American Politics

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2972973]I don't disagree with anything Trump said. He has a valid point about Hillary Clinton and carried interest, which is the biggest loophole out there. She and Chuck Schumer were big defenders of carried interest, which greatly benefits New York fund managers. She only came around when she ran for president. And Schumer, while saying he wants to end carried interest, works behind the scenes to preserve it.

Back in 2016, Trump said you should vote for me, because I know how the swamp works, and I can drain it. He was referring to his dealings through the years with politicians. And with respect to the tax code, he had a point. The corporate tax cut engineered by Trump, Ryan and McConnell eliminated certain loopholes and lowered the tax rate. American companies for the first time were taxed on unrepatriated foreign income. Yes, initially the Treasury received less income. But counting additional employment taxes from higher wages and new jobs, long term the corporate cut will be a big winner for the Treasury.

Now that didn't really matter for Trump, because he has indeed been able to take advantage of loopholes like the $960 million carried forward tax loss that Anderson Cooper mentions at the start of the segment, that I explained below. However, Trump realizes a flatter tax with fewer loopholes is best for all. Which leads into the Marquesa's post.

SubComdr, Most penthouse dwelling Bernie Bros have figured out loopholes like Trump did to avoid paying high tax. However, instead of wanting to drain the swamp, they want to double down on it, presumably because they're getting some kind of government pork they want to preserve..[/QUOTE]If someone is a tax cheat they are a thief and steal from the rest of us, everyone should pay what they owe and if you are so greedy you want more just make some more.

Koch paid so little in taxes, he probably rather pay 1000 tax attys to cheat his way so low.

I have no idea what happened in transition with my previous [B]Which Trump policies, etc[/B] submission. The only thing that made it to post was my Subject title, "See graphs below:" and the screenshot of the 3 graphs. Very strange. Internet gremlins perhaps.

Luckily, I still had the original on hand to re-sibmit and here it is:

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973201]You're a smart guy but somewhat weak in math. If I wanted to help Trump or any other Republican win, I'd vote for the Republican. As long as the Republicans control the House and / or Senate, I honestly didn't care who won the presidential election. I'd go for Trump on policy, although I really don't like his tariffs. He's less likely to get us into a war than Harris, and his emphasis on deregulation is a big plus. Both of them were set to run big budget deficits, although maybe the Musk / Ramaswamy team will alleviate that somewhat. I can't however vote for someone who tried to steal an election.

Anyway, if there were only two choices, I'd definitely vote for you over Sanders, the Marquesa, Warren, Harris or Biden. I'd probably vote for you over Obama. I don't have to make that choice though. There are always Republicans, Libertarians, or the occasional sane Democrat like Bill Clinton who I can vote for instead. That's not to say you're not sane. You probably are, you're just extremely partisan and unduly influenced by the media.[/QUOTE]Do you not care who wins the presidency because when your preferred Repub wins and his policies you claim to prefer go utterly tits up into another Great Depression, Great Recession and / or Massive Jobs Destruction you can then claim, "Hey, I didn't vote for him"! Thanks to your having announced you're voting for Oliver or me? LOL.

Well, a whole bunch of other people think the person who runs on a set of economic policy plans and goals, promotes those plans after getting elected and more often than not gets a sizable percentage of those plans enacted by Congress even when the majority in one or both Houses of Congress are the other Party matters quite a bit to what kind of economic results are produced by those policies and plans he ran on, proposed and mostly got passed.

Not all of them can be somewhat weak on math. Or logic. Or easily observable reality. Or historical data and facts.

So on wars, did you like that Peace-lover Trump was happy to keep the USA Military embroiled in a combat War in Afghanistan for every day of his so-called presidency and, as if that wasn't enough USA War for his liking, he "peacefully" led a recruited mob of violent Insurrectionists into battle against America On American Soil before the screen door smacked him in the ass on the way out?

I mean, as opposed to the previous and current "warmongering" Dem presidents taking all of the heat and responsibility for pulling us out of a Repub-initiated War in the Middle East on their watch and the current one keeping us out of any combat War anywhere on the planet since his first year in office?

And on Trump's economic policy plans, I assume your income level falls within the top 1% or possibly, the top 5% percentile of incomes, the only groups who will not pay more to the government if Trump's, not ChristiFascist Mike's nor John Thune's, policies and plans are enacted?

[B]A Distributional Analysis of Donald Trumps Tax Plan.
Oct. 7, 2024[/B]

[URL]https://itep.org/a-distributional-analysis-of-donald-trumps-tax-plan-2024/[/URL]

[QUOTE][b]Impact Of Donald Trumps Tax Proposals by Income Group[/b]

Former President Donald Trump has proposed a wide variety of tax policy changes. [B]Taken together, these proposals would, on average, lead to a tax cut for the richest 5 percent of Americans and a tax increase for all other income groups.[/b]

If these proposals were in effect in 2026, the richest 1 percent would receive an average tax cut of about $36,300 and the next richest 4 percent would receive an average tax cut of about $7,200. All other groups would see a tax increase with the hike on the middle 20 percent at about $1,500 and the increase on the lowest-income 20 percent of Americans at about $800.[/QUOTE]See graphs below:

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2973240]My taxes aren't that complicated I never used loopholes. If someone is a tax cheat they are a thief and steal from the rest of us, everyone should pay what they owe and if you are so greedy you want more just make some more.[/QUOTE]And yet you're madly in love with the man who not only cheats on his taxes, but openly brags about it at every turn.

It was nice to hear the incoming Repub Senate Leader, John Thune, finally say something truthful and accurate. Sort of. It happened in his Meet The Press interview this past Sunday morning:

[B]Meet the Press January 5, 2025[/B]

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-january-5-2025-n1311312[/URL]

[QUOTE]SEN. JOHN THUNE:

Well, I mean, I think that you start with extending existing tax policy. And thats current that is current policy. You know, some people, depending on which scorekeepers you use, will say, "Well, yes, this is going to contribute to deficits down the road." But the fact of the matter is this is the law today, and what you're doing is essentially extending that --

KRISTEN WELKER:

So it would all be paid for by offsets?

SEN. JOHN THUNE:

Well, not perhaps all of it. But what I'm telling you is a combination of growth, a combination of offsets, and an expectation, I think, that if you want to avoid a $4 trillion tax increase, you're going to have to take some steps to extend the current tax policy. When you do that, I think you get outcomes that are good for the economy. [B]And when the economy is growing, expanding, and creating better-paying jobs, people are making money, they're taking realizations, they're paying taxes. Tax revenues go up. And that was demonstrated and proven in 2017[/b] with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.[/QUOTE]Yeah, he was doing so well right up to and including the part where he says, "that was demonstrated and proven in 2017". After those words he totally fucked up and went back to a favorite Repub lie.

2017 was still an Obama-Biden year since Trump did not even sign and pass his one and only economic "stimulus" legislation, the godawful Trillions added to the deficit with nothing to show for it except a million fewer jobs created with it than without it, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, until the last business day of 2017.

But, yes, as long as Trump had not passed a single Repub economic legislation and was just playing golf, trying to come up with insulting nicknames for his critics and coasting on the terrific economic trajectories he inherited from Obama-Biden, the American Worker and tax revenues were doing fine.

Well, a sort of and partial truthful thing is still great to hear coming out of any elected Repub's mouth these days.

BTW, neither Welker nor any of the other pundits on that typically pro Repub Mainstream Media program bothered to point out that Thune had perhaps inadvertantly but certainly accurately praised the Obama-Biden economy Trump inherited having absolutely zero to do with anything Trump or, frankly, any other Repub had done.

I mean, hell, that was one third of the entire mythical "best economy ever" Trump years pre Trump's Pandemic that Thune just praised when it had nothing to do with anything Trump did or policy Repubs proposed, fought for and passed!

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2973463]And yet you're madly in love with the man who not only cheats on his taxes, but openly brags about it at every turn.[/QUOTE]He does not cheat on his taxes. Quote the ruling where that was established. He uses the tax law as it is written to pay the minimum amount of taxes under the law.

Can you show me a criminal conviction under the law?

This guy cheated on his taxes:

[URL]https://www.kxan.com/news/crime/austin-man-gets-2-years-in-prison-for-cryptocurrency-tax-fraud-a-doj-first/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2973463]And yet you're madly in love with the man who not only cheats on his taxes, but openly brags about it at every turn.[/QUOTE]Trump is perfect image for USA: stupid, sexual criminal, liar and crazy dangerous. Making USA image great again.

[QUOTE=SubCmdr;2973208]Germans make cars for drivers. Japanese makes cars for those who just need to get from here to there. I have even owned great cars made in the USA.

If MarQ has as anything to say about it tell him to check this link:

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automobiles_manufactured_in_the_United_States[/URL][/QUOTE]

Interesting SubCmdr. Yes, a lot of those "foreign" cars are made right here in the USA. Your link is timely, given that the Biden administration is blocking Nippon Steel's proposed takeover of U.S. Steel, and Trump has indicated he'd do the same. This is a bad decision that will hurt U.S. consumers and exporters, and probably U.S. steelworkers. The only winners will be the crony capitalists at Cleveland Cliffs, a U.S. Steel competitor. Here are excerpts from a WSJ editorial,

The economics of the deal make overwhelming sense for both U.S. Steel and its workers. The Japanese company promised $2.7 billion in fresh capital to modernize U.S. Steels aging plants and honor collective-bargaining agreements. It offered workers $5,000 bonuses, made job guarantees, and agreed to let Cfius block reductions in production capacity at U.S. Steel plants, among other political sweeteners.

None satisfied United Steelworkers boss David McCall, who favors a tie-up with Cleveland-Cliffs, which was outbid by Nippon Steel in 2023. Cleveland-Cliffs CEO Lourenco Goncalves lobbied the White House to block the Nippon deal because he wants to create a steel-making cartel shielded from foreign competition by tariffs and Buy America rules.

A Cleveland-Cliffs-U.S. Steel combo would control 100% of U.S. blast furnace production, 100% of domestic steel used in electric-vehicle motors, and 65% to 90% of other domestic steel used in vehicles. But Cleveland-Cliffscurrently valued at $4.7 billion with $3.8 billion in debtwill struggle to find the money even to buy U.S. Steel, much less to invest enough to revitalize its factories.

U.S. Steels stock fell 7% on Friday and is down 38% since the Nippon Steel deal was announced. Investors worry that U.S. Steel might be sold off piecemeal in a bankruptcy. U.S. Steel executives have warned that plants could be closed if the Nippon deal collapses. How would this benefit workers?

Cleveland-Cliffs might still have its monopoly if U.S. Steel fails, though U.S. manufacturers that use steel will face higher costs and become less competitive. The cost of U.S.-made EVs will increase, which is why U.S. car makers favored the Nippon Steel bid.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/opinion/biden-blocks-nippon-u-s-steel-deal-cfius-united-steelworkers-cleveland-cliffs-japan-fa301474[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2973526]It was nice to hear the incoming Repub Senate Leader, John Thune, finally say something truthful and accurate. Sort of. It happened in his Meet The Press interview this past Sunday morning:

[B]Meet the Press January 5, 2025[/B]

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-january-5-2025-n1311312[/URL]

Yeah, he was doing so well right up to and including the part where he says, "that was demonstrated and proven in 2017". After those words he totally fucked up and went back to a favorite Repub lie.

2017 was still an Obama-Biden year since Trump did not even sign and pass his one and only economic "stimulus" legislation, the godawful Trillions added to the deficit with nothing to show for it except a million fewer jobs created with it than without it, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, until the last business day of 2017.

But, yes, as long as Trump had not passed a single Repub economic legislation and was just playing golf, trying to come up with insulting nicknames for his critics and coasting on the terrific economic trajectories he inherited from Obama-Biden, the American Worker and tax revenues were doing fine.

Well, a sort of and partial truthful thing is still great to hear coming out of any elected Repub's mouth these days.

BTW, neither Welker nor any of the other pundits on that typically pro Repub Mainstream Media program bothered to point out that Thune had perhaps inadvertantly but certainly accurately praised the Obama-Biden economy Trump inherited having absolutely zero to do with anything Trump or, frankly, any other Repub had done.

I mean, hell, that was one third of the entire mythical "best economy ever" Trump years pre Trump's Pandemic that Thune just praised when it had nothing to do with anything Trump did or policy Repubs proposed, fought for and passed![/QUOTE]You're twisting Thune's words. Certainly the effects of the TCJA weren't realized in 2017. The bill didn't even take effect until 2018. In 2019 there was a huge jump in real median household income and 50 year lows in unemployment. Was all this because of the TCJA? Certainly not. Trump's deregulation helped too, and perhaps even more so factors totally unrelated to politics.

The corporate rate cut that was part of the TCJA not only left more money in the hands of companies, to be used for expansion, jobs and higher salaries, but with time they resulted in the Treasury realizing more income than it would have without the cuts! That's primarily because of higher social security and Medicare contributions from people hired by corporations, as documented in the NBER paper I've linked to several times here. The USA during the Biden administration has benefited more from the corporate tax cuts than it did during Trump's time in office. And even Harris and Biden didn't want to take the federal rate back to where it was before the TCJA.

I'll get back to you on your other post when I have more time. I don't agree with all the parts of the TCJA, nor with Trump's proposed tariffs. Your link however is another classic example of Simpson's paradox -- when you add all the data together instead of segmenting it, in this case by specific changes in the tax code, you come up with a very distorted view of reality. Trump and the Republicans aren't going to eliminate the SALT cap, which would represent most of the tax savings realized by higher earners in the fictitious analysis by the left-biased Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2972181]I can link at least 900,000 and still counting.

[B]Birx recalls 'very difficult' call with Trump, says hundreds of thousands of Covid deaths were preventable[/B]

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/birx-recalls-very-difficult-call-trump-says-hundreds-thousands-covid-n1262283[/URL]

A supposed USA Citizen pretending to be a president in 2018,2019 and 2020 laid the groundwork for and eventually mass murdered at least 900,000 Americans and still counting, according to his own administration appointee to coordinate his response to Trump's Pandemic, which he ushered in due to his decisions in 2018 and 2019 anyway.

At least 900,000 Americans, Mass Murdered.

Thanks to Trump, voters like you and the apparent irresistible lure of golf for Repub potuses as a distraction from actually Knowing anything, Doing anything and working for a living.[/QUOTE]Considering all the lardasses we have in this county 900 k number is seems a bit low, it should have been more than that. It did thin them out as COVID was tough on the morbidity obese. Two in my neighborhood died and they were 300 lbs+ and that's being kind. We are the most overweight country on earth and they will cripple the Medicare system with health issues if they live that long. COVID did us a favor.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973664]You're twisting Thune's words. Certainly the effects of the TCJA weren't realized in 2017. The bill didn't even take effect until 2018. In 2019 there was a huge jump in real median household income and 50 year lows in unemployment. Was all this because of the TCJA? Certainly not. Trump's deregulation helped too, and perhaps even more so factors totally unrelated to politics.

The corporate rate cut that was part of the TCJA not only left more money in the hands of companies, to be used for expansion, jobs and higher salaries, but with time they resulted in the Treasury realizing more income than it would have without the cuts! That's primarily because of higher social security and Medicare contributions from people hired by corporations, as documented in the NBER paper I've linked to several times here. The USA during the Biden administration has benefited more from the corporate tax cuts than it did during Trump's time in office. And even Harris and Biden didn't want to take the federal rate back to where it was before the TCJA.

I'll get back to you on your other post when I have more time. I don't agree with all the parts of the TCJA, nor with Trump's proposed tariffs. Your link however is another classic example of Simpson's paradox -- when you add all the data together instead of segmenting it, in this case by specific changes in the tax code, you come up with a very distorted view of reality. Trump and the Republicans aren't going to eliminate the SALT cap, which would represent most of the tax savings realized by higher earners in the fictitious analysis by the left-biased Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]The corporate rate cut that was part of the TCJA not only left more money in the hands of companies, to be used for expansion, jobs and higher salaries, but with time they resulted in the Treasury realizing more income than it would have without the cuts![/QUOTE]Of course, we all know from the several reports I have linked that the idea of Trump's Repub TCJA generating "expansion, jobs and higher salaries" was not only laughed at by the very CEOs that windfall was meant to benefit the most even before it was signed and passed, but there is scent evidence that any of those things happened because of it even six years later. Piss-poor results on those supposed goals for the Trillions it added to the deficit.

But on the very idea that lowering corporate tax rates would ever produce such a result, there is a whole line of learned reasoning to suggest it would not.

If the corporate tax rate is higher and that company realizes a particularly profitable year, there will, not might, be a serious effort to avoid as much of that tax hit as possible by putting that money back into the business ASAP exactly as in your mythical response to the TCJA, open another factory or outlet, hire more employees, raise wages, contribute more to the general economy and so on specifically in order to avoid paying a high corporate tax rate on that profit. The positive ripple effect for the American Worker and Economy ensues.

However, if the corporate tax rate is lower, that same company owner or board will look at that same profit as more free and clear to take as realization, shrug off the tax concerns and spend it on, oh, let's say another villa in Italy, a couple of bitcoin, slip some of it into a few Repub MAGA 6 SCOTUS Christmas gift envelopes, pick up another Renoir for the bathroom, at best for America build a 6th mansion for themselves in Holmby Hills built by the already wealthiest contractors on earth.

At some point lower corporate tax rates are counterproductive to business expansion, adding jobs, raising wages, etc.

This idea that lowering top income margin or corporate tax rates will ever in history finally produce this mythical Supply-Side / Trickle-Down notable positive economic or jobs creation effect that Repubs and Bothsider / Neithersiders have been pining for since Calvin Coolidge / Herbert Hoover while it has so far only produced and presided over Great Depressions, Great Recessions and Massive Jobs Destruction along with skrocketing deficits has really gone beyond the mere juvenile and ill-informed and moved well into bizarre to the point of psychotic at this late date.

I think Trump wants to lower the corporate tax rate to 21% or maybe to zero, right? Lolol.

Now, that is not to say lowering those tax rates is not a very good idea based on the economic conditions at the time. But in the past 100 years no incoming Repub potus taking over from an outgoing Dem has inherited an economy that needs such a dramatic windfall put into the personal pockets of corporate CEOs or the already wealthiest top marginal income earners.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2973236]But they are comparable to most cars around the world, other than maybe some of the better German designed ones.

But any American that would willfully buy a car from the enemy rather than An American company needs to move out of the USA.

I am pro Buy American Pro American worker Pro Union.

If someone was dirt poor and chose to buy a Yugo Hyundai or Kia out of desperation I might give them a pass, an employee bought a Mitsubishi several years back and I didn't give them too much shit (just a little) because I drove past the plant that made it 100 miles outside Chicago 1000 x there are some American car makers that buy many parts from the CCP and have them assembled in Mexico etc.

Hopefully Our Lord and Savior will change that.

But anyone that deliberately buys foreign products over American is a traitor and should be shot for treason.

You know the guy that only buys Asian cars only buys Asian phones only uses Asian airlines etc.

He hates America but insists on living here, albeit California.

If someone is poor and must shop at Walmart or Amazon for their cheap plastic garbage from the CCP I understand and.

I'm hoping Our Lord and Savior ends that as well.

The Tariff God returns Jan 20 2025.[/QUOTE]For a Western European, most american cars are lower quality than Europeans. And I also worry about Boeing safety, compare to Airbus. I would buy only a charger V8 for the legend, but not to drive 80000 kms per year between Paris and Germany.

[QUOTE=Locamotive;2973716]Considering all the lardasses we have in this county 900 k number is seems a bit low, it should have been more than that. It did thin them out as COVID was tough on the morbidity obese. Two in my neighborhood died and they were 300 lbs+ and that's being kind. We are the most overweight country on earth and they will cripple the Medicare system with health issues if they live that long. COVID did us a favor.[/QUOTE]Thin the Herd they say Thin the Herd!!

We got more Not Morbidly Obese Morbidly Obese Not Tiny Tinas coming in, brace yourselves!!

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2973760]For a Western European, most american cars are lower quality than Europeans. And I also worry about Boeing safety, compare to Airbus. I would buy only a charger V8 for the legend, but not to drive 80000 kms per year between Paris and Germany.[/QUOTE]Lower quality than Europe? LOL which countries lololol.

Boeing has had a few problems but I think you are trying to exaggerate them, and I was reading about the source of most of the issues.

Are you ready? Outsourcing to India.

I don't want my medicines made in India nor do I want my planes parts designed there or its flight software made in any degree there either.

I see that my original reply to Tiny that I submitted before the now previous [B]Oh, BTW[/B] post submission mysteriously got lost in transit and never showed up. See, that [B]Oh, BTW[/B] subject title meant I was adding something to that earlier reply.

You know, the one that mysteriously got lost.

Oh well.

So I will repost that original reply here:

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973664]You're twisting Thune's words. Certainly the effects of the TCJA weren't realized in 2017. The bill didn't even take effect until 2018. In 2019 there was a huge jump in real median household income and 50 year lows in unemployment. Was all this because of the TCJA? Certainly not. Trump's deregulation helped too, and perhaps even more so factors totally unrelated to politics.

The corporate rate cut that was part of the TCJA not only left more money in the hands of companies, to be used for expansion, jobs and higher salaries, but with time they resulted in the Treasury realizing more income than it would have without the cuts! That's primarily because of higher social security and Medicare contributions from people hired by corporations, as documented in the NBER paper I've linked to several times here. The USA during the Biden administration has benefited more from the corporate tax cuts than it did during Trump's time in office. And even Harris and Biden didn't want to take the federal rate back to where it was before the TCJA.

I'll get back to you on your other post when I have more time. I don't agree with all the parts of the TCJA, nor with Trump's proposed tariffs. Your link however is another classic example of Simpson's paradox -- when you add all the data together instead of segmenting it, in this case by specific changes in the tax code, you come up with a very distorted view of reality. Trump and the Republicans aren't going to eliminate the SALT cap, which would represent most of the tax savings realized by higher earners in the fictitious analysis by the left-biased Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.[/QUOTE]Inheriting an economy already at a Fed-defined "Full Employment" level with regard to the unemployment rate and continuing its 7 year-long decline, as Trump did, would be a big contributor to whatever "historic lows" it eventually went to over the next year or more as long as Trump hadn't done anything to change what he inherited and only played golf.

Yes, we have all seen your NBER charts and graphs showing "that" an increase in the median wage happened in 2018 and 2019 but have yet to see from you any substantiation for "why" that happened in any way due to a TCJA that was utterly dismissed by the corporate CEOs it benefitted the most as any reason whatsoever for them to expand their businesses, hire more employees, raise anyone's wages, etc and instead to just buy back their own stocks. Which they did.

On the other hand I have many times posted several reports explaining exactly why wages increased for anyone in 2018 and 2019; that being thanks largely to primarily Blue Cities and Blue States raising the minimum wage in 2018 and 2019, contrary to what most Repubs ever want to happen, and the inevitable ripple effect on other / higher wages.

Now, on the "bias" you referred to for the ITEP link and data I posted previously, I can help you with that if you are short on time:

[B]Media Bias/Fact Check.
Bias and Credibility
Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) Bias and Credibility[/B]

[URL]https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/institute-on-taxation-and-economic-policy-itep/[/URL]

[QUOTE]Overall, we rate the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy Left-Center biased based on economic policy and High for factual reporting.
............
Detailed Report:

Bias Rating: LEFT-CENTER (-3.2)
Factual Reporting: HIGH (1.1)
Country: USA
MBFCs Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY[/QUOTE]

Yep. Trump is already raising the prices on damn near everything even before he takes his Lie of Office again on the 20th.

BTW, his looming "policies", whether they happen or not, just him flappin his yap about it over and over again, are also the reason the Stock Market has been choppy and indecisive lately.

Thank you for your vote, MAGAs and that special demo in the three Swing States.

Got to admit, Trump is WAY ahead of his "Starting on Day One" campaign promise. His classic Repub economic policy and stewardship results have already started even before "Day One"!

[B]Services index shows big jump in prices for December as companies fear tariffs[/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/07/services-index-shows-big-jump-in-prices-for-december-as-companies-fear-tariffs.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]

[QUOTE]Activity in the U.S. services industry accelerated in December but brought with it a sharp rise in expectations for price increases as businesses grew concerned about the impact tariffs would have on inflation.[/QUOTE]