Posted on 03/13/2018 7:11:28 AM PDT by Enlightened1
How about a “phase 1” of SPENDING CUTS!!!!!!!!
Implement the ‘penny plan’
The penny plan is an actual cut of 1% across the board in every department.
It’s so easy even democrats can understand it.
Let them go on TV and scream how spending one penny less is going to kill everyone.
NOTE: this is NOT a 1% smaller increase, but an actual cut- no increase at all. Democrats are too stupid to understand that a 4% increase instead of 5% is not a ‘cut’
Every time the government cuts taxes, the government winds up with larger intake because of the turnover of cash in a better economy.
I expected a 2 or 3 phase tax cut, because the liberals would never let a single big step cut through. Our president has taken a tactic from the democrats and has implemented an incremental tax reduction plan.
WINNING !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Without some spending cuts, our present day tax cuts amount to stealing from our children.
Except that is not.
Record deficits need to be addressed. Cut spending and then I will be impressed.
And the prior tax cut/hike is not something I support. I suspect a lot of people are going to be angry next tax season.
Dumb idea unless your goal is to de-industrialized the United States and empower Communist China.
If your goal is to destroy the United States with a con job, then yes it is brilliant.
Remember this entire time we had the 0 tariffs where did our jobs go?
Answer: They left and went to China?
Why?
Answer: Because Corporations could sell not to China for free and they would have to pay the tariff. To avoid the tariff they would have to move to China. Which is what the did. Well President Trump is doing the reverse.
Our economy imploded because of 0 tariffs con game.
How come China’s economy grew faster with tariffs when we had 0 tariffs than the U.S.?
How did the U.S. grow with tariffs to be the world’s number 1 Super Power before NAFTA?
Sorry no sale ever again!
Democrats have nothing to do with it
President Trump understand how to keep people to want more, remember he is a master at marketing
Its like the Apple approach. Remember the iPad 1? No Camera? Well version 2 got the camera, people even opened up version on and saw a plastic cut out and holder where a camera could go, but Apple didn’t do cause they know people would want in the next version and get to sell them two iPads
Put Walmart in the health care business.
I completely support tariffs. Free trade is a myth unless the playing field is leveled.
Get the votes for the spending cuts first. Then cut taxes. The spending cuts will be harder to get support on.
Tariffs were phase one of tax increases. Gas tax will be phase two.
The other way around is easier.
Congress never can agree to what can be cut. That’s why we never see that.
Of course cutting taxes is easier. But the deficit for 2018 should be somewhere north of $1 trillion as it is. How much higher do they want it to go?
“Phase two of tax cuts? How about reducing tariffs?”
Actually, Trump is already talking about doing just that - at the Pittsburgh PA rally the other day.
He said he’d rather not do the tarriffs but we need to do it in order to negotiate better deals. As soon as our trading partners (adversaries) drop their abusive trade policies including barriers, tariffs, currency manipulation and dumping, he will be happy to discuss removing ours.
To me, it’s like when you encounter a car with the high beams on.
There’s nothing good about being blinded by another driver’s high beams, and there’s also nothing good about blinding another driver with your high beams. Either case is bad for both parties, as it could result in a collision.
Yet, the reality is that the quickest way to resolve the issue is to point your high beams in the other drivers eyes to induce him to lower his. Works every time.
I don’t think of it as retaliation; I think of it as negotiation.
So you have to do the nibble method which only requires a majority vote.
What I really want is a no-loophole under 19% flat tax with a generous initial earned income exemption. Imagine a tax form so simple that it makes the current 1040EZ look look complicated in comparison.
Reagan was a protectionist, just like Pres. Trump
-- Forced Japan to accept restraints on auto exports. The agreement set total Japanese auto exports at 1.68 million vehicles in 1981-82, 8 percent below 1980 exports. Two years later the level was permitted to rise to 1.85 million.(33) Clifford Winston of the Brookings Institution found that the import limits have actually cost jobs in the U.S. auto industry by making it possible for the sheltered American automakers to raise prices and limit production. In 1984, Winston writes in Blind Intersection? Policy and the Automobile Industry, 32,000 jobs were lost, U.S. production fell by 300,000 units, and profits for U.S. firms increased $8.9 billion. The quotas have also made the Japanese firms potentially more formidable rivals because they have begun building assembly plants in the United States.(34) They also shifted production to larger cars, introducing to American firms competition they did not have before the quotas were created. In 1984, it was estimated that higher prices for domestic and imported cars cost consumers $2.2 billion a year.(35) At the height of the dollar's exchange rate with the yen in 1984-85, the quotas were costing American consumers the equivalent of $11 billion a year.(36)
-- Tightened up considerably the quotas on imported sugar. Imports fell from an annual average of 4.85 million tons in 1979-81 to an annual average of 2.86 million tons in 1982-86. Not only did this continued practice force Americans to spend more than other consumers for sugar, but it created hardships for Latin American countries and the Philippines, which depend on sugar exports for economic development. The quota program undermined President Reagan's Caribbean Basin Initiative and intensified the international debt crisis.(37)
-- Negotiated to increase restrictiveness of the Multifiber Arrangement and extended restrictions to previously unrestricted textiles. The administration unilaterally changed the rule of origin in order to restrict textile and apparel imports further and imposed a special ceiling on textiles from the People's Republic of China.(38) Finally, it pressured Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea, the largest exporters of textiles and apparel to the United States, into highly restrictive bilateral agreements. All told, textile and apparel restrictions cost Americans more than $20 billion a year.(39) The Reagan administration has stated several times that textile and apparel imports should grow no faster than the domestic market.(40)
-- Required 18 countries--including Brazil, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Mexico, South Africa, Finland, and Australia, as well as the European Community--to accept "voluntary restraint agreements" to reduce steel imports, guaranteeing domestic producers a share of the American market. When 3 countries not included in the 18--Canada, Sweden, and Taiwan-- increased steel exports to the United States, the administration demanded talks to check the increase. The administration also imposed tariffs and quotas on specialty steel. These policies, with their resulting shortages, have severely squeezed American steel-using firms, making them less competitive in world markets and eliminating more than 52,000 jobs.(41)
-- Imposed a five-year duty, beginning at 45 percent, on Japanese motorcycles for the benefit of Harley Davidson, which admitted that superior Japanese management was the cause of its problems.(42)
-- Raised tariffs on Canadian lumber and cedar shingles.
-- Forced the Japanese into an agreement to control the price of computer memory-chip exports and increase Japanese purchases of American-made chips. When the agreement was allegedly broken, the administration imposed a 100 percent tariff on $300 million worth of electronics goods. This episode teaches a classic lesson in how protectionism comes back to haunt a country's producers. The quotas established as a result of the agreement have created a severe shortage of memory chips and higher prices for American computer makers, putting them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors. Only two American firms are still making these chips, accounting for a small percentage of the world market.(43)
-- Removed Third World countries from the duty-free import program for developing nations on several occasions.
-- Pressed Japan to force its automakers to buy more American-made parts.(44)
-- Demanded that Taiwan, West Germany, Japan, and Switzerland restrain their exports of machine tools, with some market shares rolled back to 1981 levels. Other countries were warned not to increase their shares of the U.S. market.
-- Accused the Japanese of dumping roller bearings, because the price did not rise to cover a fall in the value of the yen. The U.S. Customs Service was ordered to collect duties equal to the so-called dumping margins.(45)
-- Accused the Japanese of dumping forklift trucks and color picture tubes.(46)
-- Failed to ask Congress to end the ban on the export of Alaskan oil and of timber cut from federal lands, a measure that could substantially increase U.S. exports to Japan.
-- Redefined "dumping" in order "to make it easier to bring charges of unfair trade practices against certain competitors."(47)
-- Beefed up the Export-Import Bank, an institution dedicated to promoting the exports of a handful of large companies at the expense of everyone else.(48)
don’t give me that ‘get over it’ bullshit, sister.
A clean repeal was job number one. It is still CHOCKING us to death!
Are you stupid?
What you want is a continuation of the income tax. No sale.
Put away the pom poms and think for a change.
How about make the tax cuts for individuals permanent, first?
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.