TRUMP 2024

2,006,226 Views | 17719 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by DrummerboyWolf
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 6:52p, 7/30/25
We agree?
Reply Quote
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 6:53p, 7/30/25
Werewolf said:
We agree?
all I've ever wanted is to follow the law so yes
Reply Quote
5
Gulfstream4
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 7:02p, 7/30/25
Werewolf said:
Reminds me of #daSieve and #daNappy complaining about Trump, tariffs and such; it's not hard to understand.




This is #Sieve and #Nappy's America. We saw it up close for 8 yrs of Obama and the last 4 yrs with Biden.


Fat, ugly liberal women hate Sydney because she's hot as two summer times. Why are liberal women, outside of Hollywood, always so ugly?
Reply Quote
1
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:09p, 7/30/25
#Sieve, nothing to see here, right? 30 is quite a few people, don't ya think? 30+ is even more.

Reply Quote
1
2 edits
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:15p, 7/30/25
Reply Quote
1
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:18p, 7/30/25
Enemy Combatant will be the charge against The Kenyan. Mark it down! From a Q post on 01/27/2018. ;-)
Reply Quote
1 edit
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 7:33p, 7/30/25
hokiewolf said:
Werewolf said:

this isn't following the law

A federal judge alone deciding if a new law, especially one signed by Dear Leader, is unconstitutional?! What is this anti-American craziness?!?!

Man, our country is definitely paying the price for you guys sleeping through Civics class.
Reply Quote
1 edit
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 7:47p, 7/30/25
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
Werewolf said:

this isn't following the law

A federal judge alone deciding if a new law, especially one signed by Dear Leader, is unconstitutional?! What is the anti-American craziness?!?!

Man, our country is definitely paying the price for you guys sleeping through Civics class.
Oh yeah, I do recall you applauding the 2023 Texas Court decision blocking access to the abortion medication, because it's almost the exact same type of judicial Olympics in the ruling reasoning.

Reply Quote
1
2 edits
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 8:06p, 7/30/25
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
Werewolf said:

this isn't following the law

A federal judge alone deciding if a new law, especially one signed by Dear Leader, is unconstitutional?! What is the anti-American craziness?!?!

Man, our country is definitely paying the price for you guys sleeping through Civics class.
Oh yeah, I do recall you applauding the 2023 Texas Court decision blocking access to the abortion medication, because it's almost the exact same type of judicial Olympics in the ruling reasoning.


Werewolf's bullsh** didn't mention the merits of the case at all. It was just yet another chapter in the concerted attack on the Judiciary as a coequal branch of government that MAGA has been engaging in, with the help of a rogue Supreme Court happy to fan the flames of delegitimizing all courts below them in the name of a newly all powerful Executive Branch.

History won't be kind to this court.
Reply Quote
1
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:45p, 7/30/25
It's going to be quite enjoyable here over the course of the next 18-24 months. We're on SQUARE ONE, with a helluva lot of territory to cover. Our treasonous communist spuds here are going to be fun to watch ........denying it all the way. Military tribunals wrap up and the hangings and life sentences issued as justice and these clowns will still deny it.


Reply Quote
1
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:48p, 7/30/25
To be hanged or life imprisonment? I'll guess life imprisonment on these two.
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:58p, 7/30/25
Like the Senate Parliamentarian bull****, it needs to be axed.
Reply Quote
Oldsouljer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 9:19p, 7/30/25
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.
CALS grad
Reply Quote
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Oldsouljer • 9:30p, 7/30/25
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.
tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.
Reply Quote
1
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 9:42p, 7/30/25
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Imports are only (roughly) 15% of GDP.
Reply Quote
Oldsouljer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 3:08a, 7/31/25
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.
CALS grad
Reply Quote
DrummerboyWolf
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 3:23a, 7/31/25
Werewolf said:
We'll know who is with the traitors .....it won't be much longer. Traitors themselves.......

This should be coming out today. Just more truth that the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax was all BS and everyone knew it, but they had to subvert the will of the American people. They are guilty of Treason but the blind on here will not see.

https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/damning-classified-annex-durham-clinton-plan-intel-released

Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
Reply Quote
2
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:16a, 7/31/25
a plea deal ? in exchange for what? :-)
Reply Quote
2
Oldsouljer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 6:32a, 7/31/25
Werewolf said:
a plea deal ? in exchange for what? :-)

LOL, watch Phil Berger seize on this to use against his opponent even though it's not the same Sam Page.
CALS grad
Reply Quote
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Oldsouljer • 8:17a, 7/31/25
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
FlossyDFlynt
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:17a, 7/31/25
Was doing my morning reading and came across this Tweet that blew my mind



I knew Dems were struggling with young men, but I guess I underestimated how badly they are struggling with young men.
Reply Quote
5
BBW12OG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FlossyDFlynt • 8:41a, 7/31/25
They have the beta male cuck boys 100%.

The three here that are whiny ass sniveling morons gladly bend over and take whatever the left tells them up their asses.

Pinocchio, Civ and the unc guy all three epitomize why most men run away from the nonsense.

Pinocchio's only concern is that mommy and daddy keep paying his bills so he can play internet badass all day. Such a pathetic LOSER.
Reply Quote
3
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 8:49a, 7/31/25
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?
Reply Quote
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 9:02a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.
Reply Quote
1
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 9:10a, 7/31/25
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.
Reply Quote
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 9:54a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.


Yes, these tax cuts are going to help high earners more than the subset of folks with significant wealth but little income.

The broader point is Trump and his acolytes want to celebrate some sort of alleged treasury surplus when the reality is very few Americans feel that, either via tangible benefits or even indirectly via a more balanced budget/reduced deficit since in concert with the tax cuts, the deficit is ballooning.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 10:04a, 7/31/25
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.


Yes, these tax cuts are going to help high earners more than the subset of folks with significant wealth but little income.

The broader point is Trump and his acolytes want to celebrate some sort of alleged treasury surplus when the reality is very few Americans feel that, either via tangible benefits or even indirectly via a more balanced budget/reduced deficit since in concert with the tax cuts, the deficit is ballooning.

So not going to answer? Your choice, but just being clear.

A surplus like a deficit is tangible. The deficit has been ballooning for decades, not like either side has done anything about it. Not exactly sure what you would expect Americans to feel about a surplus or a deficit.

Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 10:25a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.


Yes, these tax cuts are going to help high earners more than the subset of folks with significant wealth but little income.

The broader point is Trump and his acolytes want to celebrate some sort of alleged treasury surplus when the reality is very few Americans feel that, either via tangible benefits or even indirectly via a more balanced budget/reduced deficit since in concert with the tax cuts, the deficit is ballooning.

So not going to answer? Your choice, but just being clear.

A surplus like a deficit is tangible. The deficit has been ballooning for decades, not like either side has done anythign about it. Not exactly sure what you would expect Americans to feel about a surplus or a deficit.



I thought I just answered, man. I said high earners will benefit the most. "High earners" mainly refers to those that report very signficant taxable income in a given year.

To be even more pedantic, let's further explain that "high earners" partially overlaps, but not fully, with the wealthy, who may not have high incomes on paper due to having retired; receiving most of their compensation in company stock; or any number of other reasons. Some number of those wealthy folks also stand to benefit from Trump's tax cuts in different but still signficant ways, like via business ownership tax advantages.

I would expect Americans to not be celebrating the way some on here are, and the way Trump apparently wants most Americans to, about his alleged trade deal/tariff surplus "winning" when that brand of "winning" doesn't help Americans in the lower 90%-95% of income-earners.

Again the broader point is that tariffs are Trump's thing. It's a huge part of his platform, and a huge component of his economic plan. But again, which Americans does that economic plan (tariffs plus tax cuts plus hits to the social safety net and entitlements) stand to benefit?
Reply Quote
2
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 10:34a, 7/31/25
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.


Yes, these tax cuts are going to help high earners more than the subset of folks with significant wealth but little income.

The broader point is Trump and his acolytes want to celebrate some sort of alleged treasury surplus when the reality is very few Americans feel that, either via tangible benefits or even indirectly via a more balanced budget/reduced deficit since in concert with the tax cuts, the deficit is ballooning.

So not going to answer? Your choice, but just being clear.

A surplus like a deficit is tangible. The deficit has been ballooning for decades, not like either side has done anythign about it. Not exactly sure what you would expect Americans to feel about a surplus or a deficit.



I thought I just answered, man. I said high earners will benefit the most. "High earners" mainly refers to those that report very signficant taxable income in a given year.

To be even more pedantic, let's further explain that "high earners" partially overlaps, but not fully, with the wealthy, who may not have high incomes on paper due to having retired; receiving most of their compensation in company stock; or any number of other reasons. Some number of those wealthy folks also stand to benefit from Trump's tax cuts in different but still signficant ways, like via business ownership tax advantages.

I would expect Americans to not be celebrating the way some on here are, and the way Trump apparently wants most Americans to, about his alleged trade deal/tariff surplus "winning" when that brand of "winning" doesn't help Americans in the lower 90%-95% of income-earners.

Again the broader point is that tariffs are Trump's thing. It's a huge part of his platform, and a huge component of his economic plan. But again, which Americans does that economic plan (tariffs plus tax cuts plus hits to the social safety net and entitlements) stand to benefit?

I do not see making $150k a year as "Wealthy" but that is what the top 10% in the US make. But at least now I have context when you talk about the wealthy. Thanks.
Reply Quote
2
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Oldsouljer • 10:52a, 7/31/25
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.
The GDP growth is because of all the inventory stock up on the 1st quarter.
Reply Quote
1
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 11:19a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Cthepack said:
Civilized said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The merits of that "surplus" analysis notwithstanding, how is that likely mythical "surplus" helping non-wealthy Americans?

What specifically are we celebrating?

That the mythical surplus inadequately offsets the tax breaks for the rich and resultant deficit increase from the bloated BBB?

For context, how are you defining non-wealthy Americans? Is it net worth or income or both? What is the threshold of being wealthy?


Break it down however you want.

Demonstrate how middle and lower-class Americans (using some normal, accepted definition) benefit from tariff fuzzy math "surplus" and the BBB.

You do not have to answer but I was specifically asking for your definition. Again, if not interested in sharing that is fine.

For me I define wealth as net-worth not income. Due to my goals and also seeing individuals with high incomes have a lot more liabilities than assets.


Yes, these tax cuts are going to help high earners more than the subset of folks with significant wealth but little income.

The broader point is Trump and his acolytes want to celebrate some sort of alleged treasury surplus when the reality is very few Americans feel that, either via tangible benefits or even indirectly via a more balanced budget/reduced deficit since in concert with the tax cuts, the deficit is ballooning.

So not going to answer? Your choice, but just being clear.

A surplus like a deficit is tangible. The deficit has been ballooning for decades, not like either side has done anythign about it. Not exactly sure what you would expect Americans to feel about a surplus or a deficit.



I thought I just answered, man. I said high earners will benefit the most. "High earners" mainly refers to those that report very signficant taxable income in a given year.

To be even more pedantic, let's further explain that "high earners" partially overlaps, but not fully, with the wealthy, who may not have high incomes on paper due to having retired; receiving most of their compensation in company stock; or any number of other reasons. Some number of those wealthy folks also stand to benefit from Trump's tax cuts in different but still signficant ways, like via business ownership tax advantages.

I would expect Americans to not be celebrating the way some on here are, and the way Trump apparently wants most Americans to, about his alleged trade deal/tariff surplus "winning" when that brand of "winning" doesn't help Americans in the lower 90%-95% of income-earners.

Again the broader point is that tariffs are Trump's thing. It's a huge part of his platform, and a huge component of his economic plan. But again, which Americans does that economic plan (tariffs plus tax cuts plus hits to the social safety net and entitlements) stand to benefit?

I do not see making $150k a year as "Wealthy" but that is what the top 10% in the US make. But at least now I have context when you talk about the wealthy. Thanks.


I don't see $150k in the US as being wealthy either.

I literally said high earners partially overlaps, but not fully, with the wealthy. Maybe you missed the "partially" part? And obviously the more you earn the more likely that you're a high earner and also wealthy.

But again, why are we arguing over whether the line is drawn at 90% or 92% or 94%? I'm not so worried about the wherewithal of either the top 5%-10% of earners OR the top 5%-10% of wealth-havers, to whatever extent they don't overlap.

The point is economic and tax plans need to focus on at least proportional-or-better benefit to the bottom 90%/92%/94% rather than having tax benefits that accrue to the upper 10%/8%/6% of American earners or wealth-havers.
Reply Quote
1
Cthepack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 11:23a, 7/31/25
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The GDP growth is because of all the inventory stock up on the 1st quarter.

Honest question are you just trolling? I would understand seeing some of the names you are called.

I will preface this by saying there are lots of variables that go into our GDP calculation.

But hokie, you first say that tariffs reduce the GDP growth, but then say GDP grew in the second quarter due to reduced imports, when one of the main things tariffs do is to reduce imports.
Reply Quote
2
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 11:39a, 7/31/25
Be careful; you might get sucked in here :-)
Reply Quote
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 11:43a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The GDP growth is because of all the inventory stock up on the 1st quarter.

Honest question are you just trolling? I would understand seeing some of the names you are called.

I will preface this by saying there are lots of variables that go into our GDP calculation.

But hokie, you first say that tariffs reduce the GDP growth, but then say GDP grew in the second quarter due to reduced imports, when one of the main things tariffs do is to reduce imports.

Companies stockpiled in advance of announced tariffs. As in, they bought a BUNCH of stuff before the tariffs kicked in, importing less after tariffs. We're now in that weird period where companies are burning off their inventory, but at some reality is going to kick in.

As you already said, though, there are lots of variables that go into our GDP calculation. Tariffs ultimately reduce GDP despite reducing imports.
Reply Quote
1 edit
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cthepack • 11:53a, 7/31/25
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Oldsouljer said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Cthepack said:
hokiewolf said:
Lol. Revenues


Come on Hokie, you are better than this.

What do the letters IRS stand for?

Prefect! Lets not act like this is anything but transferring money from private businesses and US citizens to the federal government via tax.

For some reason, Republicans have given up on the idea that private business is more efficient than the federal government.

But to sit here and pretend tariffs are not a tax increase, whether on consumers or businesses is getting old.

You keep saying this but I have not seen anyone claim differently. Maybe you have since you spend so much time talking about it.

Huh? People here keep celebrating these turrible tariff deals that aren't deals at all.

Prolly celebrating the income that comes with them for the time being u til the deals are reached.

tariffs reduce the GDP growth, not increase it.

Was speaking of revenue for the Treasury, not GDP. Supposedly, there was a historic surplus this past quarter, though I don't think that term is defined well enough to have meaning, in this instance. But that's what they'd be celebrating.

The GDP growth is because of all the inventory stock up on the 1st quarter.

Honest question are you just trolling? I would understand seeing some of the names you are called.

I will preface this by saying there are lots of variables that go into our GDP calculation.

But hokie, you first say that tariffs reduce the GDP growth, but then say GDP grew in the second quarter due to reduced imports, when one of the main things tariffs do is to reduce imports.
I'm not trolling, it's certainly a thought topic to digest all the nuances. I think, that tariffs haven't hit GDP yet. I think that will be in a future quarter.

There are other countries offsets too from the BBB that help businesses recover from tariff impact. I like all of those things - changing a lot of rules to allow for better growth, but they are going to be offset by tariffs.

The basic point I'm trying g to make, is that the Administration on one hand wants foreign investment and growth, on the other had, they are limiting growth with tariffs.

The GDP needs to grow at a higher rate than what has happened in the last couple years to offset the deficit. That is where my concern lies.

Hope that makes sense.
Reply Quote
First Page Last Page
Page 503 of 507 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.