ONLY AMERICA HAS EVER CARED ABOUT THE REST OF THE WORLD
By what measure? China, Russia, Germany, Japan, and the UK have foreign aid programs comparable to ours and people involved in construction and direct aid world-wide. Some sources say China outspends us in foreign aid.
Of course, Trump’s made it clear "America First" is "America Alone", by insulting and alienating our friends and allies. He's also made it clear we can't be trusted to stand by our commitments. That's why the world is realigning to avoid America.
Such as patrolling the Persian Gulf. Trump called for a multinational effort and nobody answered. The UK put together a multinational force and didn't ask us to the dance. (The UK may allow us in with Johnson ASPM).
Both Germany and France have explicitly stated they don't trust the US to keep our NATO commitments.
Or the fight over Kashmir. Trump claimed he had been asked to mediate. India and Pakistan both said "bullshit, and kindly f*** off".
TPP, the Iran deal, and the Paris accord are proceeding without us.
This guy nailed it:
quote:Trump “has a transactional approach to international relations, in which there is little regard for historic allies or even traditional enemies. It is all about getting headlines in U.S. media that might endear Trump to his base at home,” said former Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S. Husain Haqqani. “Trump’s comments during Imran Khan’s visit had only one purpose: to get Pakistani help in securing a deal with the Taliban for a U.S. military withdrawal before the 2020 elections. His comments annoyed India, led Prime Minister Modi to expedite integration of Kashmir, and did little to get what Trump wants in Afghanistan.”
They are creating wealth, their product requires the hiring of huge numbers of employees.
This is the old "trickle-down economics" crap. No, they aren't hiring huge numbers of employees unless there is demand for what they produce. In general they are not "job creators". The job creators are the 99% who create the demand... if they have the money.
Again, trickle down economics failed for Reagan. It failed for W. It failed for Jindal in Louisiana. It failed for Walker in Wisconsin. It failed most spectacularly for Brownback in Kansas, hailed as a perfect test by trickle-down economists, to the point where a Republican legislature overrode a Republican governor's veto to raise taxes and lift Kansas out of the hole Brownback dug.
quote:The Kansas experiment refers to Kansas Senate Bill Substitute HB 2117, a bill signed into law in May 2012 by Sam Brownback, Governor of the state of Kansas. It was one of the largest income tax cuts in the state's history, which Brownback believed would be a "shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy".
The law cut taxes by US$231 million in its first year, and cuts were projected to total US$934 million after six years, by eliminating taxes on business income for the owners of almost 200,000 businesses and cutting individual income tax rates, but by 2017, state revenues had fallen by hundreds of millions of dollars, causing spending on roads, bridges, and education to be slashed.
In education, school districts dealt with cuts by shutting down the school year early, eliminating school programs, cutting maintenance, phasing out teaching positions, enlarging class sizes, increasing fees for kindergarten, and cutting janitorial personnel and librarians. School districts were consolidated and some schools were closed.
That doesn't mention that the state Supreme Court ruled that the education cuts violated the state Constitution, and the Republican legislature reacted by trying to remove the Supreme Court's authority.
Here we are in 2019 after a huge tax cut for the 1% and a minor tax curt for the 99%. Job growth rate has been slower than under Obama. The deficit has ballooned to such incredible size that the Republicans are preparing major cuts to Social Security and Medicare if Trump is re-elected. Aren't you glad they want to take us old folks' money to make up for their giveaway to the 1%?
Reality demonstrates that's not how things work. Trickle down economics enriches the r rich at the expense of the 99%. The rich spend little of their wealth (most of it sits around generating interest) and are few. The 99% spend less per person, but are much more in number.
Of course you can't, as I did, cite supporting examples. There are none.
Few of the rich steal from the 99%. But the 99% don't get to share in the wealth because wages have risen much much slower than the rich's incomes.,and taxes affect the 99% much more than the rich.
And Republicans are always trying to gut Medicare and Social Security. If Trump gets re-elected he and others have announced those programs are on the chopping block to partially offset the huge drop in government revenue and ballooning of the deficit and the debt caused by their tax cut for billionaires.
As far as I can tell we don't have the wealthiest poor class. Got a reference for that claim?
As to regulation, you are a heretic. The official right-wing line is that business is being stifled by hordes of regulations and we have to deregulate so business can grow and we can give up clean air, clean water, worker safety, and so on.
But whatever, we didn't get to where we are by throwing money at the rich and hoping that it somehow trickles down. It doesn't, as demonstrated by the examples I gave. If you have an example of trickling actually happening post it.
The trickle down scam is relatively recent, first showing up under Reagan. How do you explain the 1950s boom, when the top tax rate was 90%? Where's the huge jump in job numbers we were promised in 2017?
Note that under Trump we've had just a continuation of Obama's rate of job creation.
Where's the jump in GDP growth? Trump’s doing about as well as Obama, and Obama was working with a sick economy.