One, Big Beautiful Bill (The Mega-Bill)

[acptulsa]

I tend to notice a lot of people on here don't pay much attention to what Ron Paul has to say these days. It's unfortunate.

Hell, the "nickers" troll account has been taken over by AI. @Bryan thinks the site mission we want is giving free speech to propaganda machines.

What people?

 

[unknown]

 

[acptulsa]

Behold the poster child for the inevitable decline and fall of the American Empire...

There is zero relevant constituency for austerity. There is zero mass appetite to curb debt, deficit and spending. This is the reason why with one of the slimmest majorities in recent memory, the House was still able to pass the bill. We live in the age of political patronage. Trump wants to reward his supporters and punish his enemies. This is completely agreeable and understandable. The specifics of the bill can be debated, but the idea of it is correct.

And for those like Massie whining that all of these issues should be voted on separately, it's all a grift. Instead of grandstanding and voting no on one bill, they could grandstand and vote no on 50 bills. Think of the donations!

No balls no America.

 

[Snowball]

This is a well-written article which raises lots of the points I've been making.
The country was running budget surpluses in most og the Clinton years, and the improvement began before
Republican control in 1996. Here is a chart.
I will only add that Bush Jr. probably would have had a balanced budget or a surplus also, if 9/11 didn't happen.
We've fallen very, very far in just 25 years.

 

[unknown]

Ron Paul: "The net benefit of this bill is not good for the American tax payer or for the concept of liberty."

Daniel said: "Bait and Switch". Where have I heard that before?

This bill = shit.

 

[nikcers]

When you count all of the taxes, then the result is that total taxation is always exactly equal to total spending. A bill that increases spending while cutting certain individual taxes is a net tax increase. It just funds that spending in other ways that may be less visible, but that are still properly understood as taxes.

Economic growth is the primary means of funding it because money will get spent in the US economy instead of overseas.

You actually arent looking at it in terms of the global economy.

The USA has a global economy. International corporations and financial institutions that span the globe and dollars are spent in the USA and they are spent in China and dozens of other major economies in the global economy.

When the US tax rates are too high money goes overseas instead of into the United States economy.

This is actually something Ron Paul used to talk about back when he was our representative.

He would say money goes where it's welcome and he would try to get as much money into his district. He would do earmarks and bring home the bacon.

He was criticized for it when he ran for president and he defended it. He said you know these sorts of tax loopholes where taxes remain the same but my consitituents pay less of it he said those are the loopholes that allow people to live.

So yeah of course the US taxpayers will be taxed the amount of the spending but the economy will be bigger and grow and that growth will counteract the tax they pay.

The end result it will be that the USA will hire more people, create better jobs, and those jobs will be inside the United States.

 

[Invisible Man]

Economic growth is the primary means of funding it because money will get spent in the US economy instead of overseas.

You actually arent looking at it in terms of the global economy.

The USA has a global economy. International corporations and financial institutions that span the globe and dollars are spent in the USA and they are spent in China and dozens of other major economies in the global economy.

When the US tax rates are too high money goes overseas instead of into the United States economy.

This is actually something Ron Paul used to talk about back when he was our representative.

He would say money goes where it's welcome and he would try to get as much money into his district. He would do earmarks and bring home the bacon.

He was criticized for it when he ran for president and he defended it. He said you know these sorts of tax loopholes where taxes remain the same but my consitituents pay less of it he said those are the loopholes that allow people to live.

So yeah of course the US taxpayers will be taxed the amount of the spending but the economy will be bigger and grow and that growth will counteract the tax they pay.

The end result it will be that the USA will hire more people, create better jobs, and those jobs will be inside the United States.

None of that has anything to do with what I said in the quote you're replying to.

 

[nikcers]

None of that has anything to do with what I said in the quote you're replying to.

Yeah it does. It matters where money gets spent.

I would rather have 2000 billion dollars be spent in the USA instead of overseas.

If we pay 1000 billion more in taxes but 2000 - 6000 billion more dollars gets spent here instead of Europe or Asia or Africa or Mexico or Canada or South America my country benefits.

 

[Snowball]

I would rather have 2000 billion dollars be spent in the USA instead of overseas.

If we pay 1000 billion more in taxes but 2000 - 6000 billion more dollars gets spent here instead of Europe or Asia or Africa or Mexico or Canada or South America my country benefits.

You don't put any effort in trying to understand what other people post.

He was talking about how debt acts as a tax. Debt that is unfunded in the budget. It is paid later and its effects act as a future tax.
Today, the financial system is so sophisticated that it acts sooner than it used to, in some cases, virtually immediately.

 

[Invisible Man]

Yeah it does. It matters where money gets spent.

I would rather have 2000 billion dollars be spent in the USA instead of overseas.

If we pay 1000 billion more in taxes but 2000 - 6000 billion more dollars gets spent here instead of Europe or Asia or Africa or Mexico or Canada or South America my country benefits.

The number of dollars in a country don't benefit that country. Goods and services do, but only when they are voluntarily purchased. It's only when dollar amounts accurately quantify those voluntary transactions that they can be a good measure of economic benefit, and even then only when the value of the dollar itself is stable.

 

[nikcers]

The number of dollars in a country don't benefit that country. Goods and services do, but only when they are voluntarily purchased. It's only when dollar amounts accurately quantify those voluntary transactions that they can be a good measure of economic benefit, and even then only when the value of the dollar itself is stable.

The number of dollars does benefit the country that's why GDP is a measure of the value of an economy.

Higher taxes is globalist because the USA is the richest country in the world but all the money gets sacked out and builds up Europe and Canada and Asia and to some extent even Mexico.

Mexico for example benefits so much from our high taxes that they have a higher standard of living and people move from California to Mexico because of globalism.

With low taxes people want to live here.

With higher taxes people are going to take their money and spend it somewhere else.

 

[Invisible Man]

The number of dollars does benefit the country that's why GDP is a measure of the value of an economy.

But the number of dollars doesn't benefit the country, which is why GDP is a flawed measure.

 

[nikcers]

You don't put any effort in trying to understand what other people post.

He was talking about how debt acts as a tax. Debt that is unfunded in the budget. It is paid later and its effects act as a future tax.
Today, the financial system is so sophisticated that it acts sooner than it used to, in some cases, virtually immediately.

I read what he wrote. He specifically said that

"When you count all of the taxes, then the result is that total taxation is always exactly equal to total spending"

Debt isn't paid later debt turns into investments that grow the economy.

It becomes a burden when we have debt and high taxes because all of the growth from those investments go to other countries so our economy doesnt grow as much as it should.

We built houses in China instead of the USA because they had lower taxes than us.

Now we have housing shortages.

 

[nikcers]

But the number of dollars doesn't benefit the country, which is why GDP is a flawed measure.

So when a billionaire in Germany or Japan creates 30,000 jobs in Ohio or Tennessee it doesn't benefit the USA so they should create those jobs in Canada or Mexico?

 

[acptulsa]

The number of dollars does benefit the country that's why GDP is a measure of the value of an economy.

Higher taxes is globalist...

The bot is not programmed to respond to the fact that currency devaluation is a tax. And most particularly not programmed to respond to the fact that this tax hits small business harder than large ones, and that it's the one that hits the poorest hardest of all.

 

[nikcers]

The bot is not programmed to respond to the fact that currency devaluation is a tax -- one that hits the poorest hardest.

Currency valuation is always going to be debased by other countries manipulating their currency and devaluing it.

So when our currency is free floating and the market determines their value and China's communist party wakes up and sets the value of their currency guess what happens.

Well they have 2 houses for every person in their country and we have people who work 2 jobs but cant buy a house.

 

[acptulsa]

Currency valuation is always going to be debased by other countries manipulating their currency and devaluing it.

No one can debase a currency but the people who print more of it, bot. Nobody.

 

[nikcers]

No one can debase a currency but the people who print more of it, bot. Nobody.

China devalues their currency and then manipulates the entire global economy and steals our intellectual property.

We are in a trade war with these other countries and we have a free floating currency so the market determines the value of the dollar.

Europe and China have been eating our lunch. Now increasingly it's Vietnam and India too.

 

[Invisible Man]

So when a billionaire in Germany or Japan creates 30,000 jobs in Ohio or Tennessee it doesn't benefit the USA so they should create those jobs in Canada or Mexico?

Quite possibly. Jobs themselves aren't a benefit. They are a cost. The benefit is whatever goods or services those jobs are making.

If things get made in Germany and Japan that we import cheaply, while we in turn export fewer and cheaper things to those countries (i.e. we have a trade deficit), then we are getting more for less. That would benefit us much more than if we had to re-allocate that labor that we're currently allocating to make those few cheap things and instead make the expensive products we're currently importing, and end up making fewer of them than that we are able to import now.

 

[acptulsa]

China devalues their currency and then manipulates the entire global economy and steals our intellectual property.

Stupid bot, no one's letting you change the subject. So, your argument that we must become communist China to defeat communism is too irrelevant to this thread to properly debunk here.

But your assertion that communist China is bad so we must do exactly what they do is revealing. It should open the eyes of people who mistakenly thought computer programs operate on logic.