Neither candidate wants to reduce spending, which means population has no good choice

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 15
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Kamala wants to raise taxes on rich and reduce taxes on middle class, which should benefit middle class.

Trump wants to reduce taxes on the rich while taxing middle class more by indirect means (tarrifs, money printing).

Sure, one could say that Trump's "trickle down economics" might indirectly have some benefits for middle, lower class.

But there is one crucial thing missing in both candidates. Neither wants to reduce spending. Both increase it.

This is very important because there is no actual way to fix economy if government spending keeps rising.

Every dollar in government budget is taken from US citizens and used mostly in much less effective way.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
US government spending is 25% of its GDP, which is a huge number and huge drain on its economy.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

We need to go back to Eisenhower's 91 percent top tax rate.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@FLRW
We need to go back to Eisenhower's 91 percent top tax rate
Yes. Neither candidate has a working plan nor has come up with explanation how will they fix US economy.

Both brag about saving few jobs here and there, and the audience claps. These are all just small victories.

The actual plan for achieving greater success for 340 million people is non-existent in both candidates. They have nothing.

I have watched both Kamala and Trump speak. Nothing they said convinced me of some great future success.

As long as audience claps and show goes on, its all "good", but really, these candidates are incompetent.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Wasn't Kamala's most recent trillion+ green energy bill that she cast the tying vote on a huge cash giveaway to rich green energy producers in the hopes it would trickle down? Or maybe she was being honest about where the money really went. It's funny how fast those donations from rich donors flooded in this year. Almost like they stole tax money and got their cut.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump also gave trillions to the rich by reducing taxes on them. Again and again, these candidates are incompetent.

What we really need is someone who promises less things, not more things. But such person cannot exist.

Government's promises arent free. But people seem to hold belief that they are. American education producing non-educated people.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
So you agree with what I said?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Green energy does need to be supported, but not by trillions of dollars all payed by US citizens.

Government should manage economy by reducing negative buisnesses, through taxing or banning them, or not allowing their spread.

However, funding failed buisnesses is a path to Soviet economy which failed exactly because of endlessly funding failed buisnesses.

If buisness is necessary on the market, it will succeed, so no government funding necessary to support any buisness.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Green energy does need to be supported.
Why? Isn't this what the people want? After all, the people could wear 10 dollar shoes and instead often buy shoes 10x the price because they simply want it...

Unless of course the people are just as hypocritical regarding climate alarmism as 100% of political leaders who use a huge proportion of fossil fuels..... in that case, dictatorial force will be needed.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Isn't this what the people want?
If people wanted it, nothing could prevent them from giving their money to green energy without government managing.

But people dont want to pay for it, and they ignorantly believe its free if government pays it.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
A survey conducted by the New York Times and Stanford University in 2015 explored Americans' willingness to pay to combat climate change. The survey found that while a majority of Americans believed climate change was a serious issue and supported action to address it, there was a significant reluctance to personally pay more than a modest amount to fight it.

One of the key findings was that when respondents were asked how much they would be willing to pay in higher electricity bills to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the most common answer was “$10 or less per month.” This suggested that while there was broad support for addressing climate change, many people were not willing to incur significant personal costs to do so.


Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
“$10 or less per month.”
As I said, people are retarded. People lack basic knowledge, and make contradictive decisions when voting in government.

Most people dont have their priorities set, cant weigh values, dont know whats important, cant think in premises...

When you look at people explaining why they vote for someone, you can see that they are clueless.

Anyone saying "I vote for person because Few jobs saved here and there, few billions saved..." is retarded.

The goal is not to save few billions or few jobs when trillions of dollars are being wasted everywhere.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
You and I may disagree on many things, but we agree that system in US is completely retarded.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,171
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Trump also gave trillions to the rich by reducing taxes on them.
The absence of stealing is not a gift.

Not stealing is far better for the economy than stealing no matter what the stolen money is spent on.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,649
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I have no good response to that right now, so I will post link to get last word.