Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishy2
Now... I doubt you are going to agree with these accomplishments. You can find a list of Trumps accomplishments since taking office practically anywhere. More to come from him as well. This is just the beginning. I am not a Trump surrogate. If you need a comprehensive list of the plans you need to go to his official site.
https://townhall.com/columnists/john...ffice-n2287565 |
@fishy, read this buddy. You'll be suprised.
There are a couple of items, the TTP & the 2 for 1 reulation reduction, that I'll hit here.
I'm not certain of the wisdom in mandating 2 regulations be cut prior to creating another.
The 2 for 1
First, is there any rule against the new regulation being put in place and also including parts or even the entirety of one of the other regulations that were cut? It's just now a much much bigger single regulation, right? So for political fodder Trump can say he cut the number regulations in half but actual didn't make any real changes.
Regulations can be good. New regulations my also become needed and forcing two others to be removed just because, could have unintended consequences.
The TPP
First, breathe. Secondly, I don't necessarily disagree with Trumps decision . But it is really complicated. The TPP allegedly would bring in ALOT of, and in terms we here at ECCIE understand, $$$$$$$$$$$! People have said like 300 billion or so over a certain period. However, I believe the revenues would not go the lower middle class as much, at least directly from the trade deal. I'll touch back on what I mean by directly later. That being said, a lot of pro Trump Iowa farmers think pulling out now may not have been such a great idea.
Obviously, pulling out of the TPP does not mean we cannot make bilateral deals with each country that may produce similar revenues. Maybe maybe not. We don't know yet. It isn't like they won't accept the US later into the agreement if it turns out it would be better, especially since it seems the whole deal without the US may be on the rocks.
I see what Sessions was saying about replacing Congress with a global regulatory structure that takes voting power away from Americans. However, I think congress hasn't answered to the American people for some time anyway either. That's BOTH parties fault. I also think a global economy is inevitable as the sun rising.
I think Obama could have framed the TPP and the tax increase on those making 250k or more annually, much better as well as together to sell them to people.
He could have even used a term republicans love, which is "TRICKLE DOWN" and balanced the budget!
Revenues trickle down much much faster than tax breaks. That is to say if a comany gets a tax break but their revenue turnover didn't meet or exceed expectations, it's unlikely they are going to create a new job, which is what Republican's erroneously believe trick down economic's does.
If a company hits those revenue projections, they are more inclined to create a new job and therefor the people in the lower middle class indirectly benefit.
Framed like this...
TPP brings revenues in but more so to wealthier individuals and companies and doesn't do much for the little guy. it's only fair then to have a small tax increase to those making over 250k to help balance the budget and reduce the deficit.
I don't think that sounds horrible. Of he threw in some spending reductions, Obama could have had a deal I think that would have balanced a budget.
