Donald Trump has suggested eliminating U.S. income tax

originally posted by: Fdttaut
a reply to: pianopraze

Didn't he say he was going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it the last time he was trying to get elected?

Take it with a pinch of salt, unless of course you like being lied to?

The way the dfemocrats sandbagged Donald Trumps entire 4 yrs in office?
In all fairness only a hater or a troll could accuse the man of lying or
anything else for that matter. Any open and objective observation can
in no way deny that.

But you're absolutely entitle to any irrational delusional non sensical OPINION
you can dream up.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

Democrats have communities depending on them. Democrats can't keep their boot on the necks of impoverished communities if those communities no longer depend on democrats. This wouldn't be possible for democrats without taxing the hell out of us, democrats love taxes being imposed on middle and upper class citizens. Don't be fooled by republican politicians either, there are enough RINOs in there that get their piece of the tax dollar pie too. At the end of the day, it's the normal American citizens who suffer.

I'm thinking that with 87,000 new agents
looking for middle class violations, the
(D) party would have a hard time letting go
on this one.

How would they punish their political opponents
with a targeted audit?

a reply to: pianopraze

Ending Department of Education,
maybe just the scope on what they enforce, or can dictate. requiring standards to keep our population's intelligence level as high as possible in the three r's and science is important especially in this day in age it's a good thing and important to. any thing else like sex, let the youngin's learn in the back seat of the car like we did, or their folks talk to them about the birds and the bees, like my folks didn't.

Ending taxes on tips.
the way tipping is done today is something i never understood. to me a tipping is a gift given to someone for doing a outstanding job or taking very good care of something i didn't ask them to do. not a expectation for me to pay or a way for cheap bosses to get out of paying a fair wage.

Ending taxes on social security,
that's a tough one, many people due to circumstances beyond their control like, the cost of living, illness, age, or a whole host of others can't afford to save 10, 15, 20 percent of their yearly income to take care of their future. it's hand to mouth for them. and then it can also be a burden on employers to match what their employees put in, but you also got to remember the way it is now you don't pay tax on the social security you paid in until you start to draw it over a certain limit on total income. but then again if there was no income tax you wouldn't even owe that.

Now ending all income tax!
yep sales tax is the way to go, a flat percentage on everything sold except for goods used in manufacturing products and labor. strict guidelines and no exceptions or loop holes, except on imports on goods that are in low supply in the U.S. or not made in the U.S. due to our resources. then only if those goods come from countries that deal fairly with the U.S. on the import of our goods.

Corporation's move production to other countries. They still make their obscene profits so executives and shareholders are happy.....not so good for the people losing their jobs.

a reply to: Freeborn

How would companies make obscene profits moving to other countrie becsuse of tariffs? If they could make obscene profits they would already have moved to other countries, in fact many have. The tariffs would drive the corporations back, Trump will keep taxes low and force tariffs on imports which will give American productivity a huge boost, wages up employment up. The cheap labor and theft of intelectual property from, for example China, would be offset by the tariffs. Also taking away the Developing Nation Status from China which is a huge benefit for China at the expense of the US and it's marketplace.

China Is Developing and Developed at the Same Time

The world’s second-largest economy has a historically unique economic status.

China isn’t rich enough to “go it alone” or just with a Russia, etc. Notably, export revenues remain central to China’s economic growth, more than doubling over the last decade to over $3.5 trillion, with the advanced economies of the United States, Japan, Germany, and South Korea leading the way as the biggest importers of Chinese goods.

Trump will use our global market leverage, the US is the number one market. When Trump threatened countries with doing business with Iran they were broke. That is the power the US has, only Trump has used it properly and effectively.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

wouldn't those over seas producers then just raise the prices to compensate for the loss of profit due to tariffs?

They could try ....

But The United States Of America is the largest free market on earth , The Largest Free consumer market on Earth .

A small drop in over all profits from tariffs is not worth flat out Raising prices to the point that American consumers don't buy your products.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: BingoMcGoof

wouldn't those over seas producers then just raise the prices to compensate for the loss of profit due to tariffs?

They could try ....

But The United States Of America is the largest free market on earth , The Largest Free consumer market on Earth .

A small drop in over all profits from tariffs is not worth flat out Raising prices to the point that American consumers don't buy your products.

Exactly, we are in charge of things. Aside from military strength the US controls the global market place and we could go on and on. How do you think Trump got Mexico in line with the "Stay in Mexico policy"? Trump told countries if you buy oil from Iran than you will not do business with us and as a result Iran was broke ready to capitulate until the Biden team came to the rescue. Trump just last night told of how Guatemala said they wouldn't accept the MS13 gang members back and Trump said then we will cut off your $750 million aid package...what happened next was the Guatemalan government took back the MS13 deportees. That's how it's done!

originally posted by: pianopraze
Ending Department of Education.

Ending taxes on tips.

Ending taxes on social security.

Now ending all income tax!

Except all of this means working closely with Congress. And our perpetually 50/50 split Congress isn't going to end anything revenue-wise.

Yes I'd love to see all levels of government pared back to what they're supposed to be doing. But we're talking a 20 year process, not 2. And what covers the hangover of the current $35 trillion Federal debt?

If Trump can lay out workable specifics then I'll be convinced otherwise. But "Here's my big idea, we'll figure out the details and how to pay for it later!" is something the Democrats would do.

Except all of this means working closely with Congress. And our perpetually 50/50 split Congress isn't going to end anything revenue-wise.

a reply to: gb540

The Department of Education can possibly be eliminated through executive order along with the FBI and the IRS. Viveck mentioned this before, you cannot fire some people in these departments but you can eliminate the departments alltogether. Of course Viveck said it better, I'll look for the clip. Regarding the IRS, During the Civil War, President Lincoln signed the Revenue Act of 1862, creating the Bureau of Internal Revenue just to collect taxes to fund the war effort then it morphed into what we have now.

in 1908 President Roosevelt created the Bureau of Investigation by executive order and directed Attorney General Charles Bonaparte to develop the agency within the Department of Justice.

The Department of Education may be a little trickier but it can be done possibly by merging with the Department of Labor

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof

If I recall correctly, Trump has been dangling this bait now for quite a while. No income tax and make overseas producers pay tariffs on their goods. So silly me thinks, ah, wouldn't those over seas producers then just raise the prices to compensate for the loss of profit due to tariffs?

No, that would make no sense.

The suppliers aren't paying the tariffs, the consumers are.

If a supplier figures they can sell a ton of steel for $100 and make a fair profit, then that equation doesn't change when the government tacks on an additional 10% to the manufacturer. The supplier makes the same profit either way.

The manufacturer will pass the tariff costs to the consumer, just like they do with taxes. If the manufacturer buys less steel because of the tariff, then the manufacturer didn't need the steel. The manufacturer may choose to buy domestic steel if it's cheaper, but that's the whole idea. Become less dependent on foreign goods.

If anything, suppliers may choose to lower their price on steel to make it competitive with domestic steel. But if they could do that, then they've been overcharging us all along. The tariffs would act like a market correction.

For non-Americans saying that American tariffs on foreign goods are a bad thing, I suggest you look to your own country first. You know damn well that your own country imposes tariffs on imported goods to protect domestic industries. It seems disingenuous to say tariffs are bad for America, but good for your own country.

a reply to: watchitburn

We were doing those things during his 1st term and the economy was roaring with historic low unemployment, wage increases, and economic growth before covid.

Fair enough.
Let's see how this plays out.

a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Because if Trump set ridiculously large tariffs on imported good from other countries then other countries would have no option but to do the same with US goods.
That would have an obvious impact on US exports.
So multi-nationals and big business that have manufacturing sites in the US would simply shift production to somewhere in the EU or South East Asia or South America etc. Their executives and major shareholders still get their whopping bonuses and large dividends.....the man at the bottom gets # all.

I guess it might work all fine and dandy if the US was self-sufficient....but it isn't.

Anyway, good luck with the isolationism if that's the way you guys choose to go.....historically its never worked for anyone but who knows, there could be a first?

Anyway, good luck with the isolationism if that's the way you guys choose to go.....historically its never worked for anyone but who knows, there could be a first?

a reply to: Freeborn

It's not isolationism, it is leverage. The tariffs would be relative to the cooperation of countries perhaps. I would say, respectfully to your view point, I would simply say if there are two different interests at hand the one with the most leverage wins. So, in my example, China either gets in line or it finds another country to buy their knockoffs
for which one does not exist. See China needs us more and they are not playing fair so we need to let them know who is in position of powere/leverage. That is the art of the deal. That is how it works. That is just the way it is. Money talks, if Trump says to China you cannot buy oil from Iran and Venazuela guess what happens....they don't by oil fro Iran and Venazuela because they NEED to sell to us more then we need to buy from them...period.

Hell I'd Rather have Pat Paulsen than Harris.


a reply to: WeMustCare

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: fringeofthefringe

Because if Trump set ridiculously large tariffs on imported good from other countries then other countries would have no option but to do the same with US goods.
That would have an obvious impact on US exports.
So multi-nationals and big business that have manufacturing sites in the US would simply shift production to somewhere in the EU or South East Asia or South America etc. Their executives and major shareholders still get their whopping bonuses and large dividends.....the man at the bottom gets # all.

I guess it might work all fine and dandy if the US was self-sufficient....but it isn't.

Anyway, good luck with the isolationism if that's the way you guys choose to go.....historically its never worked for anyone but who knows, there could be a first?

We sell ideas Freeborn. Plus, war equipment apparently. Yep.

So our stuff is a lot of intellectual things like those Beatles Albums were ideas from some kids around your Liverpool. Entertainment and beer here, but we don't import our crap beer there. And you wouldn't buy a pint of it if we did.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: pianopraze

Ending Department of Education,
maybe just the scope on what they enforce, or can dictate. requiring standards to keep our population's intelligence level as high as possible in the three r's and science is important especially in this day in age it's a good thing and important to. any thing else like sex, let the youngin's learn in the back seat of the car like we did, or their folks talk to them about the birds and the bees, like my folks didn't.

Ending taxes on tips.
the way tipping is done today is something i never understood. to me a tipping is a gift given to someone for doing a outstanding job or taking very good care of something i didn't ask them to do. not a expectation for me to pay or a way for cheap bosses to get out of paying a fair wage.

Ending taxes on social security,
that's a tough one, many people due to circumstances beyond their control like, the cost of living, illness, age, or a whole host of others can't afford to save 10, 15, 20 percent of their yearly income to take care of their future. it's hand to mouth for them. and then it can also be a burden on employers to match what their employees put in, but you also got to remember the way it is now you don't pay tax on the social security you paid in until you start to draw it over a certain limit on total income. but then again if there was no income tax you wouldn't even owe that.

Now ending all income tax!
yep sales tax is the way to go, a flat percentage on everything sold except for goods used in manufacturing products and labor. strict guidelines and no exceptions or loop holes, except on imports on goods that are in low supply in the U.S. or not made in the U.S. due to our resources. then only if those goods come from countries that deal fairly with the U.S. on the import of our goods.

Social security will come from the GENERAL FUND IF trump gets his way on eliminating FICA. It esentially is where it is coming from now anyway since the dems/Rinos raided the coffers.

And a FLAT TAX on all stuff bought would draw in more money I think.

I'm going to laugh my head off if Kamala copies THIS idea.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Freeborn
An observation from across the pond.

And how do you thing the rest of the world would react to this?

A universal increase in tariffs on US goods.
A big reduction in US exports with an obvious impact on sales and jobs.

Corporation's move production to other countries. They still make their obscene profits so executives and shareholders are happy.....not so good for the people losing their jobs.

As pointed out, possible de-unionisation resulting in lower wages for many.

US isolationism at its very worst, but hey......entirely up to you guys, you do as you see fit.

The U.S. cannot pull it off they are too immersed in the global economy. Promising anything other than economic policies where the math works is a con job.

You are, as always, entirely wrong.

The math works simply because the American dollar is still the world's reserve currency.

We could pull it off simply by producing more oil.

You know... something the Democrats are against because they are trying to destroy America.

Up our production 20% and we will own the world economy again.

Something that Trump understands, among other people.

a reply to: DBCowboy

It was a big plank in Ron Paul’s platform a few cycles ago.
Back when I was still a Republican .

a reply to: Lumenari

Now why would Elon want Trump to produce more oil? Elon may need to rein in Trump's leash.

Musk has consistently favored a carbon tax, which is a tax on fossil fuels, especially those used by motor vehicles, intended to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide.

Get ready to pay more tax one way or the other, not the polluter elite as usual, only the middle class.

www.entrepreneur.com...

The world's wealthiest people make a huge contribution to climate change through carbon-hungry activities. How can we reduce emissions from the rich?

The statistics are startling. The world's wealthiest 10% were responsible for around half of global emissions in 2015, according to a 2020 report from Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute. The top 1% were responsible for 15% of emissions, nearly twice as much as the world's poorest 50%, who were responsible for just 7% and will feel the brunt of climate impacts despite bearing the least responsibility for causing them.

www.bbc.com...

We are all being duped.

Who are you really voting for on the Rep side?

www.bostonherald.com...