[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #392 - Swamp the tax

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 14:20 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
https://mobile.twitter.co(...)s/913724766208610304

Staat daar nou wat ik denk dat er staat?
Hoe lezen jullie deze tweet?

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 15:14 schreef Szura het volgende:
Puerto Rico is ‘a good news story’

https://twitter.com/apjvalk/status/913749870510592000

Wat een debielen zijn Trump en z’n trawanten toch

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 14:20 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
https://mobile.twitter.co(...)s/913724766208610304

Staat daar nou wat ik denk dat er staat?
Hoe lezen jullie deze tweet?

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 14:05 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:
Ze hebben er minder strikte regels dan hier. Ik kan je zeggen dat er een vracht roestbakken rondrijden..

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 15:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Volledig van het padje af. Die lui hebben echt geen benul.

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 15:14 schreef Szura het volgende:
Puerto Rico is ‘a good news story’

https://twitter.com/apjvalk/status/913749870510592000

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 14:20 schreef Whiskers2009 het volgende:
https://mobile.twitter.co(...)s/913724766208610304

Staat daar nou wat ik denk dat er staat?
Hoe lezen jullie deze tweet?

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 15:40 schreef Wespensteek het volgende:

[..]

Even wachten op Elzies die gaat wel uitleggen waarom het een "good news story" is, ik ga ervan uit dat we het verkeerd zien.

quote:

Do I even know you anymore?

Remember how our conversations always seemed to turn to politics? How we criticized Bill Clinton for playing so fast and loose with the truth? And how shamefully Democrats turned a blind eye to his fabrications and outright lies? Man, how could those Democrats sleep at night?

And what about how the guy we voted for, George W. Bush, running up the federal debt and launching ill-planned foreign adventures overseas? We swore that the next time Republicans got in power, we would pressure them to cut spending, attack the debt and put America’s foreign policy on a restrained and reasonable path. After Bush, we grew enraged by President Barack Obama’s efforts to reorder one-sixth of our economy on a straight party-line health-care vote. How reckless was that!

(..)

Southern guys like us loved that “leave no man behind” ethos when John Wayne or Sylvester Stallone exhibited it on movie screens. So why would you even think of booing a man, now fighting for his life, who showed that true grit in real life?

But boo Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) you did, at the behest of President Trump during a rally in Alabama last week.

Mike Allen of Axios further reported this week that Trump has been “physically mocking” the thumbs-down gesture McCain used to deliver the deciding vote against the Republican health-care bill in July. Did that mocking involve an imitation of McCain’s stiff arm movements? In case you haven’t read a newspaper in the 45 years since we played on the same Dixie Youth Baseball team together, McCain got the hell beaten out of him by the communists who held him in the Hanoi Hilton for more than five years.

(..)

If you booed McCain at last week’s rally, don’t bother answering. Someone has obviously failed you in your life; you probably need to spend some time figuring out who that was. And if you still go to church, you may also want to pray for all those around you who put tribal politics ahead of basic humanity.

Then maybe you should drive home and tell your children the story of John McCain’s sacrifice. If you can teach your children that lesson of heroism, there’s a chance they might grow up to have more character than the president you now praise.

https://www.washingtonpos(...)061d56efa_story.html

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 17:07 schreef Montov het volgende:
Verrassende sterke column van Morning Joe

[..]

quote:

The GOP tax plan is ridiculous. Here’s why

Last year, I proposed a handy rule of thumb for evaluating the economic proposals of politicians: The more growth they promise, the worse their plan probably is.

Why? Because the promise of bonkers growth usually means the politicians need that bonkers growth to paper over the ginormous deficits sure to follow — in the real world, under more realistic assumptions.

(..)

The plan’s designers may not know what their proposal is, exactly, but they know it will turbocharge growth.

President Trump told a group of Democrats and Republicans on Tuesday that this tax framework could lead the economy to grow more than 6 percent a year, as my Post colleagues reported.

To give you a sense of how ridiculous that is, the Federal Reserve’s median forecast for long-term growth is 1.8 percent, thanks in part to demographic challenges facing the country. (What matters is the long-term number, as growth rates can bounce around a lot quarter to quarter and over the course of the business cycle.) The Congressional Budget Office, in scoring Trump’s budget this year, said it would add maybe a tenth of a percentage point to growth — bringing us to a whopping 1.9 percent.

(..)

In light of all these grand growth projections, I propose a corollary to my earlier rule.

Here it is: If you promise that your policy will “pay for itself” through faster economic growth, you must commit — in advance — to cutting the programs you love most if that growth doesn’t materialize.

For Republicans, that means writing language into their tax bill lopping trillions off defense spending. Hey, if they truly believe their plan won’t cost a dime, surely there’s no risk to our national security.

Otherwise, the yawning deficits that would inevitably result from the Trump plan may turn into an excuse to decimate programs Republicans are already eyeing, such as Medicaid and food stamps. In fact, “starve the beast” Republicans may see this as a best-case scenario.

https://www.washingtonpos(...)061d56efa_story.html

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 13:47 schreef brokjespoes het volgende:
Trump-adviseur Gary Cohn: "1000 dollar tax cut? Kun je mooi een nieuwe auto van kopen!"

Ja, van Lego.

quote:

Treasury Removes Paper at Odds With Mnuchin’s Take on Corporate-Tax Cut’s Winners

WASHINGTON—The Treasury Department has taken down a 2012 economic analysis that contradicts Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s argument that workers would benefit the most from a corporate income tax cut.

The 2012 paper from the Office of Tax Analysis found that workers pay 18% of the corporate tax while owners of capital pay 82%. That is a breakdown in line with many economists’ views and close to estimates from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation and Congressional Budget Office.

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 17:33 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Het is wel lastig om dingen positief te spinnen als experts wat anders denken... beter maar verwijderen.

twitter:

JohnJHarwood twitterde op vrijdag 29-09-2017 om 17:54:52 Trump says 2nd Q GDP growth of 3.1% is "a number that hasn't been hit for a long time." It was hit 8 times under Obama most recently in 2015 reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 15:14 schreef Szura het volgende:
Puerto Rico is ‘a good news story’

https://twitter.com/apjvalk/status/913749870510592000

quote:

Op vrijdag 29 september 2017 18:48 schreef brokjespoes het volgende:

[..]

Burgemeester Carmen Yulin Cruz van San Juan is het hier een heeeeeel klein beetje niet mee eens zo te zien: http://www.huffingtonpost(...)3894e4b06791bb0ff86e

San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz on CNN New Day