The Biden Presidency

What the hell does "possible abandonment of the US dollar" even mean Phat?Stop listening to all the shills.

The Trump tax cuts were harmless, except they punished the responsible states for taking an economic risk in placing higher taxes on income, as opposed to the race to the bottom jacking up of the sales taxes.(Trump ended the exemption on state and local taxes)The corruption in the Supreme Court (supporting Amazon's push to fraudulently rule that sales taxes took place where the consumer lived, as opposed to the actual transaction point at the business location) compounded the problem. In fact it was 1000 times more damaging.(Needless to say, Amazon stock soared, once the smaller competitors had sales taxes put on their consumers, despite the fact that they could have their business in Oregon, Montana, Delaware, or New Hampshire AS OPPOSED to the Amazon behemoth operation in all 50 states. Jeff Bezos became the richest man)Trump did increase the standard deduction for EVERY person by a good amount, and he said he wanted to do more, so that helped reduce the amount of people itemizing deductions, to his credit. It will reduce the number of corrupt itemizing options, overall, but it stunk that he hit the residents of responsible states arbitrarily. It encourages sales taxes to be higher still, and income taxes lower still. Bad for the poor in 100 ways, and not just on the face of itTrump gets attacked fow lowering the corporate tax to 21%, but the revenue loss was not so much, really.I am amazed, considering the $10 trillion debt increase the past year, that people still bitch about a $100 to $150 billion a year tax cut. Still? Really?Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

You are wrong. The trump tax cuts accellerated the debt, drastically. It was to the billionaires for the most part too, which widened the gap betweeen the middle class and the rich, (and never mind the poor).

While at the same time taking our personal exemptions away! Including the exemptions you used to be able take for each dependent! Basically, the amount that he raised your standard deduction was just slightly more than the personal exemption he took away from you!IOW, Trump robbed you of your personal exemption and tacked in onto the standard deduction just so he would falsely claim credit and solicit praise for giving you "a big tax break" by "doubling your standard deduction". And you fell for his tricks yet again!We've gone over this a few times already! Tax Talk: Message 1, Message 7.Oh, and our taxes are set to go up this year all because of Trump and the Great GOP Tax Scam of 2017. Tax reductions for the 99% were both small and temporary. Trump and the GOP designed them to go up after the next election so that they could blame it on the Democrats, when in reality it was a booby trap set by the GOP. Oh, and the tax cuts for the rich? Permanent!Are you going to fall for that Trump/GOP trick too?

Predictions of deficits causing disaster have been made since time immemorial. Back in the latter half of the 18th century the British feared deficit disaster and taxed the American colonies to help pay down their deficits, causing rebellion. Deficit hawks predicting disaster have as good a record as Christians predicting end times. We have far more to fear from rash actions driven by deficit fears than from the deficits themselves.Who have been most critical of our current deficits, both budgetary and the national debt? Conservatives, of course, but they're terrifically inconstant about it. Over the four years of the Trump administration, which racked up enormous deficits even before covid, conservatives expressed very little concern about deficits, but Biden wasn't even in office a week before conservatives started making deficits one of their top concerns. This is because their concern is not driven by objective considerations but by politics. Conservative concerns are about as genuine as Trump's claims of election fraud, and you're falling for it.People can get a mortgage that is 3 or 4 or even 5 (California) times their annual income. The current national debt is $27 trillion while the 2020 GDP was about $21 trillion, or about 1.3 times the country's annual income. If people who carry mortgages 3, 4 or 5 times their annual incomes do fine, then how can it be true that the US is heading for disaster by running a deficit only 1.3 times its annual income? Trump ran huge deficits. Why would the deficits wait until Trump's presidency ended to cause inflation? Do you think that if Trump had been reelected that low inflation would magically continue, just like the virus magically disappeared? Say what? With few exceptions (those countries without a domestic currency), every country in the world can "print" more money. And governments running the printing presses isn't the only way to create money. Increased bank lending can also increase the money supply - look up "money multiplier." The Fed tries to control bank lending by setting interest rates.--Percy

The current pandemic relief proposals between the Democrats and the Republicans make the difference between the two parties quite clear:The Republicans don’t want to needlessly waste a single dollar,The Democrats don’t want to needlessly waste a single life.To the Republicans, an American life is not worth a dollar.

Some Republicans seem to actively want to spread the disease. It’s insane, but that is where US politics is today.

The serious illnesses and deaths from Covid-19 are predominately among the elderly who are either no longer working, among the higher paid if working, people with existing health problems, liberals or People of Color.Those are all categories that today's Conservatives consider liabilities rather than assets and so not just expendable but redundant.

The Republican plan would provide $1000 checks to those earning below $40,000 a year. The Democrat plan would provide $1400 checks to those earning below $75,000 a year. The payments in both plans gradually phase out above those limits. Double all figures for married couples.I'd rather see a plan that provided $2000 checks to those earning below $20,000 a year and phase out linearly up to $100,000. A $50,000 earner would get $1250, a $75,000 earner $625, a $100,000 earner zero. Again, double all figures for married couples.This addresses the dual purpose of stimulus checks: stimulus *and* assistance, and it gives the most assistance to the most needy. It also helps out landlords by making it more likely that the most needy can pay their rent, and it helps out the mortgage industry by making it more likely that landlords can pay their mortgages.--Percy

It’s starting to sound like the Republicans/conservatives in this country want to institute a ‘useless eaters’ program (pogrom?).

Can this logic be used to justify a Universal Basic Income (UBI) program, or does it only apply to dire situations?

I guess what I'd like to see in place of our current patchwork of assistance programs is something that more resembles social engineering, but Republicans would never allow it.Someone who emigrated from India told me a story a long while back that helps make clear where I'm coming from. Back in India they had good jobs and lived in a fancy apartment building, but the stench from open sewers in the streets was overpowering, easily detectable even on the upper floors, and the sidewalk in front of their building was filled with temporary structures erected by the homeless who they had to pass on their way in and out. How good, really, is the quality of life in a fancy apartment if you're forced into close quarters with intolerable poverty and ignorance?We have poverty here, too. Aggressively attacking poverty through programs that, perhaps over a generation, transform the poor into productive educated contributors to society would greatly improve everyone's quality of life. The key is to cast aside a couple attitudes. Cast aside the goal of isolating oneself from exposure to poverty and its effects (e.g., gated communities). Cast aside blaming the poor for their poverty. The goal should be to improve the lot of those worst off, thereby improving things both economically and socially.The possibility of something like this seems far removed at this time. Those treated worst by Trump policies seem to love him the most.--Percy

Obama sat down in his fresh Oval Office chair in January,2009, and was told he had a $1.2 to $1.3 trillion deficit for FY 09, or October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009.The previous fiscal year had a $ 454 billion deficit.Obama passed a $787 billion stimulus plan, to be used equally the next 2 years.$388 billion more per year, for 2 years. It included $70 billion in Alternative Minimum Tax cuts, Republicans asked for, plus other stimulus money that both parties supported, though Republicans preferred a smaller stimulus.Much of the money was to state and local governments, all of which had massive budget shortfalls - some were 40% short on revenue .The stimulus essentially prevented state and local governments from having to raise taxes in an economically deadly way.The stimulus package difference between a hypothetical Republican proposal ( which never came) and the Democratic plan was probably around $200 billion a year, before the macroeconomic factor would make the difference perhaps half that dollar amount.Regardless, Obama had a $1.6 trillion deficit his first fiscal year( which included 3 months and 20 days of Bush's last year)and 1.9 trillion for FY 2010, October 1, 2009 to September 30, 2010.He got blamed for increasing the deficit from $454 billion to 4 times the amount.By the time he left office, deficitsvwere down to $500 billion a year, or roughly the same inflation adjusted yearly increase.FAST FORWARD TO FY 2021Another Republican administration has come and went.Now deficits are in the multi trillions.Bush 43 inherited a surplus of over $200 billion in 2001.Left with a projected deficit of $1.3 trillion WITH the need for a very large stimulus.Trump inherited a $500 billion deficit and managed to oversee an exponential increase in his 1 term.Typical?Expected?What is the best way to Express your feelings and expectations?

Keep in mind that the deficit is the shortfall amount in one budget year. The DEBT is the sum total of all deficits. The amounts are all off of the charts. This bill wont get paid due to the fact that every American owes close to $100,000 were it shared equally. One can only kick a can down a road while there is even a road.

Look at all of the foreigners that hold our treasury bonds. If the currency suddenly got devalued 30 percent, then we would see perhaps trillions of dollars invested in property, just from foreign debt holders alone.Many more Americans would convert their inflating dollars into land holdings and investment property assets.Now, I think a progressive federal property tax would then be in order ( it is highly called for now, if we ever want to get a grip on actually solving problems). The higher the property value, the higher the yearly tax rate.We have experienced periods of foreign investment in housing in the past. It was inflation driven, and Japanese investors were the ones driven (70s and early 80s) to buy property assets, though the federal government refused then, like now, to have a saner tax policy.In New York, subway expansion is funded with a not so secret stealth tax effect. But it is not stealthy at all. Just build a new subway route, and the streets and houses located along the lines see exploding property values, which then leads to higher property tax burdens. The new lines gets paid for over time.I think the debt is payable. Inflation combined with capital gains & dividend tax increases would have to be part of the eventual solution.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.