Why Trump Might Win by Robert Reich

[Sycho Sid]

But trump actually wants to raise taxes on the rich and he's against invasion. Hillary is all about invading other countries though.

Hasn't the left been playing identity politics for decades?

Uhm... Trump's tax plan cuts massive amounts for the rich,

It is the biggest tax break for them ever IIRC.

 

[Krallang]

Uhm... Trump's tax plan cuts massive amounts for the rich,

It is the biggest tax break for them ever IIRC.

How so?

I see stuff like this from Trump

The Trump tax cuts are fully paid for by:

1. Reducing or eliminating most deductions and loopholes available to the very rich.
2. A one-time deemed repatriation of corporate cash held overseas at a significantly discounted 10% tax rate, followed by an end to the deferral of taxes on corporate income earned abroad.
3. Reducing or eliminating corporate loopholes that cater to special interests, as well as deductions made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rate on corporations and business income. We will also phase in a reasonable cap on the deductibility of business interest expenses.

So eliminating loopholes, deductions, and deferred taxes for corporations benefits the rich how?

Anyone making less then 50k will pay 0 taxes under trumps plan, I don't see how that benefits the rich either?

So where are these tax cuts the benefit the rich? A flat rate of 25% with no loopholes seems better then what we see now

or a company like GE paying 0% in taxes etc...

 

[Sycho Sid]

The elimination of the estate tax, which would allow Trump to pass on hundreds of millions to his children tax-free. His own income tax would also be lowered, under his plan, from the current 39.6 percent rate to 25 percent, while taxes on his U.S. corporate profits would plummet to just 15 percent. The vast amount Trump earns from his investments would also enjoy a lower rate, as he has proposed cutting the capital gains tax to just 20 percent.

 

[Gandhi]

BTW @panamaican this has been a good back and forth. I am slammed right now, so I'll try to give a better point by point latter if I can. I will say I agree that feeling left behind by the impacts of trade is legit imo but the loss in relative cultural status seems like a real priorities issue. It feels like classic flag waiving and it's hard for me not to view it as people being emotionally manipulated to place much less importance on other manners. That is how I come to the term ignorance, they are ignoring other priorities. I do get that there is a large constituency that naturally has these feelings. The Rs did not create it, it has just been a large part of the group they have been targeting for a while.

 

[in the]

There are other reasons why Trump might win.

 

[panamaican]

You know, we've talked about some of this stuff before. I'm agree strongly with some of your ideas about education, etc. But when it comes to poverty, specifically, I don't think education is part of the solution (I support education reforms for reasons unrelated to economics, though I can see some small, long-term economic benefits), and I think gov't paternalism (as with the abominable Kansas TANF law) is a waste. People who don't have enough money are best helped by giving them more money.

As a solution to poverty, I don't think education is a part of the solution either. The benefits are to society at large.

I've never supported government paternalism. Most of my policy preferences lean towards eliminating existing paternalistic policies and replacing them with initiatives that better leverage government to empower individual choices.

My biggest issue with government and poverty is the unintentional creation or reinforcement of poverty traps.