AOC... what’s the deal

[TheBigBopper]

K like every other conservative you fseemingly have no beliefs. Here’s some home work trump and bush tax breaks start there and get to work since you have seemingly zero idea about modern day politics tag me once you get some of education

I also recommend some light reading into corporate subsidies, corporate bailouts and too big to fail

I work in leveraged finance. I probably know more and have a more well rounded view of this than you do.

 

[CoryMack]

I work in leveraged finance. I probably know more and have a more well rounded view of this than you do.

so you understand what's going on?

 

[director_of_bands]

It’s literally right wing propaganda. If anyone is an agent..

I didn't create the content all I did was post it why are my posts getting deleted? I know why

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

What about them? Cutting one of the highest notional tax rates in the OECD is being slavish to corporations? I wasn’t opposed to that portion of the Trump tax cut. It allowed American business to be more competitive and encouraged domestic capital investment by repatriating profits generated overseas. Any one working for a large corporation or participating in a 401k plan benefited from this.


I don’t think it was a perfect policy though. Ironically, my personal taxes increased because I’m a high income earner in a blue state and couldn’t take a SALT deduction. Neither party has any empathy for upper middle wage earners, unfortunately.

WRONG
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...ax-cuts-action-socialism-rich/?outputType=amp
it’s the largest wealth transfer since the 08 bailouts and bush tax cuts in America history. All it did was lower the quality of life for the America public while enriching the top 5% and corporations. The American public didn’t benefit from those. It’s welfare/socialism for rich.

Trickle down economics doesn’t work. Why you idiots still haven’t figured this shyt out is beyond me. Reagan sold you paste eaters a bill of goods.

What are your thoughts on corporate bailouts, corporate subsidies, and too big to fail. Explain how you can call yourself a capitalist and be favor of these things?

 

[EndDomination]

I didn't create the content all I did was post it why are my posts getting deleted? I know why

It’s poorly sourced derailment bullshyt, typically happens to weirdos who post goofy shyt in HL threads.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

I work in leveraged finance. I probably know more and have a more well rounded view of this than you do.

Then you know it literally goes against capitalism correct?

 

[TheBigBopper]

so you understand what's going on?

Yes, which is why I asked for specific examples. Economic policy is complex and nuanced. You can’t intelligently argue with someone if they begin with demagogic innuendo like claiming conservatives are slaves to corporations. First off, what evidence is there to support such a claim?

 

[director_of_bands]

It’s poorly sourced derailment bullshyt, typically happens to weirdos who post goofy shyt in HL threads.

poorly sourced cnn's viewership is down 85%...veritas has 1.05 M subs (on a platform that censors their content)

 

[TheBigBopper]

Then you know it literally goes against capitalism correct?

No shyt. But do you think the bank bailouts were only supported by republicans? Frankly, the federal reserve should have let the stock market fail during the pandemic last year, but neither party has the political willpower to withstand another prolonged recession.

 

[TheBigBopper]

WRONG
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...ax-cuts-action-socialism-rich/?outputType=amp
it’s the largest wealth transfer since the 08 bailouts and bush tax cuts in America history. All it did was lower the quality of life for the America public while enriching the top 5% and corporations. The American public didn’t benefit from those. It’s welfare/socialism for rich.

Trickle down economics doesn’t work. Why you idiots still haven’t figured this shyt out is beyond me. Reagan sold you paste eaters a bill of goods.

What are your thoughts on corporate bailouts, corporate subsidies, and too big to fail. Explain how you can call yourself a capitalist and be favor of these things?

Your link is to an editorial from an economic advisor to Biden. You should really stop calling people idiots if you’re going to pull garbage like this. If this were a college paper, you’d fail. Get back to me stats from a politically unbiased source.

 

[TheBigBopper]

What are your thoughts on corporate bailouts, corporate subsidies, and too big to fail. Explain how you can call yourself a capitalist and be favor of these things?

to add to this, you’re a god damn idiot if you think these are purely republican supported policy items or that republicans are even united over these. Mitt Romney famously told the Big Three automakers to file for bankruptcy while Congress handed over tax dollars approved with bipartisan support.

I myself am generally opposed to bail outs, but every situation has to be judged individually. Bank bailouts were unfortunately unavoidable. If the federal government didn’t infuse the banks with capital, everyday people would have been impacted. There would have been no commercial paper markets, so medium and large corporations wouldn’t have been able to meet payroll and mortgage lending would have seized. All of this ties back to the repeal of glass steagall which was arguably necessary but poorly executed (and again, passed with bipartisan support). Fortunately (and little do people know) the federal government eventually returned a profit on the bank bailouts.

Obviously this is antithetical to pure capitalism, but pure capitalism can’t exist in the real world, which—if you have any iota of the political knowledge you claim you have should know—is an argument republicans have among themselves and would be a facet of the various gradations of conservatism I alluded to earlier, i.e. to what extent does the state assist business for the benefit of existing stakeholders?

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

Your link is to an editorial from an economic advisor to Biden. You should really stop calling people idiots if you’re going to pull garbage like this. If this were a college paper, you’d fail. Get back to me stats from a politically unbiased source.

Is Forbes unbiased enough for you?

Five Good Reasons It Doesn't Feel Like The Trump Tax Cut Benefited You

Policy genuis

Policygenius

What about NPR?

NPR Cookie Consent and Choices

 

[TheBigBopper]

Is Forbes unbiased enough for you?

Five Good Reasons It Doesn't Feel Like The Trump Tax Cut Benefited You

Policy genuis

Policygenius

What about NPR?

NPR Cookie Consent and Choices

There isn’t much in either of these my post disagreed with. Like I said for myself (you probably didn’t read this and skipped over to post your editorial), as an upper middle income earner, I paid *more* in tax because I couldn’t take the salt deduction. My overall wealth went up though because of stock holdings rising from the benefit of the lowered corporate tax rate. That is the *one* facet of the trump tax cut I support and that many liberal economists support too because the notional corporate tax rate was one of the highest in the world.

the other bullshyt we could have dealt without such as the additional tax benefits for real estate investors. That, I would agree, is corporate welfare.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

to add to this, you’re a god damn idiot if you think these are purely republican supported policy items or that republicans are even united over these. Mitt Romney famously told the Big Three automakers to file for bankruptcy while Congress handed over tax dollars approved with bipartisan support.

I myself am generally opposed to bail outs, but every situation has to be judged individually. Bank bailouts were unfortunately unavoidable. If the federal government didn’t infuse the banks with capital, everyday people would have been impacted. There would have been no commercial paper markets, so medium and large corporations wouldn’t have been able to meet payroll and mortgage lending would have seized. All of this ties back to the repeal of glass steagall which was arguably necessary but poorly executed (and again, passed with bipartisan support). Fortunately (and little do people know) the federal government eventually returned a profit on the bank bailouts.

Obviously this is antithetical to pure capitalism, but pure capitalism can’t exist in the real world, which—if you have any iota of the political knowledge you claim you have should know—is an argument republicans have among themselves and would be a facet of the various gradations of conservatism I alluded to earlier, i.e. to what extent does the state assist business for the benefit of existing stakeholders?

WHO THE fukk SAID REPUBLICANS ARE THE ONLY CONSERVATIVES? Did you not notice I brought up the 2008 bailout or not?

Glass Stegall was scaled back not repealed by ur fukking hero Bill Clinton. So it's not pure capitalism but it's 100% socialism for the rich.

I'm not honestly not sure why I'm having this back and forth with you. Like you've clearly swallowed the koolaid and have yet to give any reasons why this isn't favoritism towards the rich and socialism for them. Also why the fukk does the government making money off the bailout matter if the 90% lost their homes in yet another wealth transfer to the top? That money should've been used to bail them out and save their homes not bail out banks and rob people of their assets.

Anyways this has been lame, no on on this site agrees with you about the US government not showing favoritism and giving welfare and socialism to the rich corporations. US has been doing this since reagan. It's been proven time and time again, and it's not sustainable. You clearly are well off and don't live in the same reality as the rest of us mind you I also benefited from a lot of things that happened in the past year but it doesn't mean people need to suffer to make u or I secure in our situations.


The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

There isn’t much in either of these my post disagreed with. Like I said for myself (you probably didn’t read this and skipped over to post your editorial), as an upper middle income earner, I paid *more* in tax because I couldn’t take the salt deduction. My overall wealth went up though because of stock holdings rising from the benefit of the lowered corporate tax rate. That is the *one* facet of the trump tax cut I support and that many liberal economists support too because the notional corporate tax rate was one of the highest in the world.

the other bullshyt we could have dealt without such as the additional tax benefits for real estate investors. That, I would agree, is corporate welfare.

It's all fukking corporate welfare, they shower trillions on corporations and leave scraps for the rest of us.