• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tax cuts for the wealthy elite never worked

NatMorton said:
Given we've moved on from the defense needs of the Cold War, one could argue we should see a smaller federal budget overall.

Other than through population growth, why must spending increase?
Click to expand...
If you want to dive down that rabbit hole, you could start with- what really were our "needs" during the cold war? Certainly not the amount we actually spent on the military. Is it OK to over spend on the military, but nothing else?
Why did we ever create the FDA? Or EPA, or the SEC (the governmental agency, not the college league), or the bureau of land management, or , or state/federal agencies that help foster children leading to adoption, versus orphanages?

I have not taken the position that there must be spending increases. But your suggestion that the "problem" is ONLY spending is the position that there is no reason spending should have increased at all.
 
Buckeyes85 said:
If you want to dive down that rabbit hole, you could start with- what really were our "needs" during the cold war? Certainly not the amount we actually spent on the military. Is it OK to over spend on the military, but nothing else?
Why did we ever create the FDA? Or EPA, or the SEC (the governmental agency, not the college league), or the bureau of land management, or , or state/federal agencies that help foster children leading to adoption, versus orphanages?

I have not taken the position that there must be spending increases. But your suggestion that the "problem" is ONLY spending is the position that there is no reason spending should have increased at all.
Click to expand...

Trump bragged about how much he increased the military budget. Where did he get the money? Answer: he didn't.
 
HangLow said:
Click to expand...
You know the reverse is also true, right?
The existence of really really rich people are ALSO not the reason you are not rich. It's because the only real people with control over their income refuse to do the things to make them more able to make money.

Also, other people DO care about undocumented immigrants, in fact, I'd guess a good majority care.
 
Buckeyes85 said:
If you want to dive down that rabbit hole, you could start with- what really were our "needs" during the cold war? Certainly not the amount we actually spent on the military. Is it OK to over spend on the military, but nothing else?
Why did we ever create the FDA? Or EPA, or the SEC (the governmental agency, not the college league), or the bureau of land management, or , or state/federal agencies that help foster children leading to adoption, versus orphanages?

I have not taken the position that there must be spending increases. But your suggestion that the "problem" is ONLY spending is the position that there is no reason spending should have increased at all.
Click to expand...
There are cuts to be had across the board, yet we rely on those who hold those offices, and get the funding, to do the cutting.

Certainly that isn't going to happen. In the US, we have a spending problem.
 
Republicans believe

There are two kinds of Americans
The haves and the have nots

They are on the team with the money and their job is to keep it that way
 
rickc said:
Republicans believe

There are two kinds of Americans
The haves and the have nots
Click to expand...
You guys have been telling us/them that for decades, so I disagree that it is the Republicans. The entire Democratic party stance prior to identity politics was class warfare, it hasn't gone away, just simply replaced today by race.
rickc said:
They are on the team with the money and their job is to keep it that way
Click to expand...
Everyone is on their own team, and they want their team to be the one with the money.
 
Cope said:
You guys have been telling us/them that for decades, so I disagree that it is the Republicans. The entire Democratic party stance prior to identity politics was class warfare, it hasn't gone away, just simply replaced today by race.

Everyone is on their own team, and they want their team to be the one with the money.
Click to expand...

Since Reagan has any Democrat president ever proposed a tax cut?
 
Bullseye said:
GOP has NEVER advocated "tax cuts for the rich". That's just a slogan your LW trainers use to whip you into a tizzy.

As always the growing deficits are caused by profligate spending, not lessened revenues.

Wrong again. Trump's tax "cuts" resulted in record Median Household Income.

Problem is: there never WAS a "tax cut for the rich". That's just a bone libs throw to their undereducated minions.
Click to expand...
Such obvious lie, christ, you don't even try in your trolling attempts

Gimmesometruth said:
Major examples of Republicans supporting what critics call "trickle-down economics" include the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush tax cuts and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.[3] In each of the aforementioned tax reforms, taxes were cut across all income brackets, but the biggest reductions were given to the highest income earners
Click to expand...

Like shown here, its is undeniable the republican constantly give the rich tax breaks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom