US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6641
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Donald Trump’s tax-cutting and spending plans could add another $6tn to the US public debt over the next 10 years, independent budget analysts have calculated, as the Congressional Budget Office warned the US’s current spending plans alone could trigger a financial crisis. The CBO released its latest assessment of the US budget and economic outlook on Tuesday. The CBO reported that Trump would inherit a $559bn deficit for 2017 and still-sluggish economy that will, on its current course, add another $10tn to the public debt over the next decade. Trump’s campaign promises of major tax cuts and a vast infrastructure investment would add $6tn to that debt, according to independent analysis by the nonpartisan thinktank Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “My hope is that when Trump and his administration see how high our debt is that it gives them a little pause before they start to pursue huge tax cuts and infrastructure spending,” said Marc Goldwein, policy director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The CBO report projects that the US’s gross debt will grow from almost $20tn to $30tn by the end of 2027. Debt held by the public is expected to grow from about $14tn to almost $25tn. The major drivers for the debt are the growing cost of looking after the US’s ageing population and expected rises in interest rates. “This is not a problem of runaway defense spending or runaway welfare programmes. It’s a problem of the rising cost of major entitlements that mainly go to the elderly and rising interest rates which are returning to more normal levels,” said Goldwein. Unless something changes, within three decades the debt will double when measured against the size of the economy’s gross domestic product (GDP), the broadest measure of a nation’s economic health, reaching a level never seen in US history, the CBO said. “Three decades from now, for instance, debt held by the public is projected to be nearly twice as high, relative to GDP, as it is this year – and a higher percentage than any previously recorded,” the CBO reported. “Such high and rising debt would have serious negative consequences for the budget and the nation.” A debt of that size would lead to lower productivity and wages, and hamper lawmakers’ ability to use tax and spending policies to respond to unexpected challenges. Source | ||
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
This seems like a broken promise to me. | ||
Sermokala
United States13750 Posts
| ||
LemOn
United Kingdom8629 Posts
Too bad he just can't stop being a petty child that gives so much space to stuff like turnout, voter fraud... Seriously if you guys were his advisors how'd you make him stop | ||
Sermokala
United States13750 Posts
| ||
ChristianS
United States3187 Posts
On January 25 2017 10:51 Sermokala wrote: He never said he was going to jail Clinton he said he was going to get a independent prosecutor to look into everything she did. When you're leading chants of "lock her up" you don't get off on a technicality like that. Which won't matter anyway if he doesn't even appoint a special prosecutor | ||
Lionsguard
0 Posts
| ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
there is a real issue though with federal/state powers. i'd want to discuss plans with the mayor and governor to come up with something agreeable. and how much money will you spend on such a project? what are the goals? how will they be measured? what about all the other places in the country which also have such issues? where will you get the money from to work on it? it's a fine goal, but there's already a lot of debt, and the money has to come from somewhere. trump's tweet is of course far too vague to know the policy details of an implementation, so it'd depend on what those would be. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On January 25 2017 11:23 Sermokala wrote: Oh no a politician breaking a campaign promise? This almost never happens once they win and get into office. Sorry, I should have quoted xDaunt. Just think it's funny he interprets something that appears to be directly breaking a promise to me as upholding a promise because of the sheer number of promises Trump made. | ||
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43799 Posts
| ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
odd, there must be some out there. feels like sloppiness for there not to be. | ||
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Trump administration seeks to muzzle U.S. agency employees U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has moved since he took office last week to curb the flow of information from several government agencies involved in environmental issues, in actions that may have been designed to discourage dissenting views. Employees at the Environmental Protection Agency, the Interior Department, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have seen directives from the newly minted leadership seeking to limit how they communicate to the public, according to multiple sources. The moves have reinforced concerns that Trump, a climate change doubter, could seek to sideline scientific research showing that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels contributes to global warming, as well as the career staffers at the agencies that conduct much of this research. All of the agencies affected by the actions have some input on issues related to the environment and have been involved in various efforts related to climate change, including effects on natural resources and human health. Source Edit to be in line with thread header: I find this move from the Trump administration to be concerning. I think curtailing the ability of these agencies to openly discuss and disseminate information is a move which exhibits an unhealthy attitude towards science. We'll have to wait for more details, and to see if the situation escalates, but I don't think this move is a good sign of things to come. We had a similar situation in Canada, where the federal government prohibited researchers from speaking directly to journalists without getting pre-approval. There was quite the backlash against this from the scientific community, as they saw it causing a general "chilling effect", and were concerned that researchers were restricted from sharing the results of their research. Source | ||
Zambrah
United States7122 Posts
Also DPB that video is glorious, truly glorious. | ||
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 25 2017 12:06 TheTenthDoc wrote: Sorry, I should have quoted xDaunt. Just think it's funny he interprets something that appears to be directly breaking a promise to me as upholding a promise because of the sheer number of promises Trump made. Let's dial back the pettiness a little bit; it's bordering on the ridiculous here. No one expects Trump to get 100% of everything that he campaigned for. It's not realistic. However, what Trump supporters do expect is that Trump will fight for the things that he campaigned on and, most importantly, make progress towards those goals. Trump is unequivocally advancing the ball on all of his largest issues, and he's doing it with surprising alacrity. His detractors are too busy wringing their hands to see how much Trump is winning right now. The rout is on. | ||
![]()
mustaju
Estonia4504 Posts
If true, this is entirely reprehensible, and I don't know if people would even care at this point, since there's so much to be upset about. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22726 Posts
On January 25 2017 13:00 xDaunt wrote: Let's dial back the pettiness a little bit; it's bordering on the ridiculous here. No one expects Trump to get 100% of everything that he campaigned for. It's not realistic. However, what Trump supporters do expect is that Trump will fight for the things that he campaigned on and, most importantly, make progress towards those goals. Trump is unequivocally advancing the ball on all of his largest issues, and he's doing it with surprising alacrity. His detractors are too busy wringing their hands to see how much Trump is winning right now. The rout is on. Where are you putting "drain the swamp" in this analysis? You could also answer the question on whether it would be appropriate to be surprised if Trump was lying about policy as well as petty things like crowds if you missed it. | ||
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On January 25 2017 13:14 GreenHorizons wrote: Where are you putting "drain the swamp" in this analysis? You could also answer the question on whether it would be appropriate to be surprised if Trump was lying about policy as well as petty things like crowds if you missed it. This is Trump's first week in office. Give him time. D.C. Doesn't turn on a dime. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
| ||