund things and balance their budgets with no tax increases.
 
domer76 said:
Everything from school lunches to highways, you stupid fuck.

It's going to be a good chuckle to watch the red states try to fund things and balance their budgets with no tax increases.
Click to expand...

7 trillion a year in revenue simply not enough? More soup please? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top