The Right Side of the News

He's running trillion dollar deficits mostly due to his tax cut and the loss of revenue that caused. Trickle- economics never worksTrump’s Wasteful Tax Cuts Lead To Continued Trillion Dollar Deficits In Expanding Economy

quote:

---

Less than a week after Treasury Secretary Mnuchin repeated the fanciful claim that the Trump tax cuts of 2017 would pay for themselves, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) proved him wrong. If tax cuts actually paid for themselves, they would reduce deficits based on faster revenue growth that comes from faster economic growth. Deficits immediately shot up after the 2017 supply-side tax cuts. And CBO forecasts that those deficits will continue to stay high for the foreseeable future. This is the opposite of tax cuts paying for themselves

---

Redirect Notice

quote:

---

Lawmakers typically have more tools to reduce the national debt when the economy is in a solid place. As a candidate in 2016, President Donald Trump promised to eliminate the deficit within eight years.

​

But it has continued to jump in the wake of recent legislation, including $1.5 trillion tax cuts that the president signed into law after his first year in office.

​

The GOP had initially argued that lower taxes would lift the economy enough to make up for the loss in federal revenue. But key Republicans have since walked back the long-standing claim that the 2017 package would pay for itself.

---

Redirect Notice

quote:

---

Donald Trump appeared on Rush Limbaugh's program last week and boasted that the United States is "taking in more revenue now than we did when we had the higher taxes because the economy's doing so well." It's a familiar thought in Republican circles: lower taxes fuel stronger economic growth, which leads to increased revenue. Ergo, the argument goes, tax cuts pay for themselves.

​

The trouble, of course, is that the president's claims were false. A Washington Post fact-check piece explained, "Trump gets virtually everything wrong in his framing.... The president needs a remedial lesson in budget policy."

​

It was against this backdrop that the New York Times reported on the latest deficit figures from the Treasury Department. Are the increased revenues Trump pointed to bringing the budget closer to balance? Not exactly.

​

quote:

---

The federal budget deficit surpassed $1 trillion in 2019, the Treasury Department reported on Monday, as tax cuts and spending increases continued to force heavy government borrowing amid a record-long economic expansion. [...]

​

The deficit has grown nearly four times as fast, on average, under Mr. Trump than it did under Mr. Obama. Mr. Trump has already added more to the national debt than Mr. Obama did in his entire second term -- $2.6 trillion, compared with Mr. Obama's $2.1 trillion.

---

---

I see this already has three replies, but it is so wrong it deserves another: No, this is incorrect. Testifying to what you heard someone else say is eyewitness testimony. How could it possibly be anything else. You witnessed them saying it. Testifying to what you witnessed is the essence of eyewitness testimony.I think where you're getting confused concerns whether some eyewitness testimony is direct evidence or not. If John told Mary, "I killed JR," and Mary testified, "John told me that he killed JR," that is eyewitness testimony, not hearsay. But it is not direct evidence the John killed JR. Even if John himself testified, "I killed JR," that would not be conclusive evidence. John may be confessing to protect his wife Sally, who actually killed JR.That being said, juries do tend to give confessions a lot of weight, even in the absence of eyewitness or forensic evidence. That's why forced confessions (the jury must of course be persuaded they were not coerced) have placed so many innocent men behind bars, in some cases in the face of indisputable evidence that they were miles away at the time.Summarizing, if you testify to what you saw or heard, that's firsthand knowledge and not hearsay. It's only hearsay when you testify to things you only know secondhand.--Percy

Obama inherited a staggering economy from Bush and built it back to health.Trump has managed to continue that success.

By taxing the rich and corporations to pay their fair share.You can help. Don't cash your Social Security check. Don't let your doct charge Medicare, buy a full-coverage private policy.That's what the Republicans want for everybody.

Had it happened the way you just described then sure, it would have been hearsay. But none of the testimony before the House Intelligence Committee describes what Trump or Mulvaney or Pompeo or Perry or Giuliani said or did, unless they actually witnessed it. For example, David Holmes testified to what he overheard Trump saying to Sondland on Sondland's phone. That's an eyewitness account.Had David Holmes instead testified that Trump directed Sondland to convince the Ukrainians to begin an investigation into the Bidens that would have been hearsay or speculation. But he didn't do that.As an aside, I don't know why Trump tried to cast doubt on being able to overhear cellphone conversations. I encounter people with their cell phones turned up too loud all the time. It's especially annoying in restaurants. Keep this in mind the next time you're tempted to hit that caps lock key.--Percy

Yet again you are simply repeating falsehoods.List the entitlements and how they are funded and what part they play in the National Debt.Sorry Faith but you really need to learn the basics.

I guess you really meant "there's no reason to doubt the investigation of Burisma, but I hope some doubt emerges someday".

that link I posted listed Social Security and Medicare and I think one other.

Well they keep wanting to investigate the Biden thing so clearly it's not all that well established.

And how are those two financed? How can they possibly contribute to either the deficit or debt?Basics Faith, learn the basics which have been pointed out to you MANY times in the past.Stop believing the liars that are the current crop of Conservative conmen.Edited by jar, : theY

Which means the rich will either be moving out of the country to avoid taxes, or at least not be expanding their businesses and creating more jobs, which means more money will be paid out in those entitlement programs, which means there won't be any money for paying down the debt. I truly wish I could but I am one of the people who need the help unfortunately and due to physical disability couldn't work even if there were jobs I could do. I have an income of $420 from SS, plus rent relief, and that's all. I daydream about ways to make money, writing a book is one but of course it might not sell. I am truly grateful for the help I get, I'm not against entitlements, only it's clear there are a lot of people who could be working instead and that's way better for the economy.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

They are paid for out of tax money, where else would it come from? Look at the link.

Yeah, Republicans keep wanting to investigate the Bidens. That doesn't tell us why. The fact that there isn't an iota of evidence of any wrongdoing does tell us why. It's a smokescreen to distract from the administration's criminality.https://www.frontpagelive.com/...oe-biden-and-his-son-hunter

quote:

---

quote:

---

Hunter Biden did not violate any Ukrainian lawsat least as of now, we do not see any wrongdoing. A company can pay however much it wants to its board.

---

​

The prosecutor general also said that Hunter Biden was not under investigation, and neither is the company Burisma where he was a board member.

---

Hunter got the job because of his name. Just like Jared, Ivanka, Eric, and Don Jr.Similarly, when Joe Biden called for Shokin's ouster there was no investigation into Burisma or Hunter.

To what tax are you referring?

Because he cut funding on food stamps, artificially lowering the number because fewer qualified.Unemployment down but how many people with multiple jobs getting counted twice for being employed, and how many jobs pay a living wage or better.If more people working multiple jobs to survive is unemployment the issue or underemployment?unemployment is the most manipulated figure and fails to measure the value of jobs.If unemployment is down AND the average value of jobs is down, the economy is not improving, it just means more people working starvation wages.Enjoy