Trump Touts Tax Plan
So amazing, it will make your head spin
Speaking from Trump Tower Monday, Republican Presidential contender Donald Trump announced his “tax reform that will make America great again.” The announcement brings Donald Trump’s policy paper count up to a grand total of three.
Trump claims his plan accomplishes the following:
TAX REFORM THAT WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
The Goals Of Donald J. Trump’s Tax Plan
Too few Americans are working, too many jobs have been shipped overseas, and too many middle class families cannot make ends meet. This tax plan directly meets these challenges with four simple goals:
1. Tax relief for middle class Americans: In order to achieve the American dream, let people keep more money in their pockets and increase after-tax wages.
2. Simplify the tax code to reduce the headaches Americans face in preparing their taxes and let everyone keep more of their money.
3. Grow the American economy by discouraging corporate inversions, adding a huge number of new jobs, and making America globally competitive again.
4. Doesn’t add to our debt and deficit, which are already too large.
Trump’s plan also eliminates the death tax completely.
Potentially problematic for Republicans, Trump’s plan calls for raising taxes on the wealthy, while reducing the tax rate to zero for others. The “tax the wealthy” rhetoric is typically reserved for Democrats and the Occupy movement. According to Politico:
Under a President Donald Trump, some Americans will pay no income tax and the corporate income tax will fall to 15 percent, while the Treasury Department will maintain or even increase current revenue.
And while Trump emphasized the hit the rich would take under his tax plan unveiled Monday, he pairs the closing of loopholes and deductions with such a large rate reduction that it would likely add up to a substantial tax cut for many of the well-to-do.
The tax plan “is going to cost me a fortune,” the billionaire candidate told a gathering of reporters at Trump Tower on Monday morning.
“We have an amazing code. It will be simple, it will be easy, it will be fair,” he explained.
…”If you look at actually raise, some very wealthy are going to be raised. Some people that are getting unfair deductions are going to be raised,” Trump told Scott Pelley. “But overall it’s going to be a tremendous incentive to grow the economy and we’re going to take in the same or more money. And I think we’re going to have something that’s going to be spectacular.”
Under Trump’s plan, the Republican candidate explained, “there will be a large segment of our country that will have a zero rate, a zero rate.”
…Under the proposal, individuals making less than $25,000 and married couples making less than $50,000 will not have to pay taxes. The current highest income-tax rate—39.6 percent—would drop to 25 percent. Overall, the number of rates would decrease from the current seven to four, at 0, 10, 20 and 25 percent. While 36 percent of American households do not pay income tax currently, that share would jump to 50 percent.
“My plan will bring sanity, common sense and simplification to our country’s catastrophic tax code,” Trump told the Journal. “It will create jobs and incentives of all kinds while simultaneously growing the economy.”
Romney got crushed for deriding the 47% who don't may federal income tax. Trump wants to increase that number. http://t.co/Y9Ot9y9izV
— Lex Haris (@lexharis) September 28, 2015
At a straw poll conducted at the Value Voters Summit, Trump slumped to 5%.
Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
OK, I’ll say this. The tax issue alone could put Trump in office. The lawyers, accountants and lobbyists that make their money getting special tax breaks for their clients will fight this because this could break their rice bowl.
The guys over at Fox Business loved this plan. Grover Nordquist said it would pass quickly through the House and Senate. Peter Morisi said it was a 4% growth plan. Stuart Varney said it was “reaganesque.”
Carl Icahn officially endorsed Trump for President.
Mark Levin thinks it’s a good plan, pro-growth. Doesn’t like the zero tax for millions but thinks it’s a plan Reagan could have proposed.
I think that’s true. And Reagan was WRONG.
Look what happened almost immediately. The dial got tweaked again in the WRONG direction.
Leaving THE single most oppressive thing an American faces routinely in play, and playing with it at the margins, is simply BAD government.
What would be your ideal plan?
What? Again? I favor repeal of the 16th, with some variation of the “fair tax” idea replacing the income tax entirely.
NO tax on business at the Federal level at all.
NO tax on inheritance.
I could live with the “flat tax”, but you still have much of the same crap as we do now, with the predictable evolution of a progressive rate being brought in through dicking with other elements, like “credits” for being poor that would essentially pay people’s taxes (and more), resulting in the same redistribution of wealth problem with the current code.
Rags, you normally seem like a rational guy but Jeeezzze you sure have gone off the deep end on this tax proposal from trump. To me we are in a position caused by the Bush tax cuts after 9-11 which left a large portion of the country paying little or no federal income tax.
for your consideration: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/09/29/about-these-tax-plans-establishment-republicans-have-a-george-w-bush-tax-the-rich-problem/
Yup, these guy’s are Trump believers but the more I see of the republican field the more I agree with’em. He pay’s his on way and doesn’t give a rat’s azz what any one of these bastards from DC say about anything…so there’s that.
And let’s not forget the PRIMARY reason to back Trump: he’ll proactively try to reduce the number of criminal illegal border trespassers, and do his best to reduce the incoming flow to a trickle. It’s CERTAIN we’ll see some progress there, and you won’t see anywhere near the immigration commitment from any other Republican (certainly not from the Democrats).
Vote Trump. Give him a term to redirect the national focus. If he screws up, kick his ass out. It’s only four years. And if he picks a decent running mate, and a savvy cabinet (for me, that means non-ideological experts who will get things done) let Trump loose to do his thing. He’s already proven himself shrewder then any of the other twerps in the race.
I would rather have a tax plan designed by a business man than an IRS bureaucrat or a Tax Lawyer.
If you refer to T-rump, he did NOT design this plan. I doubt seriously he understands much of it.
I think people like you (on purpose) ruin a good
website’s comment section. You are an agitator.
The best thing to do is not engage with you.
However, that is difficult because so many want
to tell you to shut up.
Amjean: I’m just commenting to give you a thumb’s up; I think what you said is spot-on. I’m so sick of the childish behavior and name-calling. I was really hoping that Prof. Jacobsen was going to follow up on his threats, but I suspect that the loudest mouths must be contributing the largest amounts. It’s sad, but kind of symbolic of the juvenile crap that passes for debate nowadays. 🙁
Carl Icahn’s video shows you where Trump got his ideas
Just what America needs is more working and middle class people who don’t pay in, but who are quick to ask for a government handout. Let’s see Trump’s plan for entitlement reform, or does he think we can grow our way out of a birth rate that has tanked just as the Baby Boomer bulge is starting to collect Social Security and Medicare.
This is not conservatism. It is pure populist envy, which always turns out badly for the very people it is supposed to help.
As for Trump, if he thinks rich people don’t pay enough, what has ever stopped him from volunteering to write a check to the Federal government?
Have you actually read the plan? It’s on his website. After you do, maybe your current view will be less knee-jerk.
I’ve read it.
Much of it is gobbledygook. There are statements in it that are implicit lies. There are a few explicit lies.
But the whole thing is ANTI-conservative. I’ll be happy to elaborate!
Flailing with the tumbling tumbleweeds…
When do we get to see screeches of pinko Commie America hater, dear?
From ME? Hold your breath. Dear.
Anti-Conservative Rags. LOL That is why Grover Norquist, Stuart Varney, and all the commentators listening to the speech called the plan Reaganesque and marveled at how only Donald Trump could sell the plan unlike Jeb! and all the other GOP and GOPe candidates.
Trump’s poll numbers are going to go up 10% points in the next round of polls. Friorina and Rubio will both fall back a bit before the next debate.
Let’s see if your prediction comes true, Bernie Butt Boi.
It could happen. The people were fooled into voting for Obama twice…
Talk to me about how great this tax plan is after Trump submits his plan for entitlement reform and cutting federal spending. Of course, that’s not popular to the class of voters Trump mostly appeals to.
Nor is it knee jerk to understand that populism is pernicious, no matter how cleverly it may be packaged. That’s because it always leads to corruption and facism, not freedom.
I’ve related how I heard a T-rump spokeshole (his attorney) declaim that ALLLLLLLL entitlements will be fully funded!
Why? We’ll be RICH, RICH, RICH. (Duh Donald has never walked that back, BTW).
Which is moonypony economics. It is literally impossible. Just like a solar-powered America.
Perhaps we will find out more at the end of October when his new book gets published. He’s been very clear that he wants to reduce spending. How he does that..well we will have to see.
He told us the other night on “60 Minutes”.
Cut waste, fraud and abuse! Management!
Better Brights! Just like all Collectivists evah!
Just what America needs is more working and middle class people who don’t pay in, but who are quick to ask for a government handout.
A glib formulation of a common complaint. But there’s little logic behind it.
Those who may be “quick to ask for a government handout” will ask for it no matter how much they “pay in”.
It’s even worse than that—if they are impoverished by taxes, even if only slightly, they have one more justification for the handout they’re requesting, and a justification not as easily dismissed as some.
Tax policy and “entitlement” policy are entirely distinct issues. Confounding and conflating them may make for good sound bites, but that’s about all.
Even for an engineer-type, tom, you are remarkably clueless about human nature!
Who pays more attention to how money is spent? Those who didn’t put any money in the deal, or those who DID? And those who WILL?
As a general rule, who makes a better student? A kid who is hauled to school every day for fear of being charged with truancy, or the kid who walks to school a mile because he/she is engaged in the process? Who’s parent is MORE involved in the process?
It’s Monday. I list to the fotball posts mortems on the radio ( for the Bears they really do feal like post mortems, sigh ).
In radio channel surfing I bumped across a radio station ( I think they were doing Dennis Prauger ) and heard a comment that Grover Norquist really liked his plan.
I don’t know the accuracy of the statement. Just reporting. I also heard that the whole plan has not been released yet.
Basically, it’s tax the rich and give it to the poor, a quaint old liberal Democrat populist theme.
He’s promising to rob Peter to pay Paul. As long as his tax plan means that there’re going to be more Pauls than Peters, he’s in clover.
He’ll embiggen the ranks of the Free Stuff Army and have them voting for him for the next umpteen years… or at least until he runs out of Peters to rob anyway.
No Amy, he isn’t. All taxpayers will get tax relief but he’s done it in a way that people like you and the democrats will be confounded to attack it in the usual ways.
“If you are single and earn less than $25,000, or married and jointly earn less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax. That removes nearly 75 million households – over 50% – from the income tax rolls. ”
See? It’s magic, like the Underwear Gnome Civics that will destroy the eGOP…
performed by the American oligarch, Mr. Estabishment!
Trump’s big mistake was saying he wouldn’t form a 3rd Party.
If he was free of the Republican label, he would attract substantial numbers of dissatisfied Democrats (modern version of Reagan Democrats), and substantial numbers of dissatisfied moderate Republican voters who have had enough of shrill right wing ululations.
Should he decide to run on his own, I have the ideal 3rd Party Vice President candidate for him. Someone who would silence the critics who say Trump lacks the credentials to be Commander in Chief, or engage in international statesmanship: retired four-star general, former US Sectary of State (and a Black guy to boot) Colin Luther Powell.
Trump-Powell in 2016!
A Better Nation!
A Better World!
Trump’s big mistake was saying he wouldn’t form a 3rd Party.
Au contraire, that was the first real indication we had that he’s serious this time.
In American presidential politics, third-party candidacies are for people who want to be in the headlines, not for people serious about being elected.
Trump-Powell in 2016!
A Better Nation!
A Better World!
God help us. As if The Donald needed a liberal running mate!!
No Republican will win the presidency without Moderate Independent and some Democratic voter support.
Carson has it. Trump never will.
Don’t think you’re right about that, genes.
From his entry into the race, polls have shown Trump with substantial support among Independents who lean Republican… A voter cohort that tends not to vote at all for far right conservatives.
And Carson is a blah personality. When he speaks it’s like listening to a 78rpm record playing at 45rpm. You could replace an audio recording of him talking with the sounds of waves breaking gently on the shore, to help you fall asleep at night
Does anyone really think it’s a good idea to exclude the majority of Americans from having to help fund the promises and handouts their government promises?
Anyone who’s not going to be one of the free riders, I mean? Or are there just not going to be enough of us left to matter?
ONE of the many tenets of conservative philosophy this “plan” spits on.
How is it sound civics for a smaller and smaller portion of Americans to pay for their Federal government?
Of course, it ISN’T!
I agree that the tax percentages and brackets are a populist politician’s “terrific” scheme to get votes, but there is some merit to the corporate cut, lowered business rate and repatriation scheme – not that a much more qualified and trustworthy candidate couldn’t incorporate the same or similar with a hat tip to whomever drafted Trumpet’s plan, which surely was not Trumpet.
I don’t understand why anybody would believe a word he says, and he has avoided the subject of entitlements altogether. For a big, blowhard loudmouth, he’s meek as a mouse when it comes to anything controversial. And what happened to the Department of Terrific that will decide who the millions of returning illegals will be that get the jobs generated by the tax cuts and profit repatriation will be, illegals that we suckers will supposedly pay billions to remove?
Good gawd, who believes this shi+?
Well, the rich have more money, of course, but the poor and lower middle class have millions upon millions of votes, more than the rich can buy via influence. So, Trump goes where the market is – populism, the numbers. Tax the rich, give it to the poor. This is a hoary old political promise, but a lot of folks eat it up and will vote for free government services even knowing someone else has to pay for it. This has been an unspoken plank in the Democrat Party for decades and decades. Plus, it has the added bonus of forwarding the socialist agenda of redistribution of wealth downward.
Worked for Obama in 2008 and now Trump uses it.
Obamaphone Lady endorses Donald Trump in 3…2…1…
“Tax the rich, give it to the poor.” Only with the Trump twist which is:
Tax the rich, give it to the poor – via $20 an hour jobs.
How many of his H2B models for his modeling agency does he pay that well. How ’bout the housekeepers and groundskeepers?
I think you’re confusing Donald Trump with Bernie Sanders. To be fair, it’s an easy mistake to make.
You don’t win elections by raising taxes on a huge voting bloc. You win elections by stimulating the economy so that these people can get better jobs. Decreasing the corporate tax and creating an incentive to repatriate overseas capital will do that.
Like it or not, we are stuck with this until this country gets wealthier. Trump’s plan can pass the House and Senate. Even if we have to force McConnell to use reconciliation.
I should correct what I typed. It should read overseas profits. That is the real meat of his tax plan IMO.
You’re exactly right, PhillyGuy.
Short of an armed revolution, or another 1930s-like severe depression, or an ecological catastrophe that wipes out 3/4 of the population, democratic/republic nations don’t make major changes to their economic systems.
The “McConnell Theory” of winning! Yeah! That’ll work. It’s endorsed by Moby Trolls!
Actually, nations DO make radical changes in tax policy when they are mandated by reality.
Yes dopy, mandated by the kinds of reality I delineated above.
Duh. Not some conservative monetary philosophical frou-frou.
TaxProf Blog has a round-up of pieces on Trump’s plan as well.
It will be FUN to have conservative tax policy outfits and wonks rate this in terms of its “revenue neutrality”, “jobs creation” and other claims (so of which are just beeee-zare!).
I just would like to see Trump in a forum where he can explain the details of these policy papers.
THAT would be ugly. Mean even…!!!
If you want a policy wonk hire a pro amnesty open borders technocrat like Clinton or Fiorina. If you want a leader that knows how to get things done through the management of others (JUST LIKE REAGAN DID) then hire a leader like Trump.
Bernie Butt Boi, PLEASE…!!!
T-rump didn’t write a syllable of that “plan”, and if pressed on its contents and meaning would do his Duh Donald shuffle!
It’s ALL BIG GOVERNMENT. All it does it nibble around the margins.
And NOBODY with a brain in business will buy it completely.
Remember, Mr. Sanders Supporter, businesses don’t look to next year when deciding the disposition of billions of dollars. They look to the END of the administration.
Rags, LOL. You need to slow down and get your mommy to give you your meds. You’re spinning so fast that you’re spitting up in your “Lucky Charms”. This last post completely fails to address even one thing stated in the post to which it replies and sets a record for you by not stating even one truthful or accurate factual allegation. Your debating prowess is truly .. ur… um…. something to behold.
Odd, then, that you can’t respond to my several factual assertions.
Innit…? ADMITTED Sander’s Butt Boi.
The only place that gasbag Trumpet has ever led a group of people to is bankruptcy court.
I can easily imagine the bombastic bombardment of the moderators of such an event that we’d be treated to in the media in the days following. That whining pissant would dine off the “unfairness” and “mistreatment” for a week.
What a despicable jackass he is. He’d be as embarrassing as obastard is, only in a slightly different way.
“…Trump’s plan calls for raising taxes on the wealthy, while reducing the tax rate to zero for others”
So he’s effectively buying the votes of the middle class by promising to use the apparatus (which routinely seizes the bank accounts and home of Americans) exclusively on the wealthy.
Anyone GOP candidate who employs and legitimizes the rhetoric and false dichotomy of Rich vs Poor isn’t grounded in the concept of individual liberty and property rights.
At this time last month, the Trumpster said: “Well, I think fair tax is okay. And I think flat tax is okay. But, I think the simplest thing to get approved is just the simplification of the existing. You know, we can just simplify the existing . . .”
What a difference a month makes.
I think everyone here forgets that when first begun, it was promised that only a few percent of Americans would ever pay an income tax. Granted, the fed. gov’t. now spends money on a trillion additional programs than then, but still…
No! That’s just FALSE. A LOT of us remember very, very well the lies that were told around the passage of the 16th Amendment.
We DO remember it was passed in large part to enable Prohibition, replacing (ostensibly) the taxes on beer and liqueur which for DECADES had been the primary source of funding the SMALL government to that point.
BOTH were Progressive notions…the income tax and Prohibition…and BOTH were disasters for Constitutional government. As history has proven.
Ok I mentioned iot before. I decided to check out drudge just now. On the top a link to this page:http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/norquist-blesses-trumps-tax-plan-brings-jobs-jobs-jobs/article/2572929
Harrumph! What does that Norquist guy know about conservative tax policy compared to our own local Commentariats’ I Hate Trump Glee Club, some of whom consider themselves to be God’s gift to conservatism?
Left Wing Comes Out in Full Attack Against Trump Tax Plan
Joined by a small cadre of hard core Trumpophobes at Legal Insurrection
Trump’s Tax Plan Is A Big Giveaway To The Wealthiest
Donald Trump Steals Jeb Bush’s Tax Plan, Makes It Classier, More Luxurious
Trump’s tax plan seems to help the rich get even richer than Jeb!’s plan
Meanwhile conservative experts were enthusiastic
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s newly released tax plan was given a blessing Monday by the nation’s biggest anti-tax advocate, Grover Norquist, who said it would produce “jobs, jobs, jobs.”
As Trump revealed his plan at a press conference, Norquist’s influential Americans for Tax Reform released its review that Trump’s plan is “consistent” with the advocacy group’s “Taxpayer Protection Pledge.”
But T-rumpian troll, this isn’t “reform”.
At VERY best, it’s twaddling with the code. It’s MORE social engineering via the power to tax…which we all know is the power to destroy!
We have a chance for REAL tax reform, which only days ago Duh Donald was TALKING about (as usual).
You should take a few minutes and see if you find ONE…just ONE…clause of that bullshit paper you understand well enough to explain to everyone here.
Go ahead. We’ll wait…
Whew — you brought home some KOS on your shoe. Probably stepped in it at the daily Frothing Against Trump Rally
PS Nobody but you put you in charge of assignments. Since you can’t understand Trump’s Plan on your own why should I waste my time explaining it to you?
I see you sliming, coward, by I can’t see any substance.
Wanna try again?
“We have a chance for REAL tax reform, which only days ago Duh Donald was TALKING about (as usual).”
A little late to this, but I disagree. The kind of “reform” I want to see requires a constitutional amendment. It’s not going to happen anytime soon. So, make what we have better, reduce taxes as much as possible, all the while working on a national sales tax to replace the current code.
This plan is better than the “status quo” and it most certainly goes further than any other serious R presidential candidate or actual president has gone.
The enemy of good is perfect.
Trumps policies, leadership, and now his tax plan to go with his jobs and trade policies are making him VERY electable in the general election. He is lowering taxes for everyone, including high income earners, but is doing it in a way that is far harder to attack on the old rich guy gets millions in tax relief and little guy gets $100 as often used by democrats in the past.
As a result of his leadership qualities, his Make America Great Again campaign slogan, his immigration, trade, jobs, and tax policies all combine to give him voter strength with republicans AND the old Reagan Democrats, union members, etc.
Trump will actually be stronger in the general election than he is in the primary elections.
“He is lowering taxes for everyone, including high income earners”
So, HOW is his plan “revenue neutral” you cult-following, slavish follower?
Well Rags, real Reagan conservatives understand that lowering marginal rates this much will cause the economy to grow so much that it is revenue neutral. You are also omitting the affects of corporations bringing 2 trillion to 4 trillion dollars back to USA, paying 10% tax on that and using the money to a great extent here in the USA. Jobs, jobs, jobs, equals more taxpayers.
Except you didn’t MENTION “marginal rates” liar.
You said everyone was going to get a tax cut. Read your own bullshit. I read it, and eviscerated it.
Except now at 1:18 pm below you quote a post from powerline blog that states quite clearly that Trump’s plan is a tax cut for everyone including the rich. So now you have “eviscerated” yourself.
Funny when chimps throwing their own feces around fall face first on it themselves. Chimps after all just aren’t that smart. LOL
Nope. You lie yet again. Besides the ad hominem from a Bernie Butt Boi, who DECLARED his butt boi position relative to free markets.
The Trump tax cuts are fully paid for by:
1. Reducing or eliminating most deductions and loopholes available to the very rich.
2. A one-time deemed repatriation of corporate cash held overseas at a significantly discounted
10% tax rate, followed by an end to the deferral of taxes on corporate income earned abroad.
3. Reducing or eliminating corporate loopholes that cater to special interests, as well as
deductions made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rate on corporations and
business income. We will also phase in a reasonable cap on the deductibility of business
Your welcome! 🙂
That’s what T-rump’s “plan” (which isn’t his at all) CLAIMS.
Like I say, it’ll be interesting to see what conservatives have to say about it.
THIS Conservative thinks it is just more of the same code manipulation and social engineering by BIG GOVERNMENT.
He COULD have opted for real reform. Instead all he’s done is play people for dupes.
“THIS Conservative…” rofl
I’ll listen to what Norquist and Limbaugh and other actual conservatives have to say when I want conservative tax analysis.
Not some foul mouthed angry internet clown — really, who gives a rat’s hind end what you think you are and what your latest hissy is about?
Speaking of “asses”, all you can do is show yours when challenged.
I’ve made several ration points, and stated testable facts.
And you’re running like a sissy for the tall grass. We all see, and we laugh!
Very solid politically; should have a lot of appeal. Worst legit attack is that it doesn’t go far enough but it is a big step.
Rush Limbaugh’s initial evaluation of the Trump Plan. He neither unreservedly endorses it nor slams it.
Maybe those who don’t understand the plan (cough, R#@!gs*@#%) will
benefit from the rather extensive comparison to Reagan’s policies.
I’ve stated my SUBSTANTIVE issues, coward.
You take them up, and I’ll defend them.
I have OTHERS, BTW.
Oh, and being that I think independently and critically, I’ve found Rush making factual errors and running backwards on conservative positions lately.
Do you have the guts to learn them? They’re all verifiable.
Stand back folks! This one looks like he about to burst his boiler any time now!
I thought you were gone, having flounced off so that you would not “grace” use with your bullshit any longer.
Interesting how your “Cruz” supporters spend so much time sucking on T-rump’s rump…!!!
Rags you think independently and critically just like most chimpanzees. Mostly you just throw your own feces around all over the place.
No. That would be YOU! What I do is make rational argument, and challenge others to counter them, and I state facts that can be verified.
Like I’ve done here.
And you don’t have the balls or the integrity to deal with either.
Rags you are a legend of rhetorical excellence in your own mind. If only Stephen Douglas had you to help him against Lincoln.
And you’ve STILL got NO balls and no integrity.
You are still confusing pooping in your hand and throwing it around for intellectual discourse. Get help.
Here are some conservative principles regarding taxation…
1. taxation for income redistribution is wrong
2. taxation that does not include all citizens is wrong
3. taxation that assumes the right of the Federal government to order business assets is wrong
4. taxation that is capricious (i.e., NOT predictable from year-to-year) is wrong
5. any tax system that leaves the current tax code substantially in place, and only tinkers with it at the margins is wrong
Now, any of you people who support the T=rump “reforms” tell me what was “reformed”.
What was reformed you ask? Numbers 1,2, 3, 4, and 5. Plus more.
But, gary, you’re a lying liar.
But Ragamuffin, I thought I was your lying liar.
If you continue to keep calling everyone lying liars, the erm of affection will lose it’s special significance.
I promise you’ll be my only narcissistic numbskull, no one else but you.
No, you’re a lying SOS. gary is fast approaching that.
You’re also a moron. I’m clearly NOT a narcissist. I have a high degree of empathy for others, and my many foibles are quite apparent to me. I don’t exhibit any of the characteristics of a narcissist, unlike T-rump and Obama, who both DO.
Sure you are:
Narcissists are envious and competitive, and misinterpret innocuous statements as hostile, often causing them to go off on tangents and irrelevancies.
In conversations they believe they are always right, and become combative if their own perceived reputations or opinions are questioned, and then frequently ACCUSE OTHERS OF LYING.
In other words, they are self-centered and lack capacity to be self-critical – a self-evident fact in regard to your comments here: has there been ANY instance where you admitted you were wrong or mistaken about any opinion you expressed? Not that I can find.
That’s narcissistic you to a custom fit, NPD personified. Wikipedia defines NPD (Narcissistic personality disorder) as a ‘cluster B’ disorder, historically defined as megalomania, or extreme egocentrism, in which “a person is excessively preoccupied with personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity, mentally unable to see the destructive damage they are causing to themselves and others.”
And if we had a surveillance camera hidden wherever it is you post your comments, I bet we’d see you kissing your own hand after posting them.
Other than that and your pathological need to name-call and insult people daily, I’m sure you’re a great old guy, fun to socialize with – and the rumors that your pals try to duck out the back door when they see you coming in the front barroom door are unfounded.
Post your links, lying SOS. I LOVED the one the other day with the blog idiot with a BA in psychology!
I don’t accuse you of lying. You demonstrate your lies.
Over and over and over, Mr. “Babies are TECHINICALLY parasites”. Then you lie about lying!
You’ll note the that there’s really no objective way gary wasn’t lying about the philosophical positions conservatives hold on taxation compared to Duh Donald’s NOT tax plan. HE was just trolling, as you know.
I don’t apologize for my positions, because I can rationally and morally defend them. I don’t take them unless those are true.
You’d note, if you had ANY integrity, that I sometimes take no position on an issue. That would be because I have not FACTUALLY analyzed it.
But a narcissist is kind of on the OTHER end of the psychological spectrum from me.
I even empathize with you. I hope and believe you can be better than you are. You can be NOT a liar. You can be NOT a Collectivist puke. Start today! One day at a time!
For the umpteenth time, if you have a problem with the words ‘parasite’ or ‘parasitic’ used to describe fetuses, take it up with the medical and scientific community. Once again, here’s some linked examples.
“Q: Technically though, what is a parasite?”
“A: Anything that thrives at the expense of what it’s living on and living in. In the broadest definition, you include viruses, a lot of bacteria and things you don’t normally think of as parasites. A fetus in the womb actually behaves a lot like a parasite. It uses strategies to extract nutrients and energy out of its mother. And the mother, to a certain extent, has to defend herself against it.”
“A fetus does not sit passively in its mother’s womb and wait to be fed. Its placenta aggressively sprouts blood vessels that invade its mother’s tissues to extract nutrients.”
(Interview with Dr David Haig, evolutionary biologist at Harvard)
You need to seek psychological help. Analysis might do wonders for you. But if that doesn’t help, we can try an exorcism. Doesn’t one of your other favorite candidates have experience doing that?
I can assure you, sir, without hesitation, I am not, nor have I ever been a Mormon!
(though I worked on a collectivist Boy Scout farm-camp as a teenager)
AMAZING…!!! You’re STILL trying to whip that dead horse back to LIFE.
AND you’re using some evil shit who invokes “parasites” as the Nazis used the term for Jews!
One more time…
The progeny of a higher species CANNOT be “parasites” on their dam, mother, etc.
You are a sick phuc!
Again, take it up with the medical community:
“Parasites often live inside the body of another creature, extract their nutrition from its blood, and struggle to escape attack by its immune system. the placenta uses at least one trick from the world of parasites–a molecule that makes it partially invisible to mom’s immune system
And what kind of anti-Semitic dunce are you to equate abortion and the use of fetal tissue for medical research with Nazism. That’s the topic that was under discussion when I made the fetus as parasite comment. You do know that a large percentage of the doctors and research scientists who have conducted fetal experiments in the past for cures of deadly diseases were and are Jews: Dr. Sabin for polio was one of many; and presently dozens of Jewish doctors and surgeons at Israeli hospitals are working to develop treatments for blood and kidney diseases, and techniques in heart and limb transplants, using fetal tissue.
These Jews for the most part are descendants of victims of the Holocaust. You have a right to your narrow and stupid beliefs about abortion, but only a piece of excretion would equate the legal fetal scientific investigations with what the Nazis did to their relatives.
“The MEDICAL community…”???
You mean a lone blogger who YOU took out of context?
I can’t say it any better. You are a sick phuc, and a lying SOS.
The unborn of any species ARE NOT “parasites”, you evil, disgusting BOS!
Here’s and interesting thing…
I searched you link for “Parasites often live inside the body of another creature, extract their nutrition from its blood, and struggle to escape attack by its immune system…”
It isn’t there. What a lying, evil, disgusting SOS.
Are you suggesting I lied and made up the assertion that the placenta acts like a parasite to avoid attack by a mother’s immune system?
Why would I lie about one of three quotes?
It looks like there’s a chunk of paranoia mixed in with your narcissism.
The essence of the quote is true. Parasitic techniques are at work in the placenta. Very mysterious cloaking devices fooling mama’s immune system.
I make you the offer again: if the paragraph above is you shut your lying mouth for a month; if not true I shut mine.
Wadda say, LipFlapper? We have a bet?
sentence should read: “if paragraph above is TRUE you shut your lying mouth for a month.”
It isn’t there. What a lying, evil, disgusting SOS.
And, of course, an unborn human being HAS to overcome the mother’s immune rejection of it.
That’s what nature equipped our progeny to do, you scientific moron! It’s all part of the process of procreation of OUR species.
Seriously, is there NO lie you will not tell, and then try pitifully to defend?
(Experience answers the question. Yes, to both.)
“It isn’t there. What a lying, evil, disgusting SOS”
It doesn’t have to be there to be true, dough-brain.
The statement was true; it wasn’t the correct link, as you knew; even you cant be so retarded you didn’t qto understand that.
The human fetus acts like a parasite.
It sucks food and energy from the female host’s body.
Yes, it isn’t there, but NONETHELESS it’s true dough-brain.
I pasted the wrong link; even a retard like you must have figured that out.
But the fetus does acts like a parasite in the female host’s body.
Its placenta aggressively sprouts blood vessels that invade its mother’s tissues to extract nutrients. To avoid attack by the female host’s immune system, it employs a cloaking device similar to that used by parasitic worms.
Yup it’s true, the human fetus is like a parasitic worm. It may not TECHNICALLY be a parasite by strict definition, but it fulfills most of the requirements for parasitism.
Here’s the correct link to verify fetal parasitical behavior.
You know what’s delicious…sublime even…???
The image of you flailing around for hours on the internet trying to find anything that will make your lie not a lie.
Fail. The progeny of a species of higher animals are not parasites on their mother. They are called “their off-spring” for good reason.
You evil, disgusting lying SOS.
“The progeny of a species of higher animals are not parasites on their mother. They are called “their off-spring” for good reason.”
The Jackass is a male donkey. Does that mean people who have been calling you a Jackass for years can’t use the word to indicate you are a stupid incompetent fool? In describing you as a jackass they are attributing undeniable similarities between you and the dumb beast. In the same way, the fetus is often described as a parasite, because it mimics parasitic behavior in relation to the female host who carries it.
You can rail against the fetus-parasite relationship as inaccurate because it’s the same species as the host all you want, but nobody is going to listen to a Jackass quibble about inexact word usage when that ignoramus does it himself in the same sentence: or are you too stupid to understand a fetus isn’t “an offspring?”
An offspring is the born young of an animal or plant, you Moron.
And what do actual conservatives think?
MARK LEVIN GIVES THUMBS-UP ON DONALD TRUMP TAX PROPOSAL: ‘A HELL OF A PLAN!’
Levin said that, although he prefers both the flat and fair taxes, he thinks Trump’s plan is good overall.
“Trump cuts the business tax rate from 35% and, in some cases, 39.6% depending on the business type, to 15%,” he said. “Could you imagine the amount of economic growth that would occur in this country?”
So, why retain a tax on business at all? As I’ve been pointing out for years, it’s really one of the most dishonest of all Federal taxes, since businesses do not PAY it, but rather collect it from unwitting consumers and pass it along.
If you’re reforming, make real reforms, not adjustments in what is the most corrupt single thing Americans come up against in their interaction with their central government…the Byzantine tax code.
Why retain a business tax at all?
To get elected, stupid.
But I see a night’s sleep has changed your sour tune somewhat.
After badmouthing everything about Trump’s plan, and hurling your usual schoolyard insults at everyone here who likes it, with your stock cries about social engineering by BIG GOVERNMENT (your caps), now that nationally known conservatives with financial authority are praising it as well – you’ve retreated to petulant criticism that ‘it could br better,’ and that Trump is playing people for dupes.
The only dupe in the equation is you.
And will you please straighten that dunce cap on your bald pate.
Wows. You just HAVE to lie about anything and everything.
My position is exactly the same.
This isn’t “reform”. This is just tinkering with the dial.
TAKING the dial off the board would be REFORM. Repealing the 16th Amendment would be real reform.
And Americans are ready for real reform as never before in my life. Citizens hate and fear the IRS, and with growing reasons every day.
Pitiful Collectivists like you LOVES you that corrupt BIG GOVERNMENT that gives you the cheap sanctimony purchased with other’s property! You’re evil and disgusting.
Kimberlee: So amazing, it will make your head spin
I heard it made Carly Fiorina orgasm with delight.
Maybe you should restrict your sexual fantasies to the Penthouse Forum.
And you’re a pig.
Can we just pass the thing already to find out what’s in it???
Actually the Trump, Bush and Rubio plans are not all that dissimilar and, once they came through the legislative process and the numbers got jockeyed up and down, might amount to substantially the same thing. They all want to simplify the tax code, as they should. Yes, there are differences that I will leave to tax geeks far more experienced in these things than I am, but what interests me is that they all, to one degree or another, work under the assumption that the poor should pay no taxes.
On the surface, this seems just. And the poor don’t have much money to pay so it’s almost irrelevant anyway, at least as far as the national treasury is concerned. It’s what Barack Obama likes to call “fair.”
But is it? Ben Carson — the candidate from the most impoverished background of all (Rubio comes in second) — approaches it differently. Coming from his religious heritage, the doctor wants everyone, whatever their financial status, to pay something close to the tithe the church recommends (slightly more, actually). What this does is give every citizen, as the saying goes, “skin in the game.” No matter how poor you are, even if you are on other forms of assistance, you contribute something to the common good. The rich, even the ultra-rich, only pay that same percentage.
Trump’s plan would enable dozens of millions of households to pay no income tax. That’s because neither single individuals who earn less than $25,000 per year nor married couples who jointly earn less than $50,000 per year would owe any income tax. They would simply send a postcard to the IRS saying “I win.”
This aspect of the plan shows Trump at his showman best. But I believe, with Ben Carson, that every American who earns money should contribute something by way of income tax. Free-loading may be winning in a sense, but saying so isn’t much of a civics lesson.
In the past, Trump has talked about the need for the very wealthy to pay more income tax. Lowering tax rates isn’t necessarily inconsistent with this talk because the wealthy might lose out due to the elimination of certain deductions and loopholes.
Trump’s plan doesn’t fully disclose the deductions and loopholes he intends to alter. However, as discussed below, there are provisions in Trump’s plan that disfavor many who are wealthy.
Nonetheless, early analyses of Trump’s plan suggest that, on balance, the rich will win (though they won’t get to send in a postcard declaring victory). Steve Gill, a tax and accounting professor at San Diego State University, said his quick calculation found that as a group, Americans making more than $200,000 a year would pay $400 billion to $500 billion less in taxes under Trump’s plan. Similarly, Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute says “the rich love this plan.” He calls Trump’s plan “not serious.”
In principle, lower taxes on the wealthy are fine with me. But Kyle Pomerleau, an economist at the Tax Foundation which favors lower rates, says that Trump’s tax cuts could easily cost more than $7 trillion over the next decade.
Assuming that Trump wants to keep the debt crisis from substantially worsening, how will he make up for the lost revenue? He talks of cutting spending. However, he has also talked of significantly increasing military spending and of universal health insurance (which we are far from having now).
This means that Trump’s plan simply doesn’t add up unless one assumes a massive increase in the rate of economic growth. Trump has mentioned six percent growth — surely an unsustainable rate unless you’re Chinese and get to fake the numbers.
Trump’s plan would bring in some revenue by attempting to force the repatriation of companies’ overseas profits (he would offer a 10 percent rate to soften the blow). President Obama also favors this approach.
I think I agree with Kevin Williamson that forced repatriation is unfair (by what right does the U.S. take a cut when a U.S. company builds something in Asia and sells it in Europe) and misguided (it will create another incentive for U.S. firms to move abroad). In any event, “repatriation” and Trump’s vaunted tax increase on hedge funds and private equity firms will not raise the kind of money needed to make Trump’s plan anything close to revenue neutral.
In sum, Trump’s plan contains the same good ideas that Republican tax plans typically feature — e.g., lower income tax rates, lower corporate tax rates, simplification — but like typical candidate-offered plans is more a political document than a serious proposal.
As a political document, Trump’s plan purports to offer more breaks than his competitors do. This suggests to me that it is somewhat less serious than rival plans.
Powerline Blog is not a credible source of political information, especially when it comes to Trump. They all hate Trump. In 2012 they spent their time lecturing conservatives on why Mitt Romney was a winner and would win the election against Obama. They like Karl Rove still think that Romney really won.
The analysis you copied from these non-conservative conservatives sounds just like what all the liberals say about conservative republican tax plans. It admits its very similar to the the plans offered by the establishment candidates they support (Bush and Rubio) and the biggest jab they make is that Trump has a 1% or 2% greater reduction in the marginal tax rates.
Also, by quoting this analysis you are now admitting that I was absolutely correct when I stated up thread that Trump’s plan lowers taxes for everyone including the rich. You claimed to completely fail to understand this point in your prior posts and denied it was true that the rich got a tax cut also. You were still posting that it was tax the rich and give to the poor up thread. Now changing your tune on that with this post.
When you were claiming (falsely or incompetently) up thread that Trump’s plan was tax the rich and give to the poor, you claimed to “eviscerate” my post that Trump’s plan cut taxes for everyone. No you post an analysis that says exactly what I said.
“eviscerate”, you keep using that word but I don’t think it means what you think it means. Credit for this paraphrase to Princess Bride (the movie).
Rags is the Sicilian bad guy from Princess Bride. Spitting and hollaring “never go up against a sicilian when death is on the line” just before he keels over dead from drinking the poison.
But, gary, lying liar, T-rump himself said he was going to tax the “rich”.
Did you miss that, or are you simply lying again?
Lowering a tax rate CAN increase revenues. Look up “Law Of Substitution” in economics, you moron. But it doesn’t HAVE to result in increased revenues. Look up “Laffer Curve”, you moron. It all depends on where the rate falls on the curve.
But, at any rate you lied about the conservative positions on taxation vis-a-vis T-rump’s non-serious proposal.
Here’s another one: no tax system that does not dismantle a corrupt, oppressive super-bureaucracy can be moral or consistent with small government and conservatism.
If you’ve been listening to Rush, you’ll have heard him gutting the T-rump plan…gently.
And, Bernie Butt Boi, we know YOU are not a conservative, and you’ve declare it! YOU are in line with Sanders regarding the free market.
“In 2012 they spent their time lecturing conservatives on why Mitt Romney was a winner and would win the election against Obama. They like Karl Rove still think that Romney really won.”
Post your links, liar.
Ragzini, do your own research. I read the powerline blog every day for years until about a month or so ago when I couldn’t take their Trump derangement syndrome any longer. Hinderaker, the guy you quoted from, was especially big on old Mitt Romney in 2012. You can look it up on their blog all you want.
That sounds like you’ve surrendered!
What a lying SOS!
Vizzini, a dazzling intellect… ha ha ha.
And he has Ragbrain’s long-winded debating style, and his bald pate as well.
and down. I’m actually very succint. You lying SOS.
Vizzini, yes that is it. Loved seeing that scene again from the movie.
Maybe from now on we should refer to Rags as Ragzini in honor of his superior intellect that allows him to “eviscerate” those who oppose him just like the great Vizzini from Princess Bride.
Two liars calling me names. How will I bear up?
Oh, I know! I’ll just keep up and a’goin’. I love you two!
Here, lying SOS I & II…
You can learn something about the wonders of market economics and why conservatives support the idea!!!
Gee I thought comments on this post would be dead by now but here’s the little guy who pretends to be a conservative clutching his tiny flagella and still beating on the horse, trying to get it to get up and charge Trump!