[expat_panama]

Related news

From Townhall:

Trump: You Bet I Support Raising Taxes on the Rich

GUTHRIE: Do you believe in raising taxes on the wealthy?

TRUMP: I do. I do – including myself. I do.

From www.donaldjtrump.com

tax cuts are fully paid for by:

1. Reducing or eliminating most deductions and loopholes available to the very rich.
2. A one-time deemed repatriation of corporate cash held overseas at a significantly discounted 10% tax rate, followed by an end to the deferral of taxes on corporate income earned abroad.
3. Reducing or eliminating corporate loopholes that cater to special interests, as well as deductions made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rate on corporations and business income. We will also phase in a reasonable cap on the deductibility of business interest expenses.

[Mr. K]

Let’s say you invent something and you make $1million dollars on it.

You would think you are set for life- you’ve won the lottery.

But, for THAT YEAR your income is $1 million so you pay a majority of that money in taxes- and then you go back to working for a living for the rest of your life

How if the hell is that ‘fair’??

[Fai Mao]

You need to read the Trump plan and listen to what he actually said rather than the Townhall hit piece

The taxes on the rich that Trump wants to raise are in areas that are currently untaxed - primarily profits from hedge funds and day trader types, who evidently can find ways to not call income - income.

Trump also supports a ONE TIME tax on the super rich to raise money that is specifically for reducing the national debt.

Read his tax plan. Look what he actually says, not what the GrOP-E shill want you to see.

[DoodleDawg]

tax cuts are fully paid for by:

A lot of people disagree with that: Link

[PGalt]

Fail? It’ll take a long time for socialists to run out of other people’s money. Fail?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__VQX2Xn7tI

R.I.P., Karen

[exDemMom]

A new study suggests this is false.

Which is exactly what every other study has shown. Amazing!

Mrs. Clinton, instead of standing up there and blaming the rich with your pandering class envy tactics, why don't you take the lead and use your own money for the poor? I understand that you have a family "foundation" which has been fed with donations that you never earned. Instead of living like an emperor, why don't you use your foundation to, I dunno, start attacking the root causes of poverty, beginning with the poverty culture that inhibits people from even wanting to better their lives?

[expat_panama]

Happy Tuesday morning all!  Major stock indexes popped up almost a % in mixed volume but futures traders this AM see that short lived w/ mixed/down trending today. 

More profit taking w/ metals too, trading is down a tad and futures atm see another -0.36%.

Yesterday's ISM Index edged down (again) and is now at 50.8 while construciton spending yesterday came out (unexpectedly) at just 0.3 --although last month's drop was upgraded to a plus 1.0% (also unexpectedly).  This afternoon we get Auto Sales & Truck Sales.

--and:

• The U.S. Economy Will Rebound from This False Dusk
• The Rising Longevity Gap Between Rich and Poor
• Hillary's Truly a Fiscal Conservative
• Stock Market Will Be Big Problem for Next President

[Sir Napsalot]

Philly's new mayor campaigned on he's going to tax the rich and sugary beverages, i.e. soda tax, to fund the Philly school ‘for a change’ (as if all his predecessors never ever fund schools). As every year the school district always runs out of money into huge debt, no matter how big the budget is.

Now his 3 cents per oz proposal for any beverage contains sugar is hitting those dummies who fell for the scheme, these guys/gals just don't realize ‘the rich’ meant themselves.

[nuconvert]

The “wealthy”, meaning people who make more than the Clintons. She doesn’t consider herself “truly rich or “ truly wealthy”.

[NonValueAdded]

Didja ever notice in the 10 Years After song that it is:

Tax the rich; feed the poor
'till there are no rich no more

Why isn't it "'till there are no poor no more?

I'll take shared prosperity over shared poverty any day of the week.

[Buckeye McFrog]

The author may very well be correct. Soaking the Rich may be a fool’s errand, and may utterly fail in its stated goal of reducing inequality.

We are going to find out. Looking at public opinion polling on the matter I’ve given up any thoughts that it will NOT happen.