4 ms·

The US has needed to raise taxes for decades given the level of spending the federal government does and constant "relief" packages that everyone now expects th

The US has needed to raise taxes for decades given the level of spending the federal government does and constant "relief" packages that everyone now expects the minute there's a downturn. The runaway deficit is a massive problem now given the age of 0 interest rates is over. So what's astonishing is, whether you like him or not, the Orange man actually got the American public to accept what is defacto the largest tax increase in decades. Unfortunately, they immediately spent that money too on the promise of persistently high growth in the world's richest economy. I find that unlikely over time, but time will tell. Seems every large Western country is currently hell bent on finding out what level of deficit spending results in societal collapse.

estearum 8mo ago
> What's astonishing is, whether you like him or not, the Orange man actually got the American public to accept what is defacto the largest tax increase in decades. What does it mean "got the public to accept it?" The public had no say and these are probably illegal. On top of that, he probably literally does not know that these are effectively taxes on consumers (i.e. he believe his own bullshit). No credit is due here whatsoever.
- pembrook 8mo ago
  This was a huge part of the platform that the US overwhelmingly voted for in the last election. People wanted this. Yes, I'm sure he believes his own bullshit, but ironically, its bullshit that the US actually needed to pull (tax increases). Modern democracy has proven totally incapable of not stealing the future from its children.
  - ohyoutravel 8mo ago
    “They wanted this” but the people who voted for this did not have the mental capacity to sort fact from fiction with respect to tariffs. So this falls flat.
  - wvenable 8mo ago
    > its bullshit that the US actually needed to pull (tax increases). Did you forget that the Big Beautiful Bill included a massive tax cut?
  - tencentshill 8mo ago
    They voted thinking tariffs are a fee charged to other countries for the privilege of selling to us. But I also agree that getting an advanced electronic device landed to my door for $5 was an unnatural economic state and something should have been done. Not unilateral 100%+ tariffs, changing weekly, with bonus rampant insider trading. We elected the worst possible person for that important job.
  - nobody9999 8mo ago
    >This was a huge part of the platform that the US overwhelmingly voted for in the last election. People wanted this. Please define "overwhelmingly" in this context. A plurality (Not a majority), with a a small margin of victory (1.5%) at that of voters voted for the eventual winner. In fact, more people didn't vote at all[0] than voted for the winner. As such, I don't understand your use of that adverb. It's entirely possible that I'm missing something important. Perhaps you could enlighten me? [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-15/how-many-people-didnt-vote-in-the-2024-election https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1...
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
edmundsauto 8mo ago
He successfully raised taxes on poorer Americans while providing an even larger tax cut to the richest Americans. He also gutted the enforcement arm for said tax collection. Netting it out, it’s a loss in revenue that disproportionately helps the richest and taxes the poor while making the government revenue decline. While also making the US dollar decline, multiplying the losses.

estearum 8mo ago

> What's astonishing is, whether you like him or not, the Orange man actually got the American public to accept what is defacto the largest tax increase in decades. What does it mean "got the public to accept it?" The public had no say and these are probably illegal. On top of that, he probably literally does not know that these are effectively taxes on consumers (i.e. he believe his own bullshit). No credit is due here whatsoever.

pembrook 8mo ago
This was a huge part of the platform that the US overwhelmingly voted for in the last election. People wanted this. Yes, I'm sure he believes his own bullshit, but ironically, its bullshit that the US actually needed to pull (tax increases). Modern democracy has proven totally incapable of not stealing the future from its children.
- ohyoutravel 8mo ago
  “They wanted this” but the people who voted for this did not have the mental capacity to sort fact from fiction with respect to tariffs. So this falls flat.
- wvenable 8mo ago
  > its bullshit that the US actually needed to pull (tax increases). Did you forget that the Big Beautiful Bill included a massive tax cut?
- tencentshill 8mo ago
  They voted thinking tariffs are a fee charged to other countries for the privilege of selling to us. But I also agree that getting an advanced electronic device landed to my door for $5 was an unnatural economic state and something should have been done. Not unilateral 100%+ tariffs, changing weekly, with bonus rampant insider trading. We elected the worst possible person for that important job.
- nobody9999 8mo ago
  >This was a huge part of the platform that the US overwhelmingly voted for in the last election. People wanted this. Please define "overwhelmingly" in this context. A plurality (Not a majority), with a a small margin of victory (1.5%) at that of voters voted for the eventual winner. In fact, more people didn't vote at all[0] than voted for the winner. As such, I don't understand your use of that adverb. It's entirely possible that I'm missing something important. Perhaps you could enlighten me? [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-15/how-many-people-didnt-vote-in-the-2024-election https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1...
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

edmundsauto 8mo ago

He successfully raised taxes on poorer Americans while providing an even larger tax cut to the richest Americans. He also gutted the enforcement arm for said tax collection. Netting it out, it’s a loss in revenue that disproportionately helps the richest and taxes the poor while making the government revenue decline. While also making the US dollar decline, multiplying the losses.