Posted on 01/14/2017 11:39:17 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
On January 20, 2016, the country is sending a businessman to Washington in one of the riskiest bets in history. Donald Trump appears to be intent on running the country like a business enterprise. But Trump is not just a business man. He is a real estate developer, an important distinction, as it impacts how he will think about revitalizing an economy that has struggled to maintain significant growth.
Trump promises to cut both corporate and individual taxes while investing up to $1 trillion on the country's infrastructure. By simultaneously decreasing the country's revenue and increasing its expenses, Trump would be making a huge bet that the resulting growth will be substantial enough to outpace the buildup of debt, potential inflation and recession that could be the outcome if his plan fails.
Not surprisingly, this bet is reminiscent of a real estate development, of which our President-elect is very familiar - use debt to invest in a property in the hope that the improved asset will generate enough cash flow to ultimately reward the investment.
Trump's real estate background provides him with the outline for how to fix the economy...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
When Reagan took office in January 1981, the IRS was taking in $550 billion per year.
When Reagan left office eight years later, the IRS was taking in $900 billion per year.
The idiot liberal think the size of the pie is finite...it is not. It can be expanded in size.
Donald Trump doesn’t pursue just any property. It’s got to have huge potential to get huge investment.
These guys refuse to learn from Reagan. Reducing stifling tax rates increase revenue because it increases business activity, causes now businesses to be built or relocated from offshore. These people think that the income tax at 100% would raise revenue to equal all the taxable income every year and the taxable income would not be reduced. They think that revenue will actually increase from year to year because people will work ever harder trying to maintain their lifestyle. These people have post graduate degrees.
The relationship between tax rates and revenues is complicated. The latter is far more closely tied to economic activity and if adjusting the former downward enhances economic growth revenue will actually increase. This has been demonstrated many times. But for Democrats how economics work is always a zero sum game. For me to have something I must have taken it from someone else. Projection on their part since thievery is a part of their very nature.
The interstate highway system wasn’t stimulus spending. It was about boldly improving transportation in America. That infra-structure improvement has paid back a million times its cost.
I am not certain why this bozo thinks the bond market is "usually the smarter market", but for the pat 100 years long term stock returns have been better than bond returns.
And, the reason bonds are seeing higher interest rates is the Fed raising rates, which is not because of the "risk in Trump's strategy." I suspect the Fed is about to go to war with DJT and try to kill the recovery he is trying to give us. Epic battle. I am rooting for Trump.
Agree on the interstates and think Trump has a good idea of “where” it needs to be spent, unlike solar panels and unicorns of the left.
That is not what we have really gotten in the last rounds of stimulus spending. I think we can do this without the sugar high from debt spending - his economic ideas and principles are very sound. Once and for all, I would love to see us PROVE we are right and they are wrong without it involving additional debt on our children and grandchildren.
I am still very happy with Trump and I trust him - I view our debt and deficit spending a bit more harshly than others do. It is beyond time to get our fiscal house in order and that would be as effective in restoring faith in America as Trump’s promised policies. We need a balanced budget amendment and we need discipline as a nation or this cycle of insanity will continue.
There is no way congress can keep their little piggy fingers out of the stimulus pie. It’s made them wealthy before and they will get wealthy again. Anyone who thinks Trump is going to direct the spending (and not congress) is in for disappointment. Hope I am wrong, but that is the way I see it.
By simultaneously decreasing the country’s revenue and increasing its expenses,
*************
So they equate “the government” with “the country”?
> And, the reason bonds are seeing higher interest rates is the Fed raising rates, which is not because of the “risk in Trump’s strategy.” I suspect the Fed is about to go to war with DJT and try to kill the recovery he is trying to give us. Epic battle. I am rooting for Trump.
You nailed it. It’s the fed jerking the rate up. There’s going to be a recession or depression next year the only question is how fast Trump can pull us out of it. If he gets us out of it quickly then we’ll win a super majority in both houses in 2020.
Regulations cost the US economy $2 trillion yearly.
Maybe if he insisted on a project list with specific physical construction projects asvthe heart of the bill....and the projected cost of each.
Only the infrastructure plan is stimulus building. Everything else is tariff and tax reform and government downsizing.
Obama did an infrastructure plan that went to his bundlers and went to increasing government programs that then had to be funded every year afterwards. They rolled the “one time” stimulus plan into the budget, just like Obama rolled the war costs that Bush had kept separate into the budget.
Trump will really spend the money on infrastructure and he will really get value for what is spent.
Infrastructure plans are different than tax cuts in that more of the money gets spent immediately into the economy than tax cuts when tend to get saved. Both are good in the right circumstances.
And Infrastructure plans don’t cost as much as their face value becaus 15 to 20% comes back to the treasure in income tax. Probably a lot more by the time you consider the velocity of money and that the money will be taxed multiple times. Plus it gets people off the welfare roles which saves money too.
Don’t expect this to be Obama’s stimulus redux and don’t ignore the many aspects of Trump’s overall plan that is not stimulus spending.
If Trump cuts government as much as I expect him to, he needs a stimulus plan to help soften the economic blow from all the government jobs that will be lost.
Only the infrastructure plan is stimulus building. Everything else is tariff and tax reform and government downsizing.
Obama did an infrastructure plan that went to his bundlers and went to increasing government programs that then had to be funded every year afterwards. They rolled the “one time” stimulus plan into the budget, just like Obama rolled the war costs that Bush had kept separate into the budget.
Trump will really spend the money on infrastructure and he will really get value for what is spent.
Infrastructure plans are different than tax cuts in that more of the money gets spent immediately into the economy than tax cuts when tend to get saved. Both are good in the right circumstances.
And Infrastructure plans don’t cost as much as their face value becaus 15 to 20% comes back to the treasure in income tax. Probably a lot more by the time you consider the velocity of money and that the money will be taxed multiple times. Plus it gets people off the welfare roles which saves money too.
Don’t expect this to be Obama’s stimulus redux and don’t ignore the many aspects of Trump’s overall plan that is not stimulus spending.
If Trump cuts government as much as I expect him to, he needs a stimulus plan to help soften the economic blow from all the government jobs that will be lost.
Heh....good one.
There is no need to spend a single cent on upgrading infrastructure. Our transportation system was originally built with private capital. I’m no financial wizard, but why not let private industry build roads, bridges and railroads and allow them to collect tolls. Build power plants and charge rent. We still collect taxes on their profits. Sunset the charges so that we don’t pay forever.
Really?!?!!
I can believe it but I wish I would have read that article. It must have had incredible information.
That’s an incredible amount.
this country is gonna explode!!!
It is just the useful idiots that think that.
The fellow travelers know this, and hate it: They want to shrink the pie (along with the white, Christian population).
What a ####ing waste of great ideas people come up with on here.
I’ve read at least 3 or 4 really good ones the past few days alone.
Sunset the charges...that’s great. I’ve never heard of the term before.
BUT the Verrazano bridge toll was supposed to be sunsetted (is that a word :)) after the bridge was paid OFF!!!!
That was 40 years ago and the toll is SIXTEEN DOLLARS!! YES SIXTEEN DOLLARS!!!! Staten Islanders get a discount.
Someone’s gotta pay for obama’s sons in the bronx
So they equate “the government” with “the country”?By simultaneously decreasing the country’s revenue and increasing its expenses,
They do that systematically. Back when W was running in 2000, he said that “Texas spends X” on hospitals. The Democrats said that the Texas budget said otherwise. But W meant that hospitals in Texas took in X. Which meant that Texas society and Texas government, spent that much.SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.”Liberals” love to use “society” as a euphemism for government. But by doing so they set a (necessary) evil equal to a positive good.Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil . . . were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)
What you wrote is true if he can keep the piggy fingers out of the pie.
Congress loves their pork and they stabbed the TEA party movement in the back over and over. I do not trust them and we will learn much by how any stimulus is negotiated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.