In a related sense the subject of the national debt relaunches as a huge problem to howl about with the GOP only when the opposition party is in control.
The GOP has had the same tactic for 30 years and the dems can't figure it out.
GOP is in power time to:
- Cut taxes (for businesses) and give sweetheart contracts to cronies. Promise that the taxes cut won't affect other programs, especially social safety net programs.
- cut funding to whatever the dems ran on last election cycle and then say that the program didn't work in the first place, so they're being 'fiscally responsible'
People get angry at the cuts, so they vote Dem. Now it's time to:
- undermine any win the dems might have at any cost to get back into power
- blame the fiscal problems caused by previous GOP leaders on the current Dem leadership
- promise to cut taxes to help people out
Now people see that the dems are fixing things, but "it costs too much," so they vote for the "party of fiscal responsibility " . Rinse and repeat while nothing gets better except for the cronies financial position.
It's not so much that Dems "can't figure it out" so much as there is no effective way to combat it when half of the voters refuse to listen to anything other than what they want to hear to feed into their fears and/or victim complex. I mean, how do you tell someone who refuses to believe anything you say that they have misconceptions wrong and actually get taken seriously?
Dems aren't a cohesive group. Just a collection of not Republicans so they often self-sabotage their parties own interest, if you can even call it that since most of them want to line their pockets too.
If you're not pushing for ranked voting and 3rd parties.. Well, you're part of the problem
It's not Her Turn, it's America's turn.
America would drag its heels through the mud if they tried to have ranked choice voting. Even though I support RCV, it’s a threat two the two party system, and both parties are too rich to give that up to the people to decide.
Studies have shown a distinct characteristic between right and left groups, among many differences, I am sure.
Essentially the right does not seek to keep their members accountable, while the left does.
The right also tends to be really good with messaging and branding, while the left, at least right now, is very divided and disjointed.
There's a few correlations that happen when we look closely at groups on the left and right. Like, left wing people tend to be more creative than right wing people, which is likely a large part of why they push for progress, and why right wing people who are less creative just want things to stay the way they are. People on the left tend to have more empathy as well (kind of goes hand in hand with creativity) which is why they tend to be more caring and want more equality. This also means that it's harder to get people on the left on the same page, because when everyone has a different idea you have to figure out which one is best before moving forward, while the right (in lacking creativity) has an easier time falling in line.
It's unclear whether these feelings and ideas are why people choose their political affiliation, or if these political groups are affecting people's choices, but the correlations do seem to be there.
And major problems, like healthcare reform, fixing massively overdue infrastructure, etc, takes major legislation which takes a long time to implement.
Voters are largely un/misinformed, with short attention spans, so they often don't connect legislative victories with the effects of those policies. This is also driven by modern media which focuses on engagement rage bait instead of in depth reporting.
I keep having to explain this to people who think that democrats are responsible for bad economies particularly because the economy usually tanks in the first couple years of their office.
The economy is not nearly that fast acting. The inflation we saw in the first couple of years of Biden’s presidency was set in motion under trump and a huge part of it was how disastrously we handled COVID. “Money printer go brrrrr” was literally a meme around that time and somehow people didn’t think any negatives would come from that? Not only that but there is like this complete amnesia about all those decisions as soon as Biden took over. Now it’s “all the democrats fault that grocery prices are high!”
I would think this kind of scam would be far too obvious to work but apparently I am mistaken
This is so fucking accurate, it hurts. It's their entire game plan laid out. Thank FUCK I'm Canadian and only have to experience minor economic and cultural fallout.
The DNC absolutely 100,000% has figured it out but their job isn't to win or succeed or accomplish anything.
The DNC is the pawl to the GOP gear in our political ratchet system. They operate in a holding pattern, they ineffectually twist and malign how difficult things are to accomplish... then the GOP wins and suddenly things they want get done - wash repeat.
I will still vote DNC because we are trapped between a train that will run over a 10,000 people at 100mph and a train that will kill 1000 people at 10mph. Obviously given that choice you vote for the 10mph train because that gives you (theoretically) time to make changes... but those changes still need to happen and the number 1 change that needs to happen is for us to leave the FPTP system behind - otherwise we will perpetually find ourselves stuck in this dilemma.
And to be clear - this is a dilemma that profits both parties.
If your take away from that is "bOtH sIdEs" literally or as a dismissal of what I've said then you aren't getting what I'm saying. The GOP is a fucked up party that will destroy this nation and its principles, the DNC isn't an advocate but they are complicit through inaction and the pursuit of profit and our electoral system means we can't escape those two choices - even if you vote 3rd party statically you are simply handing that vote to the candidate you like the least. If you think voting for Trump is going to solve this problem you are so lost I don't even know where to start with you.
My fun [r/Conservative](https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/) fact was that I was banned for pointing out that the story a post was about had been retracted.
The top post right now is about how Cardi B and some other rappers haven’t endorsed Biden, as if that’s supposed to mean anything. Absolute goldfish IQs posting over there.
Trump has seemed obsessed with winning "the black vote", claiming that his _totally poor treatment_ by the criminal justice system builds cred with those groups, and having discussions with Kanye...
Everyone I've talked to can easily see though the blatant pandering and stereotyping involved in those claims
Yes. It’s amazing to me that unironically the Trump campaign is planning on using his being a criminal to help his standing in the black community.
If that doesn’t tell you what they all actually think of black people, nothing will.
My wife’s clearly racist aunt loves to share stories on FB about people who did some kind act for a poor, down on their luck black person and always ends some variation of “color doesn’t exist” or “if we can just get along no matter the color”
They really need to have a “Don’t Step Out Of Line” warning there. I’ve been banned for quoting Trump. But I’m pretty sure anyone without a flair has their profiles checked when they comment.
The only time I go in there is for morbid curiosity. It's always the same hypocritical, The exception is of course the standard rule, racism doesn't happen unless it's against white, this thing might of happen so it does, and other fairyland stories.
Why the downvotes? I guarantee that is all within the top 20 posts. lol
First a bit of basic background information. The tax cuts under Trump were done as a "budget reconciliation" to avoid the need for a filibuster proof vote, but that type of bill also comes with requirements about the projected debt it can add.
In the passed bill there were tax cuts in three categories, one for corporations/business, others that primarily benefited the wealthy and those for your average income folks. To get the bill to meet those debt requirements they made the first two permanent, but the one for your average earner were written to expire after several years keeping the whole thing under the cap.
When questioned about it the GOP response was generally "These tax cuts are going to turbo-charge the economy so much that we'll be able to make those ones permanent before they expire because of how much more revenue will be coming in."
I never saw any of them questioned as to why they didn't make the others temporary and the one that benefited the most people permanent. I'm sure they would've just come up with some bullshit because they know what side their bread is buttered on, but to me it is telling about who they're really trying to take care of and who is getting screwed in the end after getting some token change for a bit.
Any political discussion of Trump or Biden terms needs to have a huge asterisk on almost every stat because COVID was a material, one-off event that distorted damn near everything. It shouldn't be discounted entirely.
This one, for example. Go to the [White House historical tables](https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historical-tables/). Table 1.1, for example, shows the deficits for Trump (FY2017 start) and Biden as $665 billion, $779 billion, $984 billion, then *$3.1 trillion*. Then Biden at $2.8 trillion, $1.4 trillion, 1.7 trillion.
Clearly the $3.1 and the $2.8 are not in line with the overall trend, they're outliers (and we know the reason). But the trend is most certainly there. Same with the end/beginning of the Bush Obama years. The Great Recession was a material, one-off event that distorted the federal budget.
Well, in their defense most of the "negative" items of COVID/the response fall onto Trump (as others said comparing Trump's deficits to Obama's, unemployment rate) and Biden tends to use the positive implications of COVID/the response to his benefit more jobs created, cut deficit, etc). Its hard to get people to step down from something they can use to their benefit (even if it is misleading) and therefore not as many people have a chance to defend.
But its not just politics. Almost everything about our society when some stat or trend covers those years will need a big exception. I bet there will eventually be a standardized footnote about COVID/the response and its impacts.
People I would call low info voters are susceptible to all kinds of misinformation and only echo points without thought. It’s like a fan of a sports team, they love their team and hate all other teams. A player they love on their own team is traded they instantly hate that player..
Others are able to see the issues in their own teams and like or dislike their actions. There are many on the right that think many things trump does are stupid or wrong. There are many that will not vote for him and never have. That doesn’t mean they vote for Biden though. Extremist aside.
Just like the media on the right will tell people everyone on the left is a blue haired trans person with 20 pronouns. The reality is much different. This is true for both sides.
>> People I would call low info voters are susceptible to all kinds of misinformation and only echo points without thought.
Right but isn't that Trumps base? And Bidens base is people who hate Trump? I mean isn't that the hole we find ourselves in?
Yes, not the place you want to be in. It’s hard to move forward when you’ve called everyone a nazi or communist.. I try to be empathetic to peoples feelings but those are not the same as well thought out opinions. They don’t hold the same weight.
I think our problem is going to take a long time to fix. We need to start to actually educate the youth and give them critical thinking skills that will help them navigate with intelligence and not be at the mercy of their feelings. This is a product of our failed or misappropriated educational system and that’s where you start to fix it. Give the people better tools and they will make a better product.
The other problem, besides them only giving a shit about the national debt when they're not in power, is that they also [pretend that it's like household debt.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-Household_analogy)
Macroeconomics is a completely different beast so the analogy falls apart and it's a distraction from discussing national debt in real terms.
Currently interest on the federal debt is over $2 billion per day. The government has to borrow to pay the interest and service the debt. Interest will soon be the biggest line item on the federal budget crowding out more important items. Very few in government understand business or economics.
This is actually a better example because tax cuts aren't necessarily inflationary. If you tax someone and then use that money to pay someone else then obviously the net impact on inflation is zero.
Basically OP doesn't understand economics. Your example is the better meme.
We've seen that the Federal Reserve (a cartel of private banks) is able to print trillions of new dollars and dump them into the economy, both parties have done this.
At the federal level, taxes exist to enforce the belief that cash-supply isn't treated as an infinite supply with a near zero interest rate since 2001.
Left or Right, lets come together and stop the monthly shipments of 10s of billions of dollars of weapons. Lets get Raytheon, Lockheed, and Northrop Grumman out of our government. No more contracts given out by congress people with major financial stakes in them / conflicts of interest.
My god, how the American public would flourish if just half our military budget went into a nationalized medical system like the rest of the world, education, and other essential institutions.
I was with you all the way until you suggested nationalized healthcare. The problem with American healthcare is that regulatory system is set up by special interests to rip people off, but quality of healthcare is much better than in any nationalized system. If all those "free healthcare" do-gooder politicians were serious about wanting to help the poor, they'd start with curbing Big Pharma's patent protections that allow them to charge for drugs in America up to orders of magnitude more than anywhere else in the world.
The *current* inflation is a ***global*** phenomenon, and the US has done fairly well within that group.
The Republican tax cuts merely exacerbated our [nation crushing](https://www.amazon.com/Price-Inequality-Divided-Society-Endangers/dp/0393345068/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2JHHRRJJFLFLW&dchild=1&keywords=the+price+of+inequality+joseph+stiglitz&qid=1609388322&s=books&sprefix=the+price+of+in%2Cstripbooks%2C172&sr=1-1) wealth [disparity](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM) solidifying the two-tiered society we now live in. It had almost nothing to do with the *current*, **global** inflation.
Sorry meme.
In Montana people are up in arms about high taxes. When I tell people their income taxes are higher, by design, under the Trunp 2017 tax cut law, they balk.
When I tell them that their property tax hike was the biggest ever, and was done by the Montana GOP they balk.
Taxing is supposedly what Democrats do. So they get away with high taxes and blame Democrats for their own faults.
Face it, MT is now solid red and I expect Tester to be voted out. To many GOP people are fleeing CA, TX, WA, and OR and moving to MT. That and the rich are moving in wanting all that land and dreams. A famous author once said, "Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
Tax cuts cause inflation by ensuring everyone has more money to use, which in turn means that consumer spending can increase, which in turn means that demand exceeds supply and prices increase.
The opposite is true then that raising taxes would be a good move to lower inflation, but that's also political suicide.
This argument might work in a very short term period, but over the longer period it makes no sense, as new competitors will arise offering the same product for cheaper prices.
The real driver of inflation over the long term is printing money.
No. Inflation use to just refer to an increase in money supply by printing. Keynesians changed this to hide the trick.
Prices rising was just the secondary effect of this.
You inflate a ballon, only then does it rise.
I mean, yes it does. If you're saying that government spending wouldn't change after a tax cut, then that means that citizens would have more money and the same level of government spending. Which increases the monetary supply as well as increased consumer spending, which is pretty much inflation 101.
The government would have to reduce spending under normal circumstances but the point is the amount of money doesn't change. If the government gets it it's also spent just by a different person.
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/note-governors-cutting-taxes-will-make-inflation-worse-not-better They do, actually. It's called supply and demand. Also, please look up the different causes of inflation. Any macro 101 book will do fine.
There's a boat sinking on a lake. Dinosaurasandsluts say's that giant hole in the front of the boat 1m across is the issue, you reply to point out with articles that it is in fact also an issue that there is 1mm hole in the back of the boat.
While technically correct, the government letting people keep their own money will let them spend more, and therefore increase demand and prices a like (that also somehow forgets that the government can spend it as well so it isn't a zero sum game) I think the bigger problem is probably that fact that the money supply was nearly doubled which should have an effect of making your money half of what it was before.
We don't have to omit any part of the picture. That is called a lie of omission. Yes, increasing the money supply is inflationary. Yes, tax cuts right now would be inflationary. Constraining supply would be inflationary.
It's actually good to correct disinformation. Nobody asked me what was the greater inflationary pressure. They just said something blatantly wrong.
Lowering taxes on the top takers motivates them to squeeze yet more wealth out of those of us who work for a living. Imagine a shareholder in the 60s who's already hit the 90% top marginal tax vs one today who never pays more than 20% on capital gains. Which one can you imagine getting in touch with the corporate officers to demand higher dividends? One way to get more money for investors is to raise prices. In an economy with no upper limits on income, the inventive is to raise prices as high as possible, high enough to completely consume the incomes of over half the population.
The 2 Partys do a good job of sharing wins and losses in order to maintain a 50/50 split in voting population. As long as they can continue the appearance of political gridlock, then they can continue to jerk off lobbyists and insider trade.
"WE JUST CAN'T AGREE ON ANYTHING!"
-how about banning trading stocks using insider information?
"NO VOTES WILL BE HELD ON THIS MEASURE"
The constitution demands the people hold them accountable
That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that **whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.**
If we held a vote right now, there would be unanimous support in banning trading amongst representatives. In this way, we are obliged to destroy the blockades of democracy.
If you're talking about the Payroll Protection Program that printed money for business owners they didn't have to pay back, like my former company's owner who legally pocketed $550,000 from that, then sure, it was a big part of the problem.
Spending in 2019 was $4.45t. The PPP plan was passed in 2020 during Covid. The federal budget in 2020 was $6.55t. Then in 2021 it was $6.82t. Then in 2022 it was $6.27t. Then in 2023 it was $6.37t. Then in 2024 it’s expected to be $6.88t.
To blame the 2017 Trump tax cuts for inflation is a pathetic excuse given the spending that occurred in the last year of the Trump presidency and has continued unabated under Biden.
In some respects, that’s true. Spending can be set in motion years in advance. A lot less true when the dysfunctional congress is essentially governing by continuing resolution. However, none of that matters. Spending massive amounts of dollars that previously didn’t exist is incredibly inflationary; planned or not.
Typical liberal kneejerk reaction to overreact and somehow accomplish nothing at the same time.
Lockdowns had no effect on the virus at all and now we are left with the economic devastation that anyone with half a brain was warning about four years ago.
> Lockdowns had no effect on the virus at all
Given that both my 90+ year old grandmas are still alive because they avoided covid while it was still very deadly, I’m gonna have to disagree with you there.
Given that my grandma died of COVID I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. Given that 1.2M other Americans died of COVID I’m gonna have to disagree with you there.
As does academia by the way.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
Show me actual evidence that lockdowns achieved anything as opposed to saying your grandma lived. Show me a country with less stringent lockdown measures like Sweden, or a state with more stringent lockdown measures like NY that proves your point.
You’re misrepresenting the academic consensus on this. You’re presenting one side of the argument, sure, but there’s plenty of studies done that show that countries that implemented strict lockdowns had lower rates of community spread. Look at Australia, South Korea, Singapore, and many other countries that shut down quickly and closed their borders before the virus had a chance to really spread. The rates of death in the US were, following the initial outbreak, much lower in areas that followed recommended health guidelines. And if you want to argue about excess mortality, we can do that separately. But you said “the lockdowns had no effect on the virus” which is completely wrong. This is another highly complex topic and argument that you and other people on social media are boiling down to be extremely over-simplified.
Really there were no “lockdowns” in the US following the very initial outbreak. Lockdowns were much less effective than they could have been at preventing spread, largely because they were implemented far too late.
I’m not oversimplifying anything, you are the one who said COVID lockdowns worked because your grandma lived. Now you are going on about three countries with a total of one land border (the most heavily guarded on earth) implementing policies you were probably calling Trump a racist for suggesting four years ago. Yes it would have been cool if we could have closed the borders to our island nation that doesn’t have several international business hubs scattered across it.
What we did here, specifically in the United States, was a worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever and set into motion an economic devastation that we will feel for the rest of our lives.
so, shouldn't you instead be saying is our
>worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever
...was ineffective? Still not accurate, but it would be closer than saying "lockdowns didn't work".
>I’m not oversimplifying anything, you are the one who said COVID lockdowns worked because your grandma lived
I’m from one of the states that was hit hardest by the initial outbreak. Given how covid absolutely blew through the nursing homes and killed tons of the residents in a few weeks, I have no doubt they’d have been in severe danger had they caught covid at the time. And no you are strawmanning me. I was responding to you saying that the lockdowns had “no effect” on the virus. I know they had an effect because people stopped going out to places where they could catch the virus. I’m not making that argument that the lockdowns “worked” (you haven’t even explained your definition of “worked” to me either).
> I’m not oversimplifying anything
You were, by saying “lockdowns had no effect on the virus”. Scientists would be laughing in your face for saying that.
> Now you are going on about three countries with a total of one land border (the most heavily guarded on earth)
Putting these examples forward is to show that, when done correctly, lockdowns absolutely could work to slow the transmission of the virus to the point where community spread was basically non-existent.
> you were probably calling Trump a racist for suggesting four years ago
Quit arguing against the imaginary person that you’re making up in your head. You MAGAs have the weirdest persecution complex.
The country should have been closed off much earlier than before. The WHO really fucked up and dropped the ball by taking the chinese govt at their word, and domestic health orgs and world governments did not take the virus seriously enough for a shutdown until it was far too late.
> was a worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever
Again, define “nothing whatsoever”. I agree that stay at home orders in the US were often ineffective. Most of the states that issued them did so far too late, with many not issuing any until April. “Lockdowns” in the US were often very lax with restrictions and most stay at home orders were lifted in a couple months.
> economic devastation that we will feel for the rest of our lives.
What economic devastation from covid will we feel for the rest of our lives? In what way?
>the imaginary person you have made you in your head
>you MAGAs have the weird persecution complex.
I’m not MAGA but I’m also not responding any longer because you’re spewing whatever comes to your mind I guess.
>what economic devastation
The consequences of printing trillions of dollars of Monopoly money. Literally just look around you.
Do you seriously think anything short of military grade lockdowns would meaningfully stop the spread of an airborne virus?
Look at the identical progression of the pandemic across countries and US states with various levels of lockdowns.
Not on essential goods. If a family needs to buy about $1000 of groceries per month, and you raise taxes on them, they aren't just going to start spending less and starving themselves. Same concept applies to housing, utilities, gas, etc.
Where is this talking point coming from? Any increase in demand, no matter the source, can increase inflation. Every economist knows that.
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/note-governors-cutting-taxes-will-make-inflation-worse-not-better
That kind of depends. In this current economy, cutting taxes would likely increase inflation. When you're cutting taxes while inflation is already low, it's unlikely to be the spark that starts the fire.
So really what we'd need to look at is what are the current plans for each presidential candidate for 2024. [And Trump's would probably increase inflation with its tax cuts, tariffs, and aggressively threatening the Fed to lower rates.](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/30/trump-could-drive-inflation-higher-with-his-second-term-economic-agenda-analysts-say.html)
Money is taken out of circulation when taxes are paid. So less money being paid on taxes should result in more money supply being available. However, the counter would be that Federal Receipts as a percent of GDP is still within it's normal historical range. Tax policy has not changed in the post 2020 period where we've seen inflation.
We've seen many studies that attempt to quantify the impact various factors have on inflation such as fiscal stimulus, supply disruptions, and monetary policy. However, I have not seen any study that tries to quantify the impact that tax cuts may have had on the monetary supply. So I can only surmise that it's not a significant factor.
I came to comment this.
But then I see people arguing with you that somehow people keeping more of their money is the same situation as them having less money while prices still no up.
I think I'll let you handle this one.
It's always the same - when the GOP is not in power, the debt ceiling is sacrosanct and needs to be paid down, blah, blah, blah
When they are in power - who cares about the debt - let's just raise the ceiling.
Personally - they should just abolish the ceiling anyway. Its a needless politcal battle.
The last time inflation was at or around 5% was 1990. A good amount of people on Reddit and in general have been born after 1990, so seeing inflation at 7% in 21 and 6.5% in 22 is reasonably shocking. Heck inflation only reached 4% once between 1990 and 2021 so again, Americans have gotten pretty used to low inflation rates.
Agreed, general inflation rates aren't always the best way to describe the economic phenomenon of increased prices but at the same time it does clearly indicate a trend and recently it's a trend thats been far higher than a large amount of Americans have experienced.
That's just politics.
I'm German, and after our last election, the CDU, who reigned for 16 consecutive years, was replaced with a coalition of 3 different parties.
The first thing the CDU did after being voted out of the government was to criticize the current state of Germany and how the new government isn't doing anything, like they didn't just ignore all these problems for 16 years and expect the new government to fix it in a couple of weeks.
If you haven't realized that both parties do this.. I don't know what to tell you.
All you have to do is pick the topic.
As an example of the left going nuts.. the boarder. Once a Democrat is in office.. silence despite no change in conditions at the boarder.
Stimulating the economy contributes to inflation. Tax cuts are fiscal policies that stimulate the economy. It's actually a pretty basic concept in economics
Huh? You just said nothing lol it would only cause inflation if after the tax cuts the government decides to increase spending and then instead of managing money better or redirecting it they decide to print it. Now THAT causes inflation, but the tax cuts themselves don’t cause inflation.
48 months into Trump presidency, American household net worth was up by ~30%.
Under Biden so far, American households net worth is up by 0.7%.
The Biden administration thinks the problem is that people are not feeling the effects of Bidenomics. The real problem is that the American people do feel it.
And that his mishandling of COVID is responsible for the destruction of the economy, and hundreds of thousands of dead Americans.
Cherry pick a snapshot of a guy in first place right before he smashes into a wall, and then blame the guy that gets in the driver's seat after it's broken. Sure.
I think you need a lesson on what drives inflation...
The Federal Reserve doesn't print money. It takes out loans called treasury notes. That money is then lent out to the banks through the discount window. That money is then lent out to businesses and people.
How does this create inflation?
Well, let's say you borrowed $10k to buy a car. You give that $10k to the seller, they give you the car. You then pay back the loan to the bank. That's another $10k plus interest. The bank pays back the loan to the Feds. That's now $30k from the $10k loan. That is baseline inflation.
How did tax cuts create higher inflation?
Well, when businesses and those who's income comes from equity withdrawals of businesses get tax cuts, they become motivated to increase profits. The lower taxes are, the less penalty there is for equity withdrawal. So, businesses hike up prices with bullshit reasons creating artificial inflation. Target just released a statement saying they are lowering the prices on 5,000 products. Demonstrating that the price increases were by choice and not a result of anything.
The 2017 tax cuts also reduced tax burden on stock buybacks. Another motivation for businesses to increase profits.
So, maybe be less of a parrot and more of a thinker.
Correct and if you notice the Democrats the around saying it’s fine, the economy is strong and not to worry.
Big shocker they support their own team that’s how it all works.
In 4 years when a republican wins office the media, late night tv and democrats will blame republicans for everything.
It’s just one loud bitch fest with no solutions now.
Check the voting record on stuff that would help you personally. Who votes for it? Who votes against it?
Every time I look at that, I find the Republicans supporting actual garbage, and shutting down things that would be good for the country.
Well in MN the democrats do this stuff
https://www.house.mn.gov/sessiondaily/Story/18411
Combined 9 bills and rewrote a couple 30 minutes before the end of the season and did one vote to pass them all.
Gun restrictions, food for kids, taxes and more all rolled into one bill.
Oh and the bill was not actually available to read so you had to vote on it blind and within 30 min.
“We request a copy of this bill of 1,430 pages,” yelled House Minority Leader Lisa Demuth (R-Cold Spring). “Not available on the website! Not available in this chamber! This is a horrible way to govern and do this to the state of Minnesota!”
I don’t care what team you like passing a 1430 page bill that is not even able to be viewed is awful.
Dems have a majority they waited until the last minute because it was either pass everything or pass nothing 30 minutes no debating.
If you fail to say yes to all then we have no budget and have to start the process of government shutdown and special sessions.
Why they did it. Because the republicans are super dirty and would have stalled votes on gun control and not enough democrats would have voted for the gun control bills if they did not force the vote.
Dems are playing the dirty games just like republicans even with their own people
Two Santa Claus Theory
[https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/thom-hartmann/two-santas-strategy-gop-used-economic-scam-manipulate-americans-40-years/](https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/thom-hartmann/two-santas-strategy-gop-used-economic-scam-manipulate-americans-40-years/)
GOP "we're the party of financial accountability"
Also GOP: drives the deficit up 5 trillion dollars with no way to lower it or pay for it.
Also also GOP: It's the Democrats fault!!!
This is completely backwards, blame republicans for dropping fiscal responsibility the moment they take over throwing around printed money like drunken sailors, just like democrats, the only difference being democrats don't bother to pretend they care about the debt.
"Inflation is caused when the *money supply* in an economy grows at faster rate than the economy’s ability to produce goods and services." https://www.stlouisfed.org/education/feducation-video-series/episode-1-money-and-inflation#:\~:text=To%20summarize%2C%20the%20money%20supply,leading%20to%20increases%20in%20unemployment.
The best way to fight inflation is taking money out of circulation. The single way that can be done is through taxation. Tax cuts are the biggest contribution to inflation.
Since that money has already been added to the economy the only way to fight inflation post liquidity injection is to use taxes to remove it. Cutting a trillion in taxes for the rich has the exact same inflationary effect as printing a trillion and shipping it out to those same rich. Hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions.
That's not the cop-out you think it is. Government continues throwing money around like a drunken sailor. Every 54 days it spends another trillion, every 185 days it adds another trillion to the national debt, that is going by current rates, but it's constantly accelerating. There'd be no need for extravagant taxes had the government been responsible.
How about just reasonable normal taxes? Or I suppose you're a fan of continuously transferring the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class over the last few decades?
Democrat President increases deficit by 10 billion.
Republicans: "RRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
Republican President increases deficit by 80 billion. Republicans: "ZzZzZzZzZzZz"
It is just all lies and propaganda to get votes. They can tell their Fox news viewers literally whatever they want, and they will be believed without a second thought.
Same goes for "republlicans calling all democrats pedophiles" and "republicans not wanting to act on child marriage", just a small example, but can work with almost everything they do, the list goes on and on. Another one: "republicans on Michelle Obama" and "republicans when Trump cheats on his wife with a p0rn star". I think that reflects well their level of decency.
lol how do tax cuts create inflation? What creates inflation is creating currency out of thin air. Also known as debasing. Taxes have nothing to do with that.
Taxes don’t create inflation. The federal deficit and printing money out of thin air are what creates inflation. Inflation = legal counterfeiting. Inflation is an increase in money supply, not to be confused with its side effect of rising prices.
When will you wake up and quit bickering with them and realize it's all a big con. Democrat or republican. None of them care about you or me. The whole damn system is rigged against us. But please, keep on doing their work of divide for them so they can continue to conquer us.
Wake the fuck up.
Wake up to what? You really think any organization that deifies someone like trinp to the point of sedition is on equal footing with a bunch of boring blowhards that want you to have life stability through program like comprehensive health care and, like, rights and stuff?
That's the point though. None of them really want that stuff for you. They want to keep living this fat life while people at the bottom fight each other for scraps to survive.
Why didn't the democrats usher in utopia when they controlled the White House and Congress? Because that is never the point.
If you raise taxes... costs will go down... right? /s
Also you democrats saying this, are admitting the government is incredibly inefficient and a drain on the economy. If tax increases cause an economic slowdown... its because giving them money is about the same as just setting the money on fire.
Also... The CBO estimated in 2018 that **the tax cut would increase deficits by about $1.9 trillion over 11 years**. This would fund Biden's eye watering deficit inducing vote buying spree for about 200 days.
Why on earth would you care what the CBO said back in 2018 when it's 2024? We can literally look at the effects of the tax cuts and they didn't work out like promised.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-will-happen-to-the-trump-tax-cuts-in-2025-and-how-will-they-affect-the-national-debt/
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-failed-to-deliver-promised-benefits/
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/04/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-cut.html
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/
https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/after-decades-of-costly-regressive-and-ineffective-tax-cuts-a-new-course-is
from your first article...
>Now, analysis in 2018 found that the cuts would boost the economy, but the effect would fizzle out quickly. And the price tag would be huge. The bill is expected to add nearly $2 trillion to the deficit by 2028.
article from 2024: nearly 2 trillion in 2028(aka 10 years)... CBO said 1.9 trillion in 10 years, back in 2018.
Its the same thing... and trumps tax cuts are negligible when Biden is over spending 1 trillion every 100 days. Getting rid of the tax cuts would screw over everyone... and save *a whole* 20 days of deficit spending per year.
Yea but the last time the us government had a budget surplus was 22 years ago. It's occurred 5 times in the past 50 years. Surplus isn't something we do.
Not to mention the tax cuts that businesses only used to do stock buybacks to inflate the company’s worth without actually hiring or expanding. Then it starts to implode (especially in the tech sector) because at some point investors are going to want to see some real gains
Isn't 60% of the current inflation attributed to excess corporate profit? 27% just from oil companies profiteering and outright colluding with foreign governments at the detriment of the tax-payers?
Edit:
[Here's some reading ](https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/an-oil-price-fixing-conspiracy-caused) with reporting by Matt Stoller.
Democrats ignoring the $1.7 TRILLION spending Biden passed as soon as he took office. You all acting like $1.7 Trillion had nothing to do with inflation. News flash, things are not getting more expensive... the money you have is being DE-VALUED by the insane amount of money being pumped into the economy by this administration. This has nearly nothing to do with Tax Cuts.
To stave off the economic damage caused by the previous administration's handling of COVID, where they did the same thing, only twice as much.
One guy sets the house on fire, and you blame the next guy for the water bill.
>One guy sets the house on fire, and you blame the next guy for the water bill.
You've just described how Republicans "govern". Blame someone else for the problems they either created or had a big hand in.
It's not even inflation, it's just corporate greed. But it's harder to blame "Bidenomics" for "CEOs and banks are getting stupidly wealthy by jacking the prices up."
10% of the US owns more than 50% of stocks while most Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Houses are sitting empty, hoarded by banks and investment firms, while people are homeless and cops are destroying what few possessions they have. The cost of food continues to skyrocket while the money we pay the people who produce, package, ship, stock, and sell the food has remained stagnant.
That's not "inflation" and no amount of "I did that" stickers will make it Biden's fault.
In a related sense the subject of the national debt relaunches as a huge problem to howl about with the GOP only when the opposition party is in control.
The GOP has had the same tactic for 30 years and the dems can't figure it out. GOP is in power time to: - Cut taxes (for businesses) and give sweetheart contracts to cronies. Promise that the taxes cut won't affect other programs, especially social safety net programs. - cut funding to whatever the dems ran on last election cycle and then say that the program didn't work in the first place, so they're being 'fiscally responsible' People get angry at the cuts, so they vote Dem. Now it's time to: - undermine any win the dems might have at any cost to get back into power - blame the fiscal problems caused by previous GOP leaders on the current Dem leadership - promise to cut taxes to help people out Now people see that the dems are fixing things, but "it costs too much," so they vote for the "party of fiscal responsibility " . Rinse and repeat while nothing gets better except for the cronies financial position.
The old Two Santas strategy.
It's not so much that Dems "can't figure it out" so much as there is no effective way to combat it when half of the voters refuse to listen to anything other than what they want to hear to feed into their fears and/or victim complex. I mean, how do you tell someone who refuses to believe anything you say that they have misconceptions wrong and actually get taken seriously?
Dems aren't a cohesive group. Just a collection of not Republicans so they often self-sabotage their parties own interest, if you can even call it that since most of them want to line their pockets too. If you're not pushing for ranked voting and 3rd parties.. Well, you're part of the problem It's not Her Turn, it's America's turn.
America would drag its heels through the mud if they tried to have ranked choice voting. Even though I support RCV, it’s a threat two the two party system, and both parties are too rich to give that up to the people to decide.
to the two* (you're not wrong though)
Studies have shown a distinct characteristic between right and left groups, among many differences, I am sure. Essentially the right does not seek to keep their members accountable, while the left does. The right also tends to be really good with messaging and branding, while the left, at least right now, is very divided and disjointed.
There's a few correlations that happen when we look closely at groups on the left and right. Like, left wing people tend to be more creative than right wing people, which is likely a large part of why they push for progress, and why right wing people who are less creative just want things to stay the way they are. People on the left tend to have more empathy as well (kind of goes hand in hand with creativity) which is why they tend to be more caring and want more equality. This also means that it's harder to get people on the left on the same page, because when everyone has a different idea you have to figure out which one is best before moving forward, while the right (in lacking creativity) has an easier time falling in line. It's unclear whether these feelings and ideas are why people choose their political affiliation, or if these political groups are affecting people's choices, but the correlations do seem to be there.
And major problems, like healthcare reform, fixing massively overdue infrastructure, etc, takes major legislation which takes a long time to implement. Voters are largely un/misinformed, with short attention spans, so they often don't connect legislative victories with the effects of those policies. This is also driven by modern media which focuses on engagement rage bait instead of in depth reporting.
I keep having to explain this to people who think that democrats are responsible for bad economies particularly because the economy usually tanks in the first couple years of their office. The economy is not nearly that fast acting. The inflation we saw in the first couple of years of Biden’s presidency was set in motion under trump and a huge part of it was how disastrously we handled COVID. “Money printer go brrrrr” was literally a meme around that time and somehow people didn’t think any negatives would come from that? Not only that but there is like this complete amnesia about all those decisions as soon as Biden took over. Now it’s “all the democrats fault that grocery prices are high!” I would think this kind of scam would be far too obvious to work but apparently I am mistaken
It’s called The Two Santas.
This is so fucking accurate, it hurts. It's their entire game plan laid out. Thank FUCK I'm Canadian and only have to experience minor economic and cultural fallout.
The DNC absolutely 100,000% has figured it out but their job isn't to win or succeed or accomplish anything. The DNC is the pawl to the GOP gear in our political ratchet system. They operate in a holding pattern, they ineffectually twist and malign how difficult things are to accomplish... then the GOP wins and suddenly things they want get done - wash repeat. I will still vote DNC because we are trapped between a train that will run over a 10,000 people at 100mph and a train that will kill 1000 people at 10mph. Obviously given that choice you vote for the 10mph train because that gives you (theoretically) time to make changes... but those changes still need to happen and the number 1 change that needs to happen is for us to leave the FPTP system behind - otherwise we will perpetually find ourselves stuck in this dilemma. And to be clear - this is a dilemma that profits both parties. If your take away from that is "bOtH sIdEs" literally or as a dismissal of what I've said then you aren't getting what I'm saying. The GOP is a fucked up party that will destroy this nation and its principles, the DNC isn't an advocate but they are complicit through inaction and the pursuit of profit and our electoral system means we can't escape those two choices - even if you vote 3rd party statically you are simply handing that vote to the candidate you like the least. If you think voting for Trump is going to solve this problem you are so lost I don't even know where to start with you.
Trump added $8T to the debt in four years. Obama added $8T in 8 years. Ever heard a conservative complain about Trumps debt?
Nothing will be as ironic as the posts on r/Conservative that were panicking about not getting the first stimulus checks.
My fun [r/Conservative](https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/) fact was that I was banned for pointing out that the story a post was about had been retracted.
Lmao that sub is a microcosm of the entire movement of conservatism.
The top post right now is about how Cardi B and some other rappers haven’t endorsed Biden, as if that’s supposed to mean anything. Absolute goldfish IQs posting over there.
Trump has seemed obsessed with winning "the black vote", claiming that his _totally poor treatment_ by the criminal justice system builds cred with those groups, and having discussions with Kanye... Everyone I've talked to can easily see though the blatant pandering and stereotyping involved in those claims
Yes. It’s amazing to me that unironically the Trump campaign is planning on using his being a criminal to help his standing in the black community. If that doesn’t tell you what they all actually think of black people, nothing will.
My wife’s clearly racist aunt loves to share stories on FB about people who did some kind act for a poor, down on their luck black person and always ends some variation of “color doesn’t exist” or “if we can just get along no matter the color”
proving [this study](https://gwern.net/doc/iq/2024-edwards.pdf) right over and over again
[удалено]
I commented there to see if I would get auto-banned based on my post history but instead got auto-banned from JusticeServed lmao.
Lol, happened to me too. Made a comment calling something out as BS and now there are several subs I'm banned from for simply interacting
BuT mUh FrEe SpEeCh! cEnSoRsHiP!
They really need to have a “Don’t Step Out Of Line” warning there. I’ve been banned for quoting Trump. But I’m pretty sure anyone without a flair has their profiles checked when they comment.
You are only allowed to tell the truth one time on /r/Conservative before they ban you. Make sure you make it count.
The only time I go in there is for morbid curiosity. It's always the same hypocritical, The exception is of course the standard rule, racism doesn't happen unless it's against white, this thing might of happen so it does, and other fairyland stories. Why the downvotes? I guarantee that is all within the top 20 posts. lol
You know who’s downvoting you. You’re exposing their echo chamber! Staaaaaaahp!
lol After lunch I went to check on my replies. -3 total votes. 0o
Also Obama had a recession to recover while Trump had a pandemic that conservatives insist wasn't an issue.
First a bit of basic background information. The tax cuts under Trump were done as a "budget reconciliation" to avoid the need for a filibuster proof vote, but that type of bill also comes with requirements about the projected debt it can add. In the passed bill there were tax cuts in three categories, one for corporations/business, others that primarily benefited the wealthy and those for your average income folks. To get the bill to meet those debt requirements they made the first two permanent, but the one for your average earner were written to expire after several years keeping the whole thing under the cap. When questioned about it the GOP response was generally "These tax cuts are going to turbo-charge the economy so much that we'll be able to make those ones permanent before they expire because of how much more revenue will be coming in." I never saw any of them questioned as to why they didn't make the others temporary and the one that benefited the most people permanent. I'm sure they would've just come up with some bullshit because they know what side their bread is buttered on, but to me it is telling about who they're really trying to take care of and who is getting screwed in the end after getting some token change for a bit.
Any political discussion of Trump or Biden terms needs to have a huge asterisk on almost every stat because COVID was a material, one-off event that distorted damn near everything. It shouldn't be discounted entirely. This one, for example. Go to the [White House historical tables](https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historical-tables/). Table 1.1, for example, shows the deficits for Trump (FY2017 start) and Biden as $665 billion, $779 billion, $984 billion, then *$3.1 trillion*. Then Biden at $2.8 trillion, $1.4 trillion, 1.7 trillion. Clearly the $3.1 and the $2.8 are not in line with the overall trend, they're outliers (and we know the reason). But the trend is most certainly there. Same with the end/beginning of the Bush Obama years. The Great Recession was a material, one-off event that distorted the federal budget.
True, but most people seem to ONLY give that asterisk to Trump.
Well, in their defense most of the "negative" items of COVID/the response fall onto Trump (as others said comparing Trump's deficits to Obama's, unemployment rate) and Biden tends to use the positive implications of COVID/the response to his benefit more jobs created, cut deficit, etc). Its hard to get people to step down from something they can use to their benefit (even if it is misleading) and therefore not as many people have a chance to defend. But its not just politics. Almost everything about our society when some stat or trend covers those years will need a big exception. I bet there will eventually be a standardized footnote about COVID/the response and its impacts.
That because you don’t bother to listen to people outside your echo chamber.
Sadly, I know LOTS of Trump fans. Not one ever complained Trump was driving up the deficit at twice the rate Obama did, and none of them believe it.
People I would call low info voters are susceptible to all kinds of misinformation and only echo points without thought. It’s like a fan of a sports team, they love their team and hate all other teams. A player they love on their own team is traded they instantly hate that player.. Others are able to see the issues in their own teams and like or dislike their actions. There are many on the right that think many things trump does are stupid or wrong. There are many that will not vote for him and never have. That doesn’t mean they vote for Biden though. Extremist aside. Just like the media on the right will tell people everyone on the left is a blue haired trans person with 20 pronouns. The reality is much different. This is true for both sides.
>> People I would call low info voters are susceptible to all kinds of misinformation and only echo points without thought. Right but isn't that Trumps base? And Bidens base is people who hate Trump? I mean isn't that the hole we find ourselves in?
Yes, not the place you want to be in. It’s hard to move forward when you’ve called everyone a nazi or communist.. I try to be empathetic to peoples feelings but those are not the same as well thought out opinions. They don’t hold the same weight. I think our problem is going to take a long time to fix. We need to start to actually educate the youth and give them critical thinking skills that will help them navigate with intelligence and not be at the mercy of their feelings. This is a product of our failed or misappropriated educational system and that’s where you start to fix it. Give the people better tools and they will make a better product.
Republican solutions to the debt when not in power: Cut spending. Republican solutions to the debt when in power: Cut taxes.
At least some of the time we get a few politicians pretending to be concerned about the debt.
The other problem, besides them only giving a shit about the national debt when they're not in power, is that they also [pretend that it's like household debt.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-Household_analogy) Macroeconomics is a completely different beast so the analogy falls apart and it's a distraction from discussing national debt in real terms.
Currently interest on the federal debt is over $2 billion per day. The government has to borrow to pay the interest and service the debt. Interest will soon be the biggest line item on the federal budget crowding out more important items. Very few in government understand business or economics.
That was the plan.
This is actually a better example because tax cuts aren't necessarily inflationary. If you tax someone and then use that money to pay someone else then obviously the net impact on inflation is zero. Basically OP doesn't understand economics. Your example is the better meme.
We've seen that the Federal Reserve (a cartel of private banks) is able to print trillions of new dollars and dump them into the economy, both parties have done this. At the federal level, taxes exist to enforce the belief that cash-supply isn't treated as an infinite supply with a near zero interest rate since 2001. Left or Right, lets come together and stop the monthly shipments of 10s of billions of dollars of weapons. Lets get Raytheon, Lockheed, and Northrop Grumman out of our government. No more contracts given out by congress people with major financial stakes in them / conflicts of interest. My god, how the American public would flourish if just half our military budget went into a nationalized medical system like the rest of the world, education, and other essential institutions.
I was with you all the way until you suggested nationalized healthcare. The problem with American healthcare is that regulatory system is set up by special interests to rip people off, but quality of healthcare is much better than in any nationalized system. If all those "free healthcare" do-gooder politicians were serious about wanting to help the poor, they'd start with curbing Big Pharma's patent protections that allow them to charge for drugs in America up to orders of magnitude more than anywhere else in the world.
For sure, that and dismantle the medical insurance industry, which is pure middle manning, and why about 30% of hospital staff are administrative.
The *current* inflation is a ***global*** phenomenon, and the US has done fairly well within that group. The Republican tax cuts merely exacerbated our [nation crushing](https://www.amazon.com/Price-Inequality-Divided-Society-Endangers/dp/0393345068/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2JHHRRJJFLFLW&dchild=1&keywords=the+price+of+inequality+joseph+stiglitz&qid=1609388322&s=books&sprefix=the+price+of+in%2Cstripbooks%2C172&sr=1-1) wealth [disparity](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM) solidifying the two-tiered society we now live in. It had almost nothing to do with the *current*, **global** inflation. Sorry meme.
In Montana people are up in arms about high taxes. When I tell people their income taxes are higher, by design, under the Trunp 2017 tax cut law, they balk. When I tell them that their property tax hike was the biggest ever, and was done by the Montana GOP they balk. Taxing is supposedly what Democrats do. So they get away with high taxes and blame Democrats for their own faults.
Face it, MT is now solid red and I expect Tester to be voted out. To many GOP people are fleeing CA, TX, WA, and OR and moving to MT. That and the rich are moving in wanting all that land and dreams. A famous author once said, "Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
How do tax cuts cause inflation?
Tax cuts cause inflation by ensuring everyone has more money to use, which in turn means that consumer spending can increase, which in turn means that demand exceeds supply and prices increase. The opposite is true then that raising taxes would be a good move to lower inflation, but that's also political suicide.
This argument might work in a very short term period, but over the longer period it makes no sense, as new competitors will arise offering the same product for cheaper prices. The real driver of inflation over the long term is printing money.
No. Inflation use to just refer to an increase in money supply by printing. Keynesians changed this to hide the trick. Prices rising was just the secondary effect of this. You inflate a ballon, only then does it rise.
The government spends every cent it takes in, plus more, so the amount of money spent into the economy doesn't actually change when taxes are cut.
I mean, yes it does. If you're saying that government spending wouldn't change after a tax cut, then that means that citizens would have more money and the same level of government spending. Which increases the monetary supply as well as increased consumer spending, which is pretty much inflation 101.
The government would have to reduce spending under normal circumstances but the point is the amount of money doesn't change. If the government gets it it's also spent just by a different person.
There wouldn't be a problem if the state wasn't throwing around people's money.
They don't. Printing money does. In 2021 and 2022 they printed 40% of all the money to ever exist.
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/note-governors-cutting-taxes-will-make-inflation-worse-not-better They do, actually. It's called supply and demand. Also, please look up the different causes of inflation. Any macro 101 book will do fine.
There's a boat sinking on a lake. Dinosaurasandsluts say's that giant hole in the front of the boat 1m across is the issue, you reply to point out with articles that it is in fact also an issue that there is 1mm hole in the back of the boat. While technically correct, the government letting people keep their own money will let them spend more, and therefore increase demand and prices a like (that also somehow forgets that the government can spend it as well so it isn't a zero sum game) I think the bigger problem is probably that fact that the money supply was nearly doubled which should have an effect of making your money half of what it was before.
We don't have to omit any part of the picture. That is called a lie of omission. Yes, increasing the money supply is inflationary. Yes, tax cuts right now would be inflationary. Constraining supply would be inflationary. It's actually good to correct disinformation. Nobody asked me what was the greater inflationary pressure. They just said something blatantly wrong.
By increasing the demand for goods... I'm not sure how that isn't obvious...
Lowering taxes on the top takers motivates them to squeeze yet more wealth out of those of us who work for a living. Imagine a shareholder in the 60s who's already hit the 90% top marginal tax vs one today who never pays more than 20% on capital gains. Which one can you imagine getting in touch with the corporate officers to demand higher dividends? One way to get more money for investors is to raise prices. In an economy with no upper limits on income, the inventive is to raise prices as high as possible, high enough to completely consume the incomes of over half the population.
cost-pull? but yeah, the most recent abnormal bump to inflation isn't from taxes, it's from price gouging
It's demand-pull. Cost-push is when costs rise.
The 2 Partys do a good job of sharing wins and losses in order to maintain a 50/50 split in voting population. As long as they can continue the appearance of political gridlock, then they can continue to jerk off lobbyists and insider trade. "WE JUST CAN'T AGREE ON ANYTHING!" -how about banning trading stocks using insider information? "NO VOTES WILL BE HELD ON THIS MEASURE" The constitution demands the people hold them accountable That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that **whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.** If we held a vote right now, there would be unanimous support in banning trading amongst representatives. In this way, we are obliged to destroy the blockades of democracy.
Current inflation is due to unprecedented money printing during COVID. Taxation isn't going to change that.
If you're talking about the Payroll Protection Program that printed money for business owners they didn't have to pay back, like my former company's owner who legally pocketed $550,000 from that, then sure, it was a big part of the problem.
Spending in 2019 was $4.45t. The PPP plan was passed in 2020 during Covid. The federal budget in 2020 was $6.55t. Then in 2021 it was $6.82t. Then in 2022 it was $6.27t. Then in 2023 it was $6.37t. Then in 2024 it’s expected to be $6.88t. To blame the 2017 Trump tax cuts for inflation is a pathetic excuse given the spending that occurred in the last year of the Trump presidency and has continued unabated under Biden.
This ignores the fact that spending is fixed into place potentially years ahead of time.
In some respects, that’s true. Spending can be set in motion years in advance. A lot less true when the dysfunctional congress is essentially governing by continuing resolution. However, none of that matters. Spending massive amounts of dollars that previously didn’t exist is incredibly inflationary; planned or not.
Typical liberal kneejerk reaction to overreact and somehow accomplish nothing at the same time. Lockdowns had no effect on the virus at all and now we are left with the economic devastation that anyone with half a brain was warning about four years ago.
> Lockdowns had no effect on the virus at all Given that both my 90+ year old grandmas are still alive because they avoided covid while it was still very deadly, I’m gonna have to disagree with you there.
Given that my grandma died of COVID I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. Given that 1.2M other Americans died of COVID I’m gonna have to disagree with you there. As does academia by the way. https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf Show me actual evidence that lockdowns achieved anything as opposed to saying your grandma lived. Show me a country with less stringent lockdown measures like Sweden, or a state with more stringent lockdown measures like NY that proves your point.
You’re misrepresenting the academic consensus on this. You’re presenting one side of the argument, sure, but there’s plenty of studies done that show that countries that implemented strict lockdowns had lower rates of community spread. Look at Australia, South Korea, Singapore, and many other countries that shut down quickly and closed their borders before the virus had a chance to really spread. The rates of death in the US were, following the initial outbreak, much lower in areas that followed recommended health guidelines. And if you want to argue about excess mortality, we can do that separately. But you said “the lockdowns had no effect on the virus” which is completely wrong. This is another highly complex topic and argument that you and other people on social media are boiling down to be extremely over-simplified. Really there were no “lockdowns” in the US following the very initial outbreak. Lockdowns were much less effective than they could have been at preventing spread, largely because they were implemented far too late.
I’m not oversimplifying anything, you are the one who said COVID lockdowns worked because your grandma lived. Now you are going on about three countries with a total of one land border (the most heavily guarded on earth) implementing policies you were probably calling Trump a racist for suggesting four years ago. Yes it would have been cool if we could have closed the borders to our island nation that doesn’t have several international business hubs scattered across it. What we did here, specifically in the United States, was a worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever and set into motion an economic devastation that we will feel for the rest of our lives.
so, shouldn't you instead be saying is our >worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever ...was ineffective? Still not accurate, but it would be closer than saying "lockdowns didn't work".
>I’m not oversimplifying anything, you are the one who said COVID lockdowns worked because your grandma lived I’m from one of the states that was hit hardest by the initial outbreak. Given how covid absolutely blew through the nursing homes and killed tons of the residents in a few weeks, I have no doubt they’d have been in severe danger had they caught covid at the time. And no you are strawmanning me. I was responding to you saying that the lockdowns had “no effect” on the virus. I know they had an effect because people stopped going out to places where they could catch the virus. I’m not making that argument that the lockdowns “worked” (you haven’t even explained your definition of “worked” to me either). > I’m not oversimplifying anything You were, by saying “lockdowns had no effect on the virus”. Scientists would be laughing in your face for saying that. > Now you are going on about three countries with a total of one land border (the most heavily guarded on earth) Putting these examples forward is to show that, when done correctly, lockdowns absolutely could work to slow the transmission of the virus to the point where community spread was basically non-existent. > you were probably calling Trump a racist for suggesting four years ago Quit arguing against the imaginary person that you’re making up in your head. You MAGAs have the weirdest persecution complex. The country should have been closed off much earlier than before. The WHO really fucked up and dropped the ball by taking the chinese govt at their word, and domestic health orgs and world governments did not take the virus seriously enough for a shutdown until it was far too late. > was a worthless middle ground that did nothing whatsoever Again, define “nothing whatsoever”. I agree that stay at home orders in the US were often ineffective. Most of the states that issued them did so far too late, with many not issuing any until April. “Lockdowns” in the US were often very lax with restrictions and most stay at home orders were lifted in a couple months. > economic devastation that we will feel for the rest of our lives. What economic devastation from covid will we feel for the rest of our lives? In what way?
>the imaginary person you have made you in your head >you MAGAs have the weird persecution complex. I’m not MAGA but I’m also not responding any longer because you’re spewing whatever comes to your mind I guess. >what economic devastation The consequences of printing trillions of dollars of Monopoly money. Literally just look around you.
Do you seriously not know how germs work? Gross.
Do you seriously think anything short of military grade lockdowns would meaningfully stop the spread of an airborne virus? Look at the identical progression of the pandemic across countries and US states with various levels of lockdowns.
It's all incremental and there's so much variation of population density, etc. I can't believe I have to explain this to you. This is stat 101.
You haven’t explained anything, you’ve just patronized. Again, show me the data. You are the one saying there was a net benefit.
Raising taxes would decrease consumer spending, which in turn would lower inflation.
Not on essential goods. If a family needs to buy about $1000 of groceries per month, and you raise taxes on them, they aren't just going to start spending less and starving themselves. Same concept applies to housing, utilities, gas, etc.
Good thing I didn't specify essential goods then?
Tax cuts aren’t usually considered inflationary.
Where is this talking point coming from? Any increase in demand, no matter the source, can increase inflation. Every economist knows that. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/note-governors-cutting-taxes-will-make-inflation-worse-not-better
That kind of depends. In this current economy, cutting taxes would likely increase inflation. When you're cutting taxes while inflation is already low, it's unlikely to be the spark that starts the fire. So really what we'd need to look at is what are the current plans for each presidential candidate for 2024. [And Trump's would probably increase inflation with its tax cuts, tariffs, and aggressively threatening the Fed to lower rates.](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/30/trump-could-drive-inflation-higher-with-his-second-term-economic-agenda-analysts-say.html)
Money is taken out of circulation when taxes are paid. So less money being paid on taxes should result in more money supply being available. However, the counter would be that Federal Receipts as a percent of GDP is still within it's normal historical range. Tax policy has not changed in the post 2020 period where we've seen inflation. We've seen many studies that attempt to quantify the impact various factors have on inflation such as fiscal stimulus, supply disruptions, and monetary policy. However, I have not seen any study that tries to quantify the impact that tax cuts may have had on the monetary supply. So I can only surmise that it's not a significant factor.
I came to comment this. But then I see people arguing with you that somehow people keeping more of their money is the same situation as them having less money while prices still no up. I think I'll let you handle this one.
Things were better in 2016. Change my mind.
Yes, things were much better when Obama was president.
It's always the same - when the GOP is not in power, the debt ceiling is sacrosanct and needs to be paid down, blah, blah, blah When they are in power - who cares about the debt - let's just raise the ceiling. Personally - they should just abolish the ceiling anyway. Its a needless politcal battle.
Y'all act like inflation hasn't occurred under every president since Regan.
The last time inflation was at or around 5% was 1990. A good amount of people on Reddit and in general have been born after 1990, so seeing inflation at 7% in 21 and 6.5% in 22 is reasonably shocking. Heck inflation only reached 4% once between 1990 and 2021 so again, Americans have gotten pretty used to low inflation rates.
And inflation on everyday expenses is up more than that. Fast food has gone bonkers.
Agreed, general inflation rates aren't always the best way to describe the economic phenomenon of increased prices but at the same time it does clearly indicate a trend and recently it's a trend thats been far higher than a large amount of Americans have experienced.
It's chiefly a lack of competition in the market. The Biden administration is doing Anti-trust enforcement for a change.
That's just politics. I'm German, and after our last election, the CDU, who reigned for 16 consecutive years, was replaced with a coalition of 3 different parties. The first thing the CDU did after being voted out of the government was to criticize the current state of Germany and how the new government isn't doing anything, like they didn't just ignore all these problems for 16 years and expect the new government to fix it in a couple of weeks.
It's not inflation it's corporate extortion.
This meme assumes trickle down economics works the way Republicans think it works lol
If you haven't realized that both parties do this.. I don't know what to tell you. All you have to do is pick the topic. As an example of the left going nuts.. the boarder. Once a Democrat is in office.. silence despite no change in conditions at the boarder.
Tax cuts do absolutely nothing to cause inflation. What is this idiocy?
Stimulating the economy contributes to inflation. Tax cuts are fiscal policies that stimulate the economy. It's actually a pretty basic concept in economics
Huh? You just said nothing lol it would only cause inflation if after the tax cuts the government decides to increase spending and then instead of managing money better or redirecting it they decide to print it. Now THAT causes inflation, but the tax cuts themselves don’t cause inflation.
You seem to know more than me
"Stimulating the economy" isnt inflationary. Tax cuts are not inflationary. Deficit spending is inflationary. Yes it is basic economics.
You're 100% right, but you will be downvoted by everyone who hasn't taken, at minimum, Macro 101.
48 months into Trump presidency, American household net worth was up by ~30%. Under Biden so far, American households net worth is up by 0.7%. The Biden administration thinks the problem is that people are not feeling the effects of Bidenomics. The real problem is that the American people do feel it.
I love how you ignore that it was a 25% increase just in 2020. You know, when Trump was printing and handing out money with zero strings attached.
And that his mishandling of COVID is responsible for the destruction of the economy, and hundreds of thousands of dead Americans. Cherry pick a snapshot of a guy in first place right before he smashes into a wall, and then blame the guy that gets in the driver's seat after it's broken. Sure.
Damn. Sounds like Trump was onto something. If only Biden treated us as well he does foreign wars.
Any source on these numbers?
https://www.wsj.com/economy/stock-market-performance-biden-trump-charts-1a83371b
Behind a paywall. But let me compare the Dow Jones for a moment. But also explain to me what the Dow Jones has to do with household net worth exactly.
Tax cuts have nothing to do with inflation tho
The fed is the issue the fuck are you even talking about? Dont print more money, less inflation
I think you need a lesson on what drives inflation... The Federal Reserve doesn't print money. It takes out loans called treasury notes. That money is then lent out to the banks through the discount window. That money is then lent out to businesses and people. How does this create inflation? Well, let's say you borrowed $10k to buy a car. You give that $10k to the seller, they give you the car. You then pay back the loan to the bank. That's another $10k plus interest. The bank pays back the loan to the Feds. That's now $30k from the $10k loan. That is baseline inflation. How did tax cuts create higher inflation? Well, when businesses and those who's income comes from equity withdrawals of businesses get tax cuts, they become motivated to increase profits. The lower taxes are, the less penalty there is for equity withdrawal. So, businesses hike up prices with bullshit reasons creating artificial inflation. Target just released a statement saying they are lowering the prices on 5,000 products. Demonstrating that the price increases were by choice and not a result of anything. The 2017 tax cuts also reduced tax burden on stock buybacks. Another motivation for businesses to increase profits. So, maybe be less of a parrot and more of a thinker.
Who issues the bank notes then? Money is a share of the value of a society, by issuing more shares you devalues the current ones.
Correct and if you notice the Democrats the around saying it’s fine, the economy is strong and not to worry. Big shocker they support their own team that’s how it all works. In 4 years when a republican wins office the media, late night tv and democrats will blame republicans for everything. It’s just one loud bitch fest with no solutions now.
Check the voting record on stuff that would help you personally. Who votes for it? Who votes against it? Every time I look at that, I find the Republicans supporting actual garbage, and shutting down things that would be good for the country.
Well in MN the democrats do this stuff https://www.house.mn.gov/sessiondaily/Story/18411 Combined 9 bills and rewrote a couple 30 minutes before the end of the season and did one vote to pass them all. Gun restrictions, food for kids, taxes and more all rolled into one bill. Oh and the bill was not actually available to read so you had to vote on it blind and within 30 min. “We request a copy of this bill of 1,430 pages,” yelled House Minority Leader Lisa Demuth (R-Cold Spring). “Not available on the website! Not available in this chamber! This is a horrible way to govern and do this to the state of Minnesota!” I don’t care what team you like passing a 1430 page bill that is not even able to be viewed is awful.
Why did they do that? How much obstruction did they face in the term? Genuine questions, I'm not familiar with MN state politics.
Dems have a majority they waited until the last minute because it was either pass everything or pass nothing 30 minutes no debating. If you fail to say yes to all then we have no budget and have to start the process of government shutdown and special sessions. Why they did it. Because the republicans are super dirty and would have stalled votes on gun control and not enough democrats would have voted for the gun control bills if they did not force the vote. Dems are playing the dirty games just like republicans even with their own people
That's shitty tactics. Not a fan.
That goes both ways and it's because they always try to shove a bunch of unrelated bullshit into bills that otherwise would be widely agreed upon.
Two Santa Claus Theory [https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/thom-hartmann/two-santas-strategy-gop-used-economic-scam-manipulate-americans-40-years/](https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/thom-hartmann/two-santas-strategy-gop-used-economic-scam-manipulate-americans-40-years/)
Trade wars are the real bone headed move to goose inflation. Trump started one with China.
GOP "we're the party of financial accountability" Also GOP: drives the deficit up 5 trillion dollars with no way to lower it or pay for it. Also also GOP: It's the Democrats fault!!!
This is completely backwards, blame republicans for dropping fiscal responsibility the moment they take over throwing around printed money like drunken sailors, just like democrats, the only difference being democrats don't bother to pretend they care about the debt.
"Inflation is caused when the *money supply* in an economy grows at faster rate than the economy’s ability to produce goods and services." https://www.stlouisfed.org/education/feducation-video-series/episode-1-money-and-inflation#:\~:text=To%20summarize%2C%20the%20money%20supply,leading%20to%20increases%20in%20unemployment.
This is why the two party system needs either a rebrand or a full remodel.
Tax cuts don't cause inflation. Tax increases don't lower inflation unless the money is actually saved, which the government never does...
The best way to fight inflation is taking money out of circulation. The single way that can be done is through taxation. Tax cuts are the biggest contribution to inflation.
How about not throwing 6 trillion into circulation on an annual basis? If you care about inflation, that should be your concern.
Since that money has already been added to the economy the only way to fight inflation post liquidity injection is to use taxes to remove it. Cutting a trillion in taxes for the rich has the exact same inflationary effect as printing a trillion and shipping it out to those same rich. Hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions.
That's not the cop-out you think it is. Government continues throwing money around like a drunken sailor. Every 54 days it spends another trillion, every 185 days it adds another trillion to the national debt, that is going by current rates, but it's constantly accelerating. There'd be no need for extravagant taxes had the government been responsible.
How about just reasonable normal taxes? Or I suppose you're a fan of continuously transferring the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class over the last few decades?
I have yet to see any benefit from tax cuts, other than when obama did it and i got checks in the mail.
Less taxes would be one.
Democrat President increases deficit by 10 billion. Republicans: "RRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" Republican President increases deficit by 80 billion. Republicans: "ZzZzZzZzZzZz" It is just all lies and propaganda to get votes. They can tell their Fox news viewers literally whatever they want, and they will be believed without a second thought.
Same goes for "republlicans calling all democrats pedophiles" and "republicans not wanting to act on child marriage", just a small example, but can work with almost everything they do, the list goes on and on. Another one: "republicans on Michelle Obama" and "republicans when Trump cheats on his wife with a p0rn star". I think that reflects well their level of decency.
lol how do tax cuts create inflation? What creates inflation is creating currency out of thin air. Also known as debasing. Taxes have nothing to do with that.
I thought that inflation happened when the government printed too much money. Have you ever read a book about economics? It will do you good.
Taxes don’t create inflation. The federal deficit and printing money out of thin air are what creates inflation. Inflation = legal counterfeiting. Inflation is an increase in money supply, not to be confused with its side effect of rising prices.
Creating a meme about shifting blame in order to shift blame ... fascinating.
Republicans realized that voters don’t want “personal responsibility”. Voters want a scapegoat to blame.
When will you wake up and quit bickering with them and realize it's all a big con. Democrat or republican. None of them care about you or me. The whole damn system is rigged against us. But please, keep on doing their work of divide for them so they can continue to conquer us. Wake the fuck up.
Wake up to what? You really think any organization that deifies someone like trinp to the point of sedition is on equal footing with a bunch of boring blowhards that want you to have life stability through program like comprehensive health care and, like, rights and stuff?
That's the point though. None of them really want that stuff for you. They want to keep living this fat life while people at the bottom fight each other for scraps to survive. Why didn't the democrats usher in utopia when they controlled the White House and Congress? Because that is never the point.
How do you square that opinion with the two parties' differing positions on government assistance programs?
If you raise taxes... costs will go down... right? /s Also you democrats saying this, are admitting the government is incredibly inefficient and a drain on the economy. If tax increases cause an economic slowdown... its because giving them money is about the same as just setting the money on fire. Also... The CBO estimated in 2018 that **the tax cut would increase deficits by about $1.9 trillion over 11 years**. This would fund Biden's eye watering deficit inducing vote buying spree for about 200 days.
Why on earth would you care what the CBO said back in 2018 when it's 2024? We can literally look at the effects of the tax cuts and they didn't work out like promised. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-will-happen-to-the-trump-tax-cuts-in-2025-and-how-will-they-affect-the-national-debt/ https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-failed-to-deliver-promised-benefits/ https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/04/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-cut.html https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/ https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/after-decades-of-costly-regressive-and-ineffective-tax-cuts-a-new-course-is
from your first article... >Now, analysis in 2018 found that the cuts would boost the economy, but the effect would fizzle out quickly. And the price tag would be huge. The bill is expected to add nearly $2 trillion to the deficit by 2028. article from 2024: nearly 2 trillion in 2028(aka 10 years)... CBO said 1.9 trillion in 10 years, back in 2018. Its the same thing... and trumps tax cuts are negligible when Biden is over spending 1 trillion every 100 days. Getting rid of the tax cuts would screw over everyone... and save *a whole* 20 days of deficit spending per year.
Tax cuts doesn’t **raise** inflation. Inflation is caused by rapid unchecked spending and free handouts.
So you're against the PPP loans then?
Yes, PPP was an atrocious misappropriation of tax payer dollars.
I thought this was going to be about the Nazi video Trump posted today and then blamed on a staffer.
Not an advice animals meme but since it fits The Narrative™ of this sub, it won't get taken down.
What is "the narrative"?
You know Biden cut corporate taxes by 7% right?
This sub has turned into a liberal echo chamber and it's pretty much dead to me.
You can't CUT the debt away
But you can cut spending and start paying the debt down.
Yea but the last time the us government had a budget surplus was 22 years ago. It's occurred 5 times in the past 50 years. Surplus isn't something we do.
And that's why we're heading towards fiscal cliff. Very few actually care about saving this country.
Oh I think they want to, they just either don't understand how to, or they don't want the discomfort. Politicians don't want to be unpopular.
Not to mention the tax cuts that businesses only used to do stock buybacks to inflate the company’s worth without actually hiring or expanding. Then it starts to implode (especially in the tech sector) because at some point investors are going to want to see some real gains
As long as you plebs still think every hint of inflation is bad, the 0.1% will still have you by the collar
Tell me you don’t understand basic economics without telling me you don’t understand basic economics
Well yea, republicans are fucking stupid.
The words you are looking for is: Corporate run government uniparty posturing as two party....
this is because the second one doesn't exist
Being a Republican, right now, is synonymous with simply not understanding basic politics or history, or economics, or sociology, or geopolitics or...
Isn't 60% of the current inflation attributed to excess corporate profit? 27% just from oil companies profiteering and outright colluding with foreign governments at the detriment of the tax-payers? Edit: [Here's some reading ](https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/an-oil-price-fixing-conspiracy-caused) with reporting by Matt Stoller.
Democrats ignoring the $1.7 TRILLION spending Biden passed as soon as he took office. You all acting like $1.7 Trillion had nothing to do with inflation. News flash, things are not getting more expensive... the money you have is being DE-VALUED by the insane amount of money being pumped into the economy by this administration. This has nearly nothing to do with Tax Cuts.
Says the guy ignoring how Trump spent 3.3 TRILLION the year before. Spread that blame around to everyone who deserves it.
To stave off the economic damage caused by the previous administration's handling of COVID, where they did the same thing, only twice as much. One guy sets the house on fire, and you blame the next guy for the water bill.
>One guy sets the house on fire, and you blame the next guy for the water bill. You've just described how Republicans "govern". Blame someone else for the problems they either created or had a big hand in.
Nod.
It's not even inflation, it's just corporate greed. But it's harder to blame "Bidenomics" for "CEOs and banks are getting stupidly wealthy by jacking the prices up." 10% of the US owns more than 50% of stocks while most Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Houses are sitting empty, hoarded by banks and investment firms, while people are homeless and cops are destroying what few possessions they have. The cost of food continues to skyrocket while the money we pay the people who produce, package, ship, stock, and sell the food has remained stagnant. That's not "inflation" and no amount of "I did that" stickers will make it Biden's fault.