US 2024 Presidential Election

[Trunkage]

So when Trump imposes a tax that gets paid by American businesses, that tax hits the poor more severely than the rich. Do you take them same position on corporate income taxes?

Reagan reduced corporate taxes and employment went down

He put the taxes back on and employment went back up

Now, some of this is paid by consumers, true. But it's not as simple as corporate taxes just get transferred to the consumers as a tariff is because it's also more workers getting paid

The tarrifs America had on China just lead to China placing tarries on the US which just tanked both economies. Both sides were stupid

 

[Trunkage]

Salaries are not typically taxed at 99%.

Anyway, I sort of agree; it might be interesting to see the effect of a 100% corporate income tax, although I can imagine much more straightforward ways of abolishing profit.

Consistently, increased corporate taxes just leads to increased investments back into businesses. Whether this includes this tax specifically, I don't know.

 

[Trunkage]

Because people keep voting the same people in power that enable the elite to do what they want.

The Presidency was designed to be out of reach for the average person. I agree that people keep voting for these elites.... but also, the Dems and the GOP only ever put up elites as their candidate. The system is designed to only vote for elites

 

[Silvanus]

And the challenge was like 50 years ago, not 226 years ago.

Irrelevant, since any failed challenge at all proves my original point: that the Constitution offered no protection that the Courts couldn't just decide to override.

 

[Agema]

The Presidency was designed to be out of reach for the average person. I agree that people keep voting for these elites.... but also, the Dems and the GOP only ever put up elites as their candidate. The system is designed to only vote for elites

Hence that famous description the "tyranny of the majority".

The ability of the masses to override the interests of minorities included the ability of the working classes to dispossess the rich and middle classes of their wealth and power: and every one of those middle-upper class guys who wrote the Constitution knew so.

 

[Schadrach]

'Biden has destroyed the economy!'

*checks economic data* The economy doing better than ever

Macroeconomic indicators and people's experiences do not necessarily align. So you have a big class of people who's pay is not remotely keeping up with prices, while prices changed very quickly under the Biden admin and so the Biden admin is getting blamed for it. Those people aren't worried about macroeconomic indicators, because those indicators don't help them afford their groceries.

 

[Agema]

Macroeconomic indicators and people's experiences do not necessarily align. So you have a big class of people who's pay is not remotely keeping up with prices, while prices changed very quickly under the Biden admin and so the Biden admin is getting blamed for it. Those people aren't worried about macroeconomic indicators, because those indicators don't help them afford their groceries.

Never mind Biden, the failure of macroeconomic indicators to align with many people's individual experiences pretty much describes the last 45 years. And despite the rhetoric and fervour of supporters on either side, I don't seriously believe the Republicans or Democrats offer any significant change to this decades-long pattern.

No wonder so many Americans are fed up with their politicians.

 

[Schadrach]

Good on you, Matt and Trey.

Eh, they can still ermember what happened in 2016 and how the 2016 election really borked their season because they never believed Trump could win.

 

[tstorm823]

Salaries are not typically taxed at 99%.

Anyway, I sort of agree; it might be interesting to see the effect of a 100% corporate income tax, although I can imagine much more straightforward ways of abolishing profit.

You would not like the results. Now every big business runs like Amazon...

 

[tstorm823]

Sometimes I think examples like this are produced intentionally in order to promote the idea that the media is biased against Republicans. Because really, that is an indefensible mischaracterization.

There's no need to invoke the idea of a conspiracy when everyone involved can be individually motivated to do something. People who publish news want an audience. Hatred draws an audience. Hatred towards Republicans is the most socially acceptable hatred. Hence, tons of people driving engagement with articles against Republicans and particularly headlines like that. They just want the clicks.

 

[Agema]

Hatred towards Republicans is the most socially acceptable hatred.

Sure, at the moment, given that they are ~3% behind in the polls currently.

 

[BrawlMan]

Eh, they can still ermember what happened in 2016 and how the 2016 election really borked their season because they never believed Trump could win.

Yep. It was also around the time I had stopped watching SP completely. I wasn't keeping thought often for a long while, but after that season I decided to end it. Also, the show got too formulaic and samey for me, and I moved on different shows beforehand and afterward.

 

[tstorm823]

Reagan reduced corporate taxes and employment went down

He put the taxes back on and employment went back up

Now, some of this is paid by consumers, true. But it's not as simple as corporate taxes just get transferred to the consumers as a tariff is because it's also more workers getting paid

The tarrifs America had on China just lead to China placing tarries on the US which just tanked both economies. Both sides were stupid

Trump reduced corporate taxes and imposed those tariffs, and while it was a detriment to some economic indicators that you shouldn't even care about, employment skyrocketed, and real wages accelerated upwards for the first time in decades, while prices for things stayed relatively stable.

I am unaware of Reagan ever increasing corporate taxes. You may be thinking of capital gains taxes, which are a different thing.

 

[tstorm823]

Sure, at the moment, given that they are ~3% behind in the polls currently.

Are you not happy that your perspective on US politics is based on people milking your attention through your worst impulses?

 

[Agema]

Are you not happy that your perspective on US politics is based on people milking your attention through your worst impulses?

As you evidently do not know the range of media I access for my perspectives, why should I care what you think?

 

[tstorm823]

As you evidently do not know the range of media I access for my perspectives, why should I care what you think?

I am well aware of the talking points you repeat. It is fairly easy to distinguish between when you are talking about things you know yourself vs when you are repeating the things you read in the news. Your whole tone changes.

 

[Thaluikhain]

As you evidently do not know the range of media I access for my perspectives, why should I care what you think?

I agree with the second clause there, and while the first clause is ample reason, it's hardly the only one.

 

[Silvanus]

NY Economic Club member: "If you win in November can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make childcare affordable and if so what specific piece of legislation will you advance?"

Donald Trump: "I would do that and we're sitting down. I was somebody we had Senator Marco Rubio and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It's a very important issue.

But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I'm talking about because childcare is childcare, you have to have it in this country, you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the type of numbers I'm talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they're not used to, but they'll get used to it very quickly.

And it's not going to stop them doing business with us, but they will have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we're talking about including childcare. I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud."

---

Who was it saying Trump is so very much more coherent than Biden was? Gorfias maybe?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Who was it saying Trump is so very much more coherent than Biden was? Gorfias maybe?

I misread that as it being about whether Trump or Gorfias was more coherent. It's clearly Gorfias...but that wasn't the question.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

And you haven't explained how you expect gay marriage to have been challenged 200 years ago when just the admission of being gay would have gotten you killed or landed you with a prison sentence of 20 years hard labor.

Before you can even talk about gay marriage there would have to be an acceptance that just being gay isn't automatically a crime.

There's also plenty of time before 50 years ago and 200 years ago where gay people weren't killed or sent to jail.

I wouldn't even think gay people would have wanted to get married back then to begin with, what would be the benefits of it? The woman was essentially trapped in a marriage because of how sinful getting a divorce used to be. The benefits of marriage are now rather important whereas 200 years ago those benefits didn't exist.

I mean, Phoenix is a guy who unironically believes that gays were never prohibited from marriage because a gay man could always marry a woman. I've had that argument with him already. Arguing this with him is beyond pointless.

Never said that...

The Presidency was designed to be out of reach for the average person. I agree that people keep voting for these elites.... but also, the Dems and the GOP only ever put up elites as their candidate. The system is designed to only vote for elites

You don't have to vote for them...

Irrelevant, since any failed challenge at all proves my original point: that the Constitution offered no protection that the Courts couldn't just decide to override.

So then your point is the constitution protects nothing?