Posted on 08/06/2016 1:39:45 PM PDT by Innovative
In a new economic blueprint that is set to unveil next week, Donald Trump will propose one of the biggest tax cuts since Ronald Reagan’s presidency, an advisor to the Republican Presidential nominee told Bloomberg.
The proposal will reiterate Trump’s plan to cut the corporate tax rate to 15%, Stephen Moore, who is the chief economist for the Heritage Foundation, and of one of the men on Trump’s 13-member economic advisory team that the Republican presidential candidate announced Friday, said.
(Excerpt) Read more at fortune.com ...
“The talking point for tomorrow will be along the lines of “How will he PAY for it!”.”
Trump needs to answer that and convincingly knock down Hillary’s plan.
Yep. Also, only about half the economic argument is for more jobs and more income—the rest of it is to assure the strength of the country to help endure and triumph over the Islamic threat.
If he cuts taxes and gets government on the right track to start cutting spending, then where would the deficits come from? Biggest problem we’ve had for the last few decades, at least, is a bunch of people that don’t know squat, writing checks knowing that it doesn’t matter if there’s nothing there. They’ll just keep raising taxes or borrowing for their pet projects.
With Trump, being the business guy that he is, knowing how to squeeze every last penny to make a buck, he just might be able to pull it off. Of course, getting rid of as many illegals off the government boob will be a fantastic start.
“These tax cuts while terrific and classy, will enlarge the deficit enormously.”
Nope. Revenues increase when tax rates are lowered (Kennedy,Reagan, Bush).
All that is needed to balance the budget is tax-cuts and an end to ‘baseline budgeting’.
Capital gains cuts? Would Be nice.
Which means the government will just spend more.
Trump needs an ad that focuses on the difference in average take-home pay in a Trump vs Clinton presidency ... or in some way communicates how a Trump presidency will result in an household having more money for their families. Make it real and personal.
Trump knows how to get the job done on LESS money than the government does...
Reference New York skating rink Trump rebuilt....
The problem is that nearly half of voters pay NO taxes. Pretty sure they don’t give a crap about tax cuts.
Yes it makes a difference. A company will spend it. The government will waste it.
It is a nice idea, but almost half of all Americans are not paying taxes. Dunno if they will care.
“He’ll create private sector jobs and eliminate government excess trash....”
Yes he will. But libs don’t understand that. It needs to be promoted this way in my opinion:
“Hillary will raise taxes on the rich. They will use their lawyers, get out of paying it and then people who cannot hire rich tax lawyers will pay for it. Or, they will pay it, but then to make up the difference they will fire hundreds of thousands of workers. Then next year they will do the same.”
Or:
“Trump can lower the taxes of the rich. They will take those savings and reinvest in America, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs which will more than make up for the tax reduction. They will be build things for export, returning America to the forefront of manufacturing in the world.”
Trump needs to make sure he uses names like Buffett and Cuban in his proposal. Force then ppm to say what they will do. Shame them.
Any tax burden above 20% is theft.
“Which means the government will just spend more.”
Probably.
My point was, and everyone here should realize and repeat as often as possible:
Tax rates have NOTHING to do with deficits.
Tax rate could be 100% and you can still have a deficit.
From a related thread, consider the following explanation of how the Founding States had probably envisioned the annual federal budget.
$765,645,000,000: FY2016 Taxes Set Record Through December; $5,107 Per Worker; Feds Still Run…
Four times the amount shown in thread title above is over three trillion dollars. And this is a major constitutional problem, imo, as indicated by the following material.
Note that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers. This is evidenced by the following excerpt.
”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Based on the Court’s statement above, here is a rough approximation of how much taxpayers should be paying Congress annually to perform its Section 8-limited power duties.
Given that the plurality of clauses in Section 8 deal with defense, and given that the Department of Defense budget for 2015 was $500+ billion, I will generously round up the $500+ billion figure to $1 trillion (but probably much less) as the annual price tag of the federal government to the taxpayers, not the $5 trillion annual budget now being projected for the feds.
In other words, the corrupt media, including Obama guard dog Fx Noise, should not be reporting multi-trillion dollar annual federal budgets in budget discussions without mentioning the Supreme Court’s clarification of Congress’s limited power to appropriate taxes.
Trump supporters need to get him up to speed on the idea that a good percentage of the federal taxes that he and his rich friends have been paying throughout their lives are probably unconstitutional.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to suppoort the Trump / Pence ticket by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutional federal taxes and likewise unconstitutional interference in state affairs.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
How much savings on sending home 11 million illegals, saving welfare and hospital cost, school and court cost. Maybe a trillion?
I know of about three dozen or so federal alphabet agencies and programs, with the lying scheming treasonous bastards that run them, we can get rid of to pay for it all
Try explaining to a liberal that taxes on corporation are passed onto the consumer (us) and they will give you a confused look then blurt “but, but, but . . . corporations make so much money . . . obscene profits . . . executive compensation . . . blurt, spiff, gurburble.”
Producing jobs brings money into the coffers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.