You make a lot of contentions here. To adequately address all of these contentions, I will quickly run into the forum's word count restrictions. Instead of doing that, I'll just say this:As president, Donald Trump lowered federal income taxes for all Americans. However, these tax cuts were temporary and will expire at the end of next year. If Trump wins the election, he plans to make his tax cuts permanent. Currently, there is a cap on how much state taxes can be deducted. If Trump wins, he plans to remove this cap, further lowering taxes for many Americans. Trump also wants to eliminate taxes on tips, income from overtime, and Social Security pensions.
Over the past year, inflation has dropped significantly in the U.S. and is now very close to the Federal Reserve's two-percent target. As a result, the Fed recently lowered interest rates. However, despite inflation seemingly being under control, both Trump and Harris continue to talk about what they will do to curb rising prices. Trump has said he will make American prices "affordable" again by eliminating costly regulations and reducing energy prices through increased production of American oil and gas. On his first day as president, he has vowed to instruct his team to "use every tool and authority available to them to defeat inflation (which has already been defeated) and to quickly bring consumer prices down."
Trump also plans to eliminate taxes on Social Security pensions. Many of Trump's tax cuts primarily benefit those with high incomes, which can exacerbate inequality and lead to wealth concentration. The elimination of the state tax deduction cap will benefit people in high-tax states like New York and California the most. Removing this cap means individuals in these states could deduct the full amount of their state taxes, significantly lowering their federal tax burden. Eliminating taxes on Social Security pensions would also benefit the wealthiest retirees more than others, as they pay the most taxes on these pensions. (The poorest retirees in the U.S. already pay little or no taxes on their Social Security benefits.)
Trump has no plan to finance his tax cuts, instead relying on the assumption that they will lead to increased growth. The U.S. national debt is projected to increase by $7.5 trillion by 2035 (according to the "Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget") with Trump's policies. Since most of the benefits from his tax cuts will go to a small group of very wealthy individuals, and because this group already has the means to consume everything they want, it's highly doubtful that Trump's tax cuts will lead to increased consumption. Instead, his policies are more likely to result in unchanged or reduced consumption, as decisions such as imposing tariffs will lead to higher prices, eating up the tax cuts for the middle class, who do not benefit as much as the wealthy.
Trump (or more accurately, his advisors—he's not that smart himself…) is aware of this, so he has a typical amateur solution to the problem. A "backup" plan that will destroy the U.S.'s potential for a strong economy in the long term and instead plunge the country into a deep recession. In the short term, it may lead to increased consumption and an "artificial" boost in GDP by taking control of FEd and the settings of interest rates. Doing this will in the short term give the US a boost in GDP, but in the long-term the U.S. would plunge into a deep recession, and the risk of stagflation would be overwhelming.
Is Trump Building an Economy That Will Give a Short-Term Boost to the Rich but Throw the U.S. into Economic Disaster in the Long Run?
Short answer: No.
You make a lot of contentions here. To adequately address all of these contentions, I will quickly run into the forum's word count restrictions. Instead of doing that, I'll just say this:
Trump has established a record of low inflation, rising wages and decreasing consumer prices...especially in regard to food. In short, he has talked the talk AND he has walked the walk. He's been there and done that. There is no reason to believe that he cannot do it again, even if he is opposed by Congress as he was previously.
So...you mostly repeated yourself. As I said, to address each of your contentions I would run into the forum's word count restrictions so I won't bother.Trump's proposals:
Criticism of Trump’s Economic Proposals:
- Increasing tariffs: Trump plans to impose tariffs between 10% and 20% on most imported goods, with a special 60% tariff on Chinese goods.
- Deregulation and increased oil and gas production: Trump intends to reduce regulations and increase domestic energy production to lower prices.
- Tariffs will raise prices: Increased tariffs on imported goods will make products more expensive, especially for the middle class, eating up any benefits they might gain from tax cuts.
- Deregulation and lack of investment in green energy: By eliminating support for green technology and relying on fossil fuels, Trump will damage long-term economic growth and falling behind in the global shift towards sustainable energy.
You're responding to points that I didn't actually focus on or address in depth.So...you mostly repeated yourself. As I said, to address each of your contentions I would run into the forum's word count restrictions so I won't bother.
However, you have added two new contentions that I will address.
Tarrifs.
Trump's use of tariffs do NOT result in increased consumer prices. His first term proved that.
Deregulation, oil and gas production and green energy.
Deregulation removes oppressive roadblocks to ALL US businesses...from big to small. This unleashed US productivity.Like it or not, fossil fuel energy is the lifeblood of the US. Restrict it in favor of the Green New Deal and you will damage/kill the country. We've already seen this play out from day one of the Biden administration, starting with the Biden puke's attacks on the oil industry and the resulting massive increase in inflation.Refer to the chart above. Notice the drops in ALL energy prices. That is a direct result of Trump unleashing our US oil industry.
So...you mostly repeated yourself. As I said, to address each of your contentions I would run into the forum's word count restrictions so I won't bother.
However, you have added two new contentions that I will address.
Tarrifs.
Trump's use of tariffs do NOT result in increased consumer prices. His first term proved that.
Deregulation, oil and gas production and green energy.
Deregulation removes oppressive roadblocks to ALL US businesses...from big to small. This unleashed US productivity.Like it or not, fossil fuel energy is the lifeblood of the US. Restrict it in favor of the Green New Deal and you will damage/kill the country. We've already seen this play out from day one of the Biden administration, starting with the Biden puke's attacks on the oil industry and the resulting massive increase in inflation.Refer to the chart above. Notice the drops in ALL energy prices. That is a direct result of Trump unleashing our US oil industry.
sigh...You're responding to points that I didn't actually focus on or address in depth.
My main argument in the previous posts was centered around Trump's tariffs, tax cuts, and his desire to control the Federal Reserve—all of which are economic policies with potential long-term consequences like inflation and stagflation. While I did briefly mention deregulation, oil, and gas production as part of Trump's broader political platform, they weren’t the core of my argument.
Your response about energy prices and deregulation seems somewhat tangential to the points I raised. You're shifting the conversation to focus on energy policy (deregulation, oil, and gas) and green energy, likely because this is an area where you feel more confident in defending Trump's policies. However, the chart you included (which lacks a clear source) supports your claim about energy prices but doesn't address my primary argument about the lack of financing behind Trump's tax cuts or the inflationary risks associated with his tariffs and his plan to control the Federal Reserve.
In short, you're focusing on energy, which wasn't central to my argument, and sidestepping the deeper critique about Trump's overall economic policies and their long-term risks.
It's a bit ironic that you’re asking me to pick just one of Trump's proposals when my argument has been that many of his policies are interconnected and have cumulative consequences—particularly when it comes to tax cuts, tariffs, and his approach to the Federal Reserve. It’s the combination of these that leads to the long-term risks of inflation, stagflation, and the ballooning national debt.sigh...
I told you...twice...why I won't address all of your contentions.
How about this...you choose one of Trump's proposals and your criticism from post #5 and I'll address it.
shrug...It's a bit ironic that you’re asking me to pick just one of Trump's proposals when my argument has been that many of his policies are interconnected and have cumulative consequences—particularly when it comes to tax cuts, tariffs, and his approach to the Federal Reserve. It’s the combination of these that leads to the long-term risks of inflation, stagflation, and the ballooning national debt.
The problem, as I see it, is that he is focused on implementing policies that will boost the economy in the short term, only to then throw it into total chaos. This means that he won't be the one facing the situation when the US enters stagnation, and when the devaluation of the dollar sends the country into a deep recession while borrowing to jumpstart the economy again will be both limited and at unreasonably high costs. It will be those who come after him who will have to deal with the fallout.There is no question that another Trump presidency would result is disaster for the US economy.
The blanket elimination of taxes on tips is a particularly bad idea. High income bonuses will be treated as gratuities to avoid taxation. Unfortunately both candidates are proposing this.Trump's proposals:
Criticism of Trump’s Economic Proposals:
- Permanently lowering federal income taxes: Trump wants to make his previous temporary tax cuts permanent.
- Eliminating the cap on state tax deductions: This benefits people in high-tax states by allowing them to deduct the full amount of their state taxes from their federal taxes.
- Eliminating taxes on tips, overtime income, and Social Security pensions: These measures primarily benefit wealthier individuals, including retirees.
- Further reducing corporate taxes: Trump aims to lower corporate taxes from 21% to 15%.
- Increasing tariffs: Trump plans to impose tariffs between 10% and 20% on most imported goods, with a special 60% tariff on Chinese goods.
- Deregulation and increased oil and gas production: Trump intends to reduce regulations and increase domestic energy production to lower prices.
- Tax cuts primarily benefit the wealthy: Eliminating the cap on state tax deductions and cutting Social Security taxes disproportionately benefit high-income earners, increasing wealth inequality.
- No financing for tax cuts: Trump has no concrete plan to finance his tax cuts. This is expected to increase the national debt by $7.5 trillion by 2035.
- Unlikely to boost consumption: The wealthiest already have enough money to consume whatever they want, so the tax cuts are unlikely to significantly increase overall consumption.
- Tariffs will raise prices: Increased tariffs on imported goods will make products more expensive, especially for the middle class, eating up any benefits they might gain from tax cuts.
- Deregulation and lack of investment in green energy: By eliminating support for green technology and relying on fossil fuels, Trump will damage long-term economic growth and falling behind in the global shift towards sustainable energy.
I don't think you've taken the time to understand what Trump will do and what the consequences of his policies will be. If you had, no American would judge him as having the better economic policies, yet according to your own polls, you do. It's truly astonishing. And when you are surprised when yet another high-profile Republican ends their long-term career by going public and announcing they’re voting for Kamala, I understand perfectly why they do so. The long-term effects of Trump’s economic policies are devastating for the country, and they want to continue living in America more than they care about their future careers as politicians. They, not the Democrats, will be the first to leave your country if Trump wins (well they will wait for a couple of years before doing so...). It's called self-preservation.OK so what most Americans want to know is what is Kammy's position on the border and the economy. When she tells us we can have a discussion about it. However, her mind seems to be an empty vessel. With Trump we know what he will do and what he did for 4 years.
The problem, as I see it, is that he is focused on implementing policies that will boost the economy in the short term, only to then throw it into total chaos. This means that he won't be the one facing the situation when the US enters stagnation, and when the devaluation of the dollar sends the country into a deep recession while borrowing to jumpstart the economy again will be both limited and at unreasonably high costs. It will be those who come after him who will have to deal with the fallout......
What we need is a president who has the will to do what it takes to secure the border. We need a president who won’t cause inflation but prevent it. We need a president who will keep our country out of war.Parallels Between the 1920s and Trump’s Economic Policies:
When discussing welfare cuts and economic policies, it's worth looking back at the 1920s, often remembered for its prosperity but which ultimately led to one of the worst economic crises in US history—the Great Depression.
During the 1920s, there was a strong push for deregulation, tax cuts, and reduced government intervention in the economy. Just like Trump's approach, these policies boosted the economy in the short term, creating a sense of stability and growth. However, they also created deep vulnerabilities:
When the stock market crashed, unemployment soared, and there were no substantial welfare programs in place to help those affected. It wasn't until FDR's New Deal in the 1930s that the government introduced widespread social safety nets to stabilize the economy and help people survive.
- Growing inequality: The wealth gap widened, with the wealthy benefiting disproportionately from tax cuts while workers faced stagnant wages and less access to social services.
- Lack of safety nets: The social welfare system was weak, and when the Great Depression hit in 1929, there was little government support to cushion the blow for millions of Americans.
Fast forward to 2008: While the financial crisis had a significant impact globally, social safety nets like unemployment benefits, food assistance, and government bailouts helped prevent a complete economic collapse. The U.S. recovery, though slow, was largely supported by these government programs.
Could Trump's Cuts Lead to a 1929-Style Crisis?
Trump's proposed cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and other welfare programs echo the laissez-faire policies of the 1920s.
With no safety nets in place, a future recession—combined with high inflation and a devalued dollar—could lead to a crisis similar to the Great Depression. By gutting welfare systems before a recession hits, the U.S. could face the same problems it did in the 1930s, where millions were left without support during the worst economic downturn in history.
The question remains: Do we really want to repeat the mistakes of the past by cutting the very programs that protect the most vulnerable during times of economic hardship?
Trump's plan for tariffs will very likely reignite inflationWhat we need is a president who has the will to do what it takes to secure the border. We need a president who won’t cause inflation but prevent it. We need a president who will keep our country out of war.
Nope.Trump's plan for tariffs will very likely reignite inflation
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?