Thread: American Politics
+
Add Report
Results 3,946 to 3,960 of 14394
-
10-01-22 14:26 #10449
Posts: 5451Got anything yet?
Originally Posted by Paulie97 [View Original Post]
Yes, I was trying to make it as simple and easy as possible for any pro-Repub Bothsider or outright Repub supporter to jump in, meet or beat this simple challenge and show me the way.
However, unless someone wants to highlight and praise the 2-3 worst Great Repub Depressions / Great Repub Recessions and Massive Jobs Destruction in history as fine examples of what Repubs can "accomplish" with legislation they pass while occupying the White House and controlling both houses of Congress, I'm afraid we're not going to see much of a list here:
Shall we dance through a short list of legislation passed when a Dem was in the White House and Dems controlled both Houses of Congress?
Social Security. A favorite of yours I believe.
Medicare. Ditto above.
Medicaid.
Unemployment Insurance.
The Civil Rights Act.
401 ks For Rank and File Employees.
The 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The Affordable Care Act.
The American Rescue Plan.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022.
The Inflation Reduction Act.
To name just a few.
Ok, now it's your turn or anyone else's turn. Please list a few legislation highlights from when a Repub was in the White House and Repubs controlled both Houses of Congress.
-
10-01-22 13:52 #10448
Posts: 5451How does that help your Bothsider argument?
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
With the constant and most common denominator for crap economic results being a Repub in the White House, accompanying oil shocks and all ("August 2001 PDB? What August 2001 PDB"? GW Bush might well have asked in September of that year), I guess the only conclusion is when Dems control Congress during those times the Repub POTUS is just plain ineffectual and unable to prevent those dastardly Dems from fucking up his economy. By contrast, Dems in the White House can somehow manage to get some positive things done anyway with Repubs controlling Congress.
So how does that support your contention again?
My contention still is that any legislation proposed, fought for and passed by Dem Presidents and Dems in Congress is diminished in its effectiveness and positive results with every Repub vote it receives. Why wouldn't that be so if those are votes are coming from people who think this government of, by and for We, The People and nobody else "is the problem" and have gleefully gone to war against it?
Oh, and on that last point, if Repubs are so effective and positive either when they are in the White House or when they control Congress, why have they never proposed and passed a single piece of meaningful legislation or anything whatsoever worthy of being revered and cited as something that Makes America Great when they controlled BOTH the White House and Congress over the past century?
I challenged you and anyone else here to rack their brains, rip through Google Search and come up with the list of legislation even remotely rivalling that of Dems when they were in the White House and controlled both houses of Congress. That was several days ago. So far not one person has been able to come up with anything.
I mean, we know they produced 2-3 of worst Great Repub Recessions and Crashes in history thanks to the legislation they came up with under those circumstances. But I was hoping to be surprised by something, you know, a bit more positive than those Repub "accomplishments. ".
-
10-01-22 13:17 #10447
Posts: 5451Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
Eisenhower committed America to the Vietnam War by word, deed and treaty:
Southeast Asia and the Vietnam War
https://media.defense.gov/2019/Feb/2...ology%20v1.pdf
1959
May 25: With authorization from the White House, Adm. Harry Felt, the
CINCPAC, told General Williams that U.S. advisors with the ARVN could
accompany Vietnamese troops on operations, provided they do not become
involved in actual combat. Historian Fredrik Logevall called this new order
highly significant. To this point, U.S. troops had been confined to corps
and division headquarters, training commands, and logistic agencies and
had been obligated to remain behind whenever their units were on patrol.
Now they would be in the field, in harms way, their advising duties greatly
expanded. U.S. personnel had been participating in patrols before this time,
unofficially, including Williams himself on occasion.59
July 8: Six Vietnamese communist guerrillas attacked the quarters of the
thirteen-man U.S. advisory detachment at Bien Hoa. Two U.S. soldiers,
Maj. Dale R. Buis and MSgt. Chester M. Ovnand, died in the assault,
the first U.S. servicemen killed in action in Vietnam since Lt. Col. Peter
Dewey in 1945 (see Sept. 26, 1945). Buis and Ovnard are the first two
names that appear on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington.63
-
10-01-22 12:41 #10446
Posts: 5451Details. Remember?
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
Nice try though.
A Year After the Middle Class Tax Cut, the Rich Are Winning.
December 18, 2018
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...-consequences/
Distribution of Trump Tax Cuts Favors Wealthiest
On average, in 2018, taxes declined for everyone, but top groups got the biggest benefit
Income group (Average income)
Percent change in after-tax income
Lowest quintile ($14,170) - 0.4%
Second quintile ($36,450) - 1.2%
Middle quintile ($65,640) - 1.6%
Fourth quintile ($114,370) - 1.9%
Top quintile ($347,940) - 2.9%
Source: Tax Policy Center estimates
Note: Average federal tax (includes individual and corporate income tax, payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare, the estate tax, and excise taxes) as a percentage of average expanded cash income.
January 2, 2018
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-fr...-be-worse-off/
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) will cut taxes by almost $1.5 trillion over the next decade, largely benefiting corporations, pass-through businesses such as partnerships, and people who inherit large estates. The bill will also provide modest tax reductions for most wage and salary earners.
Though some households will do better than others, it sounds like almost everyone is a winner at first glance. But tax cuts are not free; they eventually have to be financed with higher taxes or lower spending. And once those financing requirements are taken into account, most low- and middle-income households are likely to be worse off than they would have been without the tax cut in the first place.
Previous TPC analysis shows that households in every income group will be better off on average due to the direct provisions of the tax cut. However, after accounting for a plausible financing mechanismin which the tax cuts would be paid for with equal-per-household increases in taxes or reductions in benefitsmany low- and middle-income households will lose more than what they gain from the tax cuts themselves.
(and more)
Did Trumps tax cuts boost hiring? Most companies say no.
January 28, 2019
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy...mpanies-say-no
The vast majority of American businesses havent boosted hiring or investment as a result of the Republican tax law, according to a survey by the National Association for Business Economics.
Eighty-four percent of businesses said they didnt accelerate hiring because of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which President Donald Trump hailed as a bill for the middle class and a bill for jobs. Only 6 percent said they had more hires because of the law and 10 percent said they accelerated investments, according to the survey.
But they didn't.
Actually, Biden and the Dems "extending" them as they were originally set DID cut taxes for lower and middle income earners since allowing them to do what they were destined to do re increasing costs for those marginal earners instead of cutting costs for them.
Dems, the Party of Meaningful Tax Cuts, Strike Again!
-
10-01-22 11:19 #10445
Posts: 1113Bothsidesism, care to substantiate any of its claims?
Originally Posted by EihTooms12 [View Original Post]
And now he's piggy-backing and riding on Tiny 12 "data / evidence" coat tails, and pawning off the work, as if its his own findings, as if he did the work.
-
10-01-22 11:14 #10444
Posts: 1113Doing the work to substantiate your claims
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
-
10-01-22 06:19 #10443
Posts: 1113Huh...being "right"?
Originally Posted by Tiny 12 [View Original Post]
Look just because any BM here, in this discussion/opinion forum, is in disagreement with the arguments you put forth, be it, a Dem, Repub, QAnon, Bothsidesist, left, right or otherwise, is not a case IMHO about being "right".
Any political discourse, counterpoints or information I present is meant to frame and/or support my POV. I don't really care if you think, I'm simply trying to be "right".
You, Tiny 12 and the arch "bothsidesist", who stands for nothing and falls for everything, seem to think, we somehow need to accept/agree the arguments you put forth. WE DON'T!
Let me put it to you like this:
One BM here, thinks Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf (aka. the 45th pres. aka.Agent Orange) is a god, meanwhile I personally think he's a devil.
Is he right, I am I right? He'll continue to provide whatever opinions/evidence to support his claims and so will I.
While I may find his opinions/claims distasteful, I reserve the right for him to make them. The only "right(s)" that I'm concerned with is, equal rights, people's rights, human rights, civil rights, voting rights...etc
For me it's that simple. I am not here to be "right", as you see it. I'll provide my counterpoints, arguments and opinions and let them stand or fall on their own.
If you have an opinion on said topics and provide arguments to support your POV and not just here to BM bash or bash America, then I welcome your input.
-
10-01-22 04:26 #10442
Posts: 5451We all know the fix for that
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
And from all available historic evidence the only way to prevent them from doing that is to vote all Dem down every ballot every time. Once in, Repubs apparently can't help but produce those results. And a vote for a Third Party candidate or not voting typically results in Repubs winning. So those last two are not options for America avoiding the next Great Repub Depression / Recession, Massive Jobs Destruction and Catastrophe.
Hoover famously exacerbated the Great Repub Depression with his Smoot-Hawley Tariffs and his Classic Repub mistake of providing Supply-Side / Trickle-Down government aid and spending on the exact wrong people. The Great Repub Depression didn't just "hit" or "happen" on Hoover's watch.
Coronavirus was another endemic viral spread that very likely could have been contained or at least significantly damage reduced had the leaders of the proven Pandemic Prevention and Response teams not gone missing where they were needed most for more than a year by Trump contrary to all expert warnings not to do something so dangerous and stupid. And especially had Trump not compounded that disastrous decision by spending critical year 2020 doing, lying and saying everything a World Leader could do, lie about and say to make sure it would become the historically deadly economy and global supply-chain-destroying and Inflation producing Trump's Pandemic it became.
Those were Trump economic decisions. Trump's Pandemic didn't just "hit" or "happen" on his watch.
-
10-01-22 04:25 #10441
Posts: 1807Originally Posted by EihTooms [View Original Post]
$30,000 - 20% tax cut.
$50,000 - 12% tax cut.
$100,000 - 14% tax cut.
$250,000 - 6% tax increase.
$400,000 - 6% tax increase.
$1,000,000 - 6. 5% tax cut.
https://taxfoundation.org/historical...ates-brackets/
The tax cut was not disproportionately directed to higher income earners. In fact, it made the tax system more progressive.
I take issue with your statement: "Then the beauty of Dem leadership is you get the superior economic results without invading Poland and creating the Holocaust. " Strictly speaking this is true, as no Democratic President has invaded Poland. Yet. However, please see my post below about the correlation between Democratic Presidents and major wars. The Democrats are a bloodthirsty lot, disposed to sacrifice many lives so they can juice the economy and get more votes come election time.
Disclaimer: I actually don't believe this, the part about bloodthirsty Democrats. This is part of an intervention, to try to help Tooms recognize spurious relationships and Double Think, and to cure his Stockholm Syndrome.
HOWEVER, In general, GDP growth during wars and their aftermath when Democrats were president was very good -- there were a few years with 18%+ GDP growth. Does this deserve consideration if you're trying to show that Republicans are worse than Hitler at managing the economy? Why of course not.
-
10-01-22 03:43 #10440
Posts: 5451You got it
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
You know, the Great Repub Recessions that always require a huge influx of deficit spending, government intervention and government expansion to pull us out of them because those brave free market top marginal income "job creators" who got the big tax cuts can't be coaxed out from under their beds without it?
Of course, that comes right before "smaller government" Repubs start repealing decades long precedent Rights To Privacy in order to invade our bedrooms, bathrooms, up asses, vaginas and around penises to outlaw sex for pleasure and restrict it for the purpose of procreation only.
-
10-01-22 03:08 #10439
Posts: 5451Uh
Originally Posted by Tiny12 [View Original Post]
Other than that, nothing. That is a Classic Repub tax policy result going back to Coolidge / Hoover. Well, that is, if we generously ignore the infrastructure projects, real jobs creation, border control and crime prevention investment opportunities lost by flushing all that money down the shitter as another Classic Repub tax and economic policy "accomplishment. ".
Yes, that helped keep Trump's stock market record afloat. So what? The stock market is not "the economy. " The reason the stock market also performs notably better under Dem stewardship than Repub stewardship is precisely because of those numbskull Repub tax and economic policy and agenda decisions and results that no Dem did nor should have supported and voted for.
-
10-01-22 01:43 #10438
Posts: 1807Originally Posted by Spidy [View Original Post]
-
10-01-22 01:39 #10437
Posts: 1680Bothsidesism
Originally Posted by Spidy [View Original Post]
-
10-01-22 00:47 #10436
Posts: 1113Bothsidesism is not at all pejorative, IMO
Originally Posted by Tiny 12 [View Original Post]
There are those lazy posters/BMs that want to equate all of American politics from both sides of the aisle, as all the same "shit". Nothing could be further from the truth (as EihTooms, neatly explains below). Hence my use of "bothsidesism", to identify a group of lazy poster(s) and thinkers that believe and think accordingly.
Originally Posted by EihTooms [View Original Post]
"When a person tries to make you believe that both sides are equally responsible for something even though one is really, clearly, at fault."
Worth repeating: "...even though one is really, clearly, at fault"
Originally Posted by Tiny 12 [View Original Post]
So "bothsidesism" much like the word "neoliberalism", perhaps one should take the time to understand these words being used, without the sanctimonious bluster.
-
10-01-22 00:20 #10435
Posts: 1807Originally Posted by EihTooms [View Original Post]
For every article you trot out from a left of center New York Times opinion columnist arguing for the superiority of Democratic governance, I could trot out two from right of center Wall Street Journal columnists if I weren't so damn lazy. When Leonhardt writes off Congressional control as a factor he loses credibility in my eyes. And when you look at his list of presidents, the top one, FDR, came to power in the aftermath of the worst depression in modern USA History, while the person in last place, Trump, had the misfortune to be in office when COVID hit.
At the risk of sounding immodest, my post #10362 in this thread makes more sense and is less biased than Leonhardt's article.