Jump to content
SC_RNDude SC_RNDude (New Member) New Member

Winning...the economy under Trump

Politics   (23,292 Views 1,042 Comments)
17,597 Visitors; 2,071 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 78 of Winning...the economy under Trump. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

31 minutes ago, Tweety said:

I'm a very strong believer that like stated above "we're better off when everyone has a state in their success" and this especially includes a thriving consumer middle class.

Me too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, SC_RNDude said:

Me too!

I think where we might diverge in our beliefs is that a certain segment already had their stake and were doing just fine, but we handed them an even bigger stake and gave ourselves "a few extra coins" with the belief that we would be helped by them having more.  Perhaps we were, but I think we would have been fine had we not done that.  Sour grapes I suppose at this point.

Edited by Tweety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Tweety said:

There continues to be good economic news.  Consumer spending down some.  Again I'm concerned about the middle class.  Also concerned about gas prices.  But better than expected GDP

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/26/economy/us-gdp-report-q1/index.html

Income inequality. 

I read something during the week about the middle class disappearing in a number of countries, including the US.

We all know that "trickle down" economics is a fantasy and doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heidi Heitkamp: Trump has failed rural America’s ‘Reagan test’

  • President Trump has failed to deliver for rural America – but Democratic politicians have also let their connection to heartland voters weaken, writes former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.
  • Heitkamp is launching the One Country Project, which she says “will elevate the issues important to rural America, demonstrate why the rural vote will be decisive in the upcoming election, and encourage leaders to take a serious look at policies that can help America’s heartland.”

...   Given the persistence of rural economic woes and the lack of a clear path to a better future, it’s understandable that in 2016 rural voters took a long shot on a wild card candidate. During his campaign, President Trump promised to scrap a failing status quo and focus on issues that resonated with rural voters like fairer trade deals, infrastructure investment, regulatory rollback, and the return of manufacturing jobs. Desperate to have their voices heard, rural voters gave President Trump the win, with a margin 29 points higher in rural counties than in cities.

However, despite Trump’s pandering and bluster, rural communities are not seeing improvements...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/25/heidi-heitkamp-trump-has-failed-rural-americas-reagan-test.html?ref=hvper.com 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement
6 minutes ago, nursej22 said:

I looked on conservative media for coverage on this, but couldn’t find any. Gold Star families are being hit with a substantial tax increase on survivor benefits.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.military.com/money/personal-finance/2019/04/26/how-new-law-affects-taxes-gold-star-families.html/amp

Yet more unintended consequences from a hastily written-by-lobbyists tax bill. 

MAGA!

Yes an unintended consequence.  An unintended end to the end-around of a broken tax law that was already in place that should have been fixed long ago.  

I was unable to find any record of a Democrat speaking up about this issue when the bill was going through Congress.  Are you aware of any?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SC_RNDude said:

Yes an unintended consequence.  An unintended end to the end-around of a broken tax law that was already in place that should have been fixed long ago.  

I was unable to find any record of a Democrat speaking up about this issue when the bill was going through Congress.  Are you aware of any?  

 

 

Good point. Perhaps the fact that there were no committee hearings on particulars of the bill, and some changes were so last minute that they were handwritten in the margins, they didn’t have much chance.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/sections/news/the-passage-of-the-senate-republican-tax-bill-was-a-travesty/amp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Growing up in the Vietnam War in military towns, I knew kids, including my best friend that were raised on those benefits and I think SSI.  Back then jobs for women weren't all that high paying.  

Here's a good article that tax about the tax code one year later and how it delivered on some of it's promises, some of which might be a bit to early to tell.  It does say 1 in 20 actually paid more, including 7.3 of middle class earners, which I suppose includes these military families.  I think perhaps it's these 7.3% that we're hearing from most vocally at tax time this year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tax-plan-consequences/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Families of military members killed in the line of duty may face a huge tax increase thanks to changes hidden in a new tax law.

Survivors of fallen military members are entitled to benefits from both the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense. This is in the form of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) from the VA (also known as the Death Pension), and the Survivors Benefit Plan (SBP) from the military.

[…]

This isn’t entirely accurate.  While the surviving spouse/children of all service members who die on active duty or as a result of a service-related injury are eligible for dependency indemnity compensation (DIC) this isn’t the case with the survivor benefit plan (SBP).  To be eligible for SBP the service member has to be retired, and elect at the time of her or his retirement to participate.  After retiring, if he or she subsequently dies as a result of a service connected illness or injury her or his surviving spouse would be eligible for both SBP and DIC.

Edited by chare
Updated links

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SC_RNDude said:

Bad news for anti-Trumpers.  I’m assuming many if these consumers are the middle-class.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/us-consumer-confidence-improves-in-april

 

This isn't bad news for anti-Trumpers.

How so?

Our opposition to Trump, and all that he stands for, isn't based solely on the economy.

That would make us one issue voters, and nothing could be further from the truth.

Actually, there are many, many reasons to oppose Trump.

The economy isn't on the top of the list.

Why would anyone think it is?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×