Trump / Musk (other than DOGE)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 643K
  • Politics 
How are tax cuts benefitting the rich? Seriously? The share of the country's income and wealth going to the rich (whether you want to isolate it to the top 20%, 10%, 1%, or whatever) has steadily increased over the past 40+ years, the time during which the tax rates for the rich have steadily been cut. Their income and wealth are rising by much more than the amount their total tax payments are increasing.

Perhaps you truly don't understand the math side of this. Let's try a simple example, ignoring the marginal levels for the simplicity of the math. Let's say someone is paying a 50% tax rate on $500k of income. That's 250k in taxes. Now let's say 10 years later that same person pays a 35% tax rate on $1 million of income. That's $350k in taxes. The amount of taxes the person is paying went up by $100k even though his tax rate went down! Does that mean the tax cut hurt him? No, of course not. He now gets to keep a much greater share of his much greater income. That is what has been happening for the rich in this country. It's why their wealth and their income is rising much more quickly, on a percentage basis, than anyone in the classes below them.

It's hard to tell whether you just don't understand this or if you're trolling.
Do good is trolling. Wish he would be silent.
 

President Trump’s media company sued a Brazilian Supreme Court justice on Wednesday, accusing him of illegally censoring right-wing voices on social media.

The unusual move was made all the more extraordinary by its timing: Just hours earlier, the Brazilian justice had received an indictment that would force him to decide whether to order the arrest of Jair Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president and an ally of Mr. Trump. The justice is overseeing multiple criminal investigations into Mr. Bolsonaro.

The Trump Media & Technology Group — which is majority owned by Mr. Trump and runs his Truth Social site — sued the Brazilian justice, Alexandre de Moraes, in U.S. federal court in Tampa on Wednesday morning. Joining as a plaintiff was Rumble, a Florida-based video platform that, like Truth Social, pitches itself as a home for free speech.

The companies accused Justice Moraes of censoring political discourse in the United States and infringing upon the First Amendment by ordering Rumble to remove the accounts of certain right-wing Brazilian pundits.

The companies argued that those orders could apply to how those accounts appeared in the United States, breaking American law. Mr. Trump’s company has not been subject to Justice Moraes’s orders, but it argued in the lawsuit that it relied on Rumble’s technology and therefore could be harmed if Rumble’s operations were affected.

Justice Moraes has argued that his actions are necessary to protect Brazil from the anti-democratic acts of Mr. Bolsonaro and his supporters. His spokeswoman said that Justice Moraes did not have immediate comment.
 

President Trump issued an executive order on Tuesday that seeks greater authority over regulatory agencies that Congress established as independent from direct White House control, part of a broader bid to centralize a president’s power over the government.

The order requires independent agencies to submit their proposed regulations to the White House for review, asserts a power to block such agencies from spending funds on projects or efforts that conflict with presidential priorities, and declares that they must accept the president’s and the Justice Department’s interpretation of the law as binding.

“This is a power move over independent agencies, a structure of administration that Congress has used for various functions going back to the 1880s,” said Peter M. Shane, who is a legal scholar in residence at New York University and the author of a casebook on separation-of-powers law.

The order follows Mr. Trump’s summary firings of leaders of independent agencies in defiance of statutes that bar their removal without cause before their terms are up. Collectively, the moves constitute a major front in the president’s assault on the basic shape of the American government and his effort to seize some of Congress’s constitutional power over it.

The directive applies to various executive branch agencies that Congress established and empowered to regulate aspects of the economy, structuring them to be run by officials the president would appoint to fixed terms but whose day-to-day actions he would not directly control.

Those agencies include the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission and the National Labor Relations Board. Still, the order applies only partly to one particularly powerful agency, the Federal Reserve, covering issues related to its supervision and regulation of Wall Street, but exempting its decisions related to monetary policy, like raising and lowering interest rates.
 
"The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor"

Could this (poor) be due to the forced increases in minimum wage? I'd venture that none in the middle class work for minimum wage while many poor do.

Minimum wage in AZ has close to doubled, but those already above aren't getting comparable increases.
“Forced increases” in minimum wage? Isn’t any increase in minimum wage “forced” (by the government) by definition?

Also - as I’m sure you’re aware the federal minimum wage hasn’t increased in 15+ years.
 

President Trump issued an executive order on Tuesday that seeks greater authority over regulatory agencies that Congress established as independent from direct White House control, part of a broader bid to centralize a president’s power over the government.

The order requires independent agencies to submit their proposed regulations to the White House for review, asserts a power to block such agencies from spending funds on projects or efforts that conflict with presidential priorities, and declares that they must accept the president’s and the Justice Department’s interpretation of the law as binding.

“This is a power move over independent agencies, a structure of administration that Congress has used for various functions going back to the 1880s,” said Peter M. Shane, who is a legal scholar in residence at New York University and the author of a casebook on separation-of-powers law.

The order follows Mr. Trump’s summary firings of leaders of independent agencies in defiance of statutes that bar their removal without cause before their terms are up. Collectively, the moves constitute a major front in the president’s assault on the basic shape of the American government and his effort to seize some of Congress’s constitutional power over it.

The directive applies to various executive branch agencies that Congress established and empowered to regulate aspects of the economy, structuring them to be run by officials the president would appoint to fixed terms but whose day-to-day actions he would not directly control.

Those agencies include the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission and the National Labor Relations Board. Still, the order applies only partly to one particularly powerful agency, the Federal Reserve, covering issues related to its supervision and regulation of Wall Street, but exempting its decisions related to monetary policy, like raising and lowering interest rates.
The kind of thing one does if one has plans of never ceding power, ever.
 
“Forced increases” in minimum wage? Isn’t any increase in minimum wage “forced” (by the government) by definition?
The market could force an increase in minimum wage to hire people for certain jobs or in certain locations.
Also - as I’m sure you’re aware the federal minimum wage hasn’t increased in 15+ years.
Right, but many states have and those changes would be reflected in federal government data.
 
And pubs are going to support it. The sooner we come to grips with the fact that Trump and anyone who voted for him and now supports him are traitors. They voted for a dictatorship and that’s what they want . And they aren’t going to give it up peacefully.
Yup. My brother tested earlier this week about seeing new doctors for his years long battle with long covid. I first replied and said I loved him then later replied to say that I will not forgive him for his support of Trump until he shows some form contrition.

Fuck every single Trump voter.
 
Too early in the morning for blatant straw manning.
It wasn't straw manning it was sarcasm, lol. Do you know the difference?

if your position is that there shouldn't be any minimum wage set by the government at all - and that the minimum wage should be set by the market - just come out and say it. We all know you tend to pretty libertarian in philosophy.
 
Of all the posters on this board, I'm most disappointed by Zen. Smart enough to know better, not overtly trolling like a lot of others, not a professional contrarian, just stuck in a mental groove they can't quite seem to snap out of. Cognitive bias is a hell of drug. I haven't lost faith in them. They'll have their CFord like come to Jesus moment sooner or later. They're too smart not to. But damned if I'm not disappointed it hasn't happened by now.
 
Back
Top