The Truth About the Trump Budget

budgettoon09.jpg

The Democrats are up in arms about the Trump budget. Cruel, Barbaric, Mean are some of the nicest words they have used to describe it and it just goes downhill from there. As usual the spokespeople of the Trump administration have not been able to defend the budget effectively so it falls upon independent bloggers like me to get the truth out the best I can. On a side note I am convinced Trump would be better served if he outsourced his messaging to independents , 4chan, and reddit. We would do a better job than his current team.

The primary line of attack the democrats are using is that President Trump is cutting 800 billion dollars from Medicaid therefore he is throwing grandma off a cliff. This is not true. The budget actually adds more money to medicaid and other entitlements every year. This is what is actually happening. There is a projection of how many people would be enrolled for Medicaid in the future and that medicaid would need a certain amount of money in the future. If you allocate less than that then the democrats deem it as a cut. If you are on medicaid this year and next this will not affect you.

Philosophy

The philosophy behind the budget plays a major part in the conflict here. When democrats and republicans make a budget they expect that the amount of people seeking entitlements will increase or stay at the same pace that they are now. When Trump and sane republicans make a budget they expect that this budget will help people earn more money and therefore this will reduce the number of people who rely on entitlements or at the very least slows the growth of the enrollees.

The budget is the blueprint of your plan for the economy. It is what you would like the economy to achieve. With the plans they present if the democrats are successful then you would have more people enrolled via welfare than ever. If the Trump plan is succesful then you would have fewer people enrolled for entitlements. Remember the budget is only supposed to be for one year. If it turns out the projections are not working then you can always add more money in the future. In essence the democrats want people mired in poverty and living of entitlements while Trump and sane republicans are taking a risk to lift them out of it.

Debt

At this point in the conversation it is usually the Republicans that cry out. What about the debt? If the plans to remove more people from entitlements fail then the deficit will be higher than ever. This is true, but then so what?

One thing that republicans don’t like to admit is that if Romney had won the debt would still have gone up. It may not have doubled like it did under Obama but it would still have gone up. If you put the most committed deficit hawk in power during the time of Obama the debt would have still gone up. At the end of the day any meaningful attempts to tackle the debt and deficits will have to go through entitlement reform. That is only possible if people are earning enough that they get out of it and are able to look at it objectively. Presiding over 8 years of supposedly massive growth while ordinary people have the same income they did when your massive growth started will not help it. If we have budgets that promote the status quo where we add more and more people to welfare then nothing will change and the problem will get worse. At some point we have to take the risk and try to lift people off poverty so they no longer need entitlements. Only then will they agree to change it.

Stimulus vs Tax Cut

Everyone democrat who was wildly applauding the stimulus by Obama is now staunchly opposed to the tax cuts by President Trump. The tax cuts and stimulus achieve the same thing. They stimulate the economy by making more money available to people. In the stimulus companies were able to stay open and keep paying their employees while others were able to expand and with tax cuts the same results are achieved.

There is one major difference that has to be pointed out. With the stimulus you gave all the benefits up front. Each company was handed a sack of money from the Obama administration. If the companies did not live up to their end of the deal then there was nothing Obama could do. Incidentally this is also the problem a lot of people have with the Iran deal. Tax cuts are different. They are not sacks of money to be handed out but rather promises that we will not take as much of their income in the future. It is implied that we are doing this so they can employ more Americans and offer higher wages. If this does not materialize then we can always remove the tax cuts.

In the past tax cuts were given but America was not a competitive place to invest in. Companies instead invested in India, China, and other countries. In effect our tax cuts funded their growth. To be completely fair with the corporations it is very hard to invest in a place that says on paper it will take 39.1% of your profits when other places say they will only take 15-20% sometimes less. It is time we used tax cuts to fund our growth.

The Trump budget is good enough. Something needs to be done to attempt to lift people up from poverty. If we keep doing what we have done before we will only achieve the same results.

Monuments and the Ctrl-Left

Robert_E._Lee_001.jpg

There has been some debate about certain statues of confederate heroes getting removed. As a general rule whenever the monuments have been removed liberals from all across the country have been in favor of it while the local residents have not. In fact there was a bill in Louisiana where the legislators required a vote by the local residents before any statues were removed and the democrats walked out when it was passed. They knew that if they consulted the public they would never be able to remove another monument again. There really should be no opposition in to a public vote. Unlike issues like minimum wage where one state may affect another the existence of a statue on a courthouse lawn in Alabama would have no impact on the life of someone in New York or Los Angeles. In fact odds are until the media informed them about it they would have no idea these monuments existed. My opposition to this is much deeper though. It shows the desire for control of the aptly named ctrl-left.

History

Whenever the left argues this issue they would always point out that Robert Lee and the rest were traitors and the losing side in a civil war deserves no honor from the victors. History would say otherwise.

In Japan Yukimura Sanada fought on the side of the Toyotomi against the Tokugawa and even while defeated was still hailed as the bravest man in Japan by his opponents.

In China Liu Bei and Zhuge Liang fought on the losing side of a civil war with the Kingdom of Shu. Statues of Zhuge Liang are still in Cheng Du today and their reign is widely regarded as the perfect example of a reign by a confucian scholar.

In Korea Yi Sun Shin was convicted as a traitor by King Senjong and tortured yet today he is one of the most popular heroes of Korea. Even the Japanese admired him as Admiral Tojo would not allow himself to be compared to him when he was compared to both Nelson and Yi Sun Shin.

In Mongolia Prince Jochi turned traitor to Genghis Khan and set off to start his own Khanate yet the populace still loved him. Genghis enlisted Tsubodai to hunt him down and kill him and Tsubodai nearly resigned when the deed was done.

Of course in the US we have Robert E Lee who was venerated by both sides. Mainly because of how cleanly he fought the war. Both northern and southern soldiers admired him and both Lincoln and Davis wanted him to lead their armies.

This admiration even exists for the worst regimes. In World War 2 Rommel was admired by British soldiers for his skill in battle and his lenient treatment of prisoners. After Hitler he was the most mentioned German figure in British newspapers during the early part of the war.

It is usually the most brutal of regimes that are so insecure in their reigns that they must crush any form of dissent and make sure that no good attributes are identified with losing sides in the civil war. Regimes like communist Russia or China or North Korea who have a ruling class interested in maintaining power vilify the losing side to solidify their hold. In more civilized areas the positive attributes of the losing are amplified to promote unity between the various factions. The winners see that there is good in the losers too and are more inclined to be lenient.

Culture

Of course this has never been about traitors. That is the only the excuse the liberals use. The goal is to destroy the unique culture of the southern states. This is ironic because whenever a minority has his culture threatened it is usually the liberals who first speak out and claim cultural appropriation and destruction of their native culture. Somehow the Islamic culture, African culture, and others are worth protecting but American culture is not. The hypocrisy of the situation does not really matter to liberals as destroying culture is only a means to an end. They want people in the South to be ashamed of their heritage.

This ties into the concept of the original sin I mentioned in the article about cultural privilege. Whether we like it or not the south was able to produce some fine people like Robert E Lee that fought nobly for their cause and the people in the south should be proud of that. Once you remove anything positive that people can associate with regarding their heritage then you have effectively saddled them with the original sin. They now have this stain that they must atone for purely for being born in the location where they are. Once they have accepted this fact then the ctrl-left can now insist that they follow its agenda in order to atone for the sins of their fathers. This issue is much bigger than statues.

Debunking the Myths on the Trump Tax Plan

images.jpg

There have been plenty of attacks against the tax plan proposed by President Trump. I personally love the tax plan as it is everything you could want. Realistic taxes for the rich and corporations. Lower taxes on the poor and middle class. Best of all the new tax code is simple and easy to use as it pushes everyone to use standardized deductions. It’s no wonder tax attorneys and accountants are against it. They would lose a lot of business as people begin using standardized deductions.

There are two main arguments people use when they claim they are against the tax reform proposed by Trump. First that it would blow up the deficit. Second only the very wealthy would benefit from the tax cut.

The Tax Cut Will Increase the Deficit

When discussing how the tax cut will affect the deficit we have to take a look at how the taxes collected are calculated. Whenever any analysis is done on this point people assume that the figures presented are gospel truth and base everything on that. There are two main problems with how the figures are calculated.

The first major problem is it assumes there are no deductions and other loopholes and that everyone paid the statutory tax rates. Whenever business leaders on the left discuss the tax cuts they always say that the tax rate is not as high as you would think like Warren Buffet for example in his recent interview. The document detailing the differences in tax collection are almost always prepared by tax attorneys and accountants as well. People who make a living finding and maximizing these deductions. According to the Wall Street Journal the actual tax rate is 24%. The GAO says around 12-16%. The amount should be in the middle of that. Calculating your collection based on 35% is dishonest and does not present a clear picture. If companies actually paid that there would be none left registered in the US.

The second major problem with their numbers is that it takes income tax by itself. Economists have a phrase called “ceteris paribus” to hand wave away all variables they do not want to deal with. In the report by the Tax Policy Center they specifically mention that they do not take any other macroeconomic effects into consideration. The concept may have some uses but it distorts what is actually happening with this tax cut. When you are given a tax cut you do not use it to swim around in a pool of Trump bucks like Scrooge Mcduck. You would use the money. It would most likely be used to buy other things which would generate sales or other local taxes. You could invest it if you have nothing to buy which would then generate capital gains tax. You could deposit it into a bank allowing them to lend out more money. Almost everything you can do with the money that is not taken from you would be taxed after you use it in some shape, way, or form. This would make up for any shortfall in collection from income taxes. After all nothing states that all the funds of the government must come from income taxes. If you have ever heard anyone argue for giving a stimulus to boost the economy the exact same arguments would apply.

The Tax Cut is For the Rich

There are two things people refer to when they state this. First the tax brackets for the rich when it comes to personal income taxes and next the corporate income taxes dropping down from 35 to 15%.

I will go with the corporate tax argument first as it is easier to explain. As I explained earlier numerous sources respected by the left from Warren Buffet to various publications have stated that the actual tax rate is not 35%. Moving the tax bracket from 12% to 15% or 20% to 15% does not sound as controversial does it? That is not the entire picture though. When companies pay taxes the companies that can scale to afford excellent tax lawyers invariably end up paying lower taxes while those who can only afford turbotax or do their own pay higher taxes. Aside from the tax rates not being what is advertised it ends up being higher for smaller companies than it is for larger ones. Reducing the rate and then removing deductions means that all companies pay the same rate. This actually hurts the rich companies and helps the poor ones.

On to personal income taxes. The defining characteristic of the tax plan is that it pushes almost everyone to take standardized deductions. If you wanted a tax plan to benefit the poor and middle class this would be how you do it. As a general rule the poorer someone is the better standardized deductions are for him. Those with lower incomes would not have the disposable income necessary to have plenty of deductions nor would they be able to avail of services of an accountant to find all the deductions that they could benefit from.

In 2016 75% of people filing income taxes decided to use the standardized deduction because it is more than what they would by itemizing. President Trump would more than double this deduction in his tax plan which means everyone gets more than double the deductions. In contrast the highest earners rely almost exclusively on deductions to get their taxes down. Most of the deductions are going away under the Trump tax plan. Just removing the SALT (state and local tax) deduction alone would remove a lot of the deductions high income earners use. Add the fact that President Trump is also proposing a limit on the amount of deductions of 100000 on single and 200000 on jointly filed taxes and the case that the tax cut is favorable to the rich is harder to make. Of course this will never get discussed as the media will only discuss the changes to the raw tax rates. My personal fear is the reverse might be true. Removing the deductions and placing a hard limit on the amount that can be claimed may cause the wealthy to flee the country like that French actor who took Belgian citizenship to avoid a tax hike.

Once you take a look at the entire plan it is both very fair and remarkably simple. I encourage everyone to take a look at the tax code themselves instead of relying on media or “the experts”. Remember they need the tax code to be complex or they would not be able to charge a high amount for their services.

Kekistanis Need President Trump to Support Net Neutrality

donald-trump-pepe-the-frog-2016.jpg

The FCC under President Trumps appointee has begun efforts to remove rules that ensure net neutrality. As a Trumplican and Kekistani I ask President Trump to stop this. Not only that I call on other Kekistanis  in reddit, 4 chan, and the blogosphere to lend their voice and ask President Trump to stop this as well. I do this fully aware of the counterarguments saying that we have never really been under any rules for net neutrality and there have been no major incidents in the past.

I ask for this not only because it is in my best interest but because it is in the best interests of the Trump administration and Republicans in general. I will not go into detail with the arguments but at its heart removing net neutrality benefits established companies. Companies with established audiences or platforms can afford to pay for express lanes while start ups and single bloggers can’t.

Take a step back and look around at which sites support Republicans and which sites support Democrats. Lets consider social media first. Anyone who frequents Reddit knows that we are already having problems with the site admins enforcing the rules against conservative subreddits but not against liberal ones. In Twitter you have right leaning personalities banned for the slightest reasons while left leaning ones can call for those in the right to be killed in terrible ways and still be safe. In Facebook you have allegations in the past of the site fixing their news so that only liberal sources showed sidelining conservative ones. Removing net neutrality means we support these companies at the expense of new start-ups. Why would we support a policy that helps companies that do everything they can to hinder us?

In YouTube you already have conservative commentators like Steven Crowder complaining that left leaning outlets are promoted by the site while right leaning ones are not. Take a look at the websites supporting the administration and those who do not. The major newspapers and their online outlets are all left leaning. A lot of the bigger sites like the Huffington Post are as well. On the other side the team supporting the administration and conservatives in general are small independent bloggers like me and some sites like Red State, National Review, and American Thinker that while established are usually fewer and poorly funded compared to their liberal counterparts. Supporting the removal of net neutrality means that only liberal viewpoints will be heard.

The single greatest con that the Democrats have been able to pull is to convince Americans that the GOP is the party of big money. Clinton raised 1.4 billion while Trump raised 600 million. Obama outraised Romney by a couple of 100 million as well. In 2016 on average Democrat senatorial and congressional candidates spent more than their Republican counterparts. The difference is even more pronounced in the federal level. If you make this contest about money we will lose.

At the end of the day we are in an information war with the liberals. Since I mentioned info wars I am also compelled to state that Bill Clinton is a rapist. We are doing everything we can to support the Trump administration. We ask that President Trump support us as well.

Cultural Privilege

main-qimg-2f59c72889146a5f1b0c1d106dcbbb3b.png

Whenever you discuss anything with a liberal the conversation always devolves down to privilege. This is ironic as this is exactly the reason why they cannot handle the Trump presidency. Loosely defined privilege is the advantage someone has in life because of the circumstances of his birth.

The right may hate me for saying this but some privileges do exist. I firmly believe that there is an American Privilege, if you are born an American you can expect a much higher quality of life than someone born in Syria. A genius born in Syria could still very well end up sold by Uncle Mohammed for 5 goats or be sent to bomb the local police station to claim your 99 virgins. There are of course some privileges that are bogus. White privilege being one of them. People of all colors can succeed in America. If hard pressed I would even say that Asians may succeed at higher rates than white people do. It may even be harder to be a poor white person in America than a poor black or brown one as there are support structures that exist for them that do not for the poor white person.

I am not saying we should feel guilty about this. Some people are born stronger, faster, smarter, prettier, more athletic, or a whole host of other advantages than others. Different people get different advantages and it is all about making the best out of the hand we are dealt.

Liberal Privilege

Liberals have cultural privilege. Since they were born liberals have been told by society that their ideas are correct. While you are growing up most of the things that you interact with come from a liberal perspective. If you watch tv or a movie it would most likely have been made by a liberal. Chances are the teachers you have for lower and middle school are liberals as well. Even comic books are coming with a liberal flavor now. Although that may change as marvel says their profits have cratered after catering to social justice warriors. Nuanced arguments like how adding more labor to the pool without available jobs makes it harder for wages to go up or how we creating a new slave class with illegal immigrants come much later. This is not random. Liberals exert a lot of effort to keep these institutions pure. Conservatives are routinely hunted down in Hollywood and teachers who don’t conform to the standard viewpoints are removed.

This goes above being taught that they are right. Liberals are taught a very simple formula. If you dislike something all you have to do is declare that it is racist, sexist, fascist, or any other ist and society will rally behind you to exterminate the threat. Companies will get boycotted, professors will get fired tenure or no tenure, and people lose their jobs. I urge you to look for articles about Mccain, Romney, Bush, or any other Republican running for president at the time they were running and compare it with articles after. It would be far kinder to be labelled a murderer than a racist. Do you ever wonder why there are so many accusations of faux racism happening recently? You cannot give people the power of life and death over someone and not expect them to use it. Republicans are complicit in this as well. Instead of standing up to the system they have gone along with it and the greatest fear for most of them is to be labelled an ist.

Trump

For most liberals Trump is a breakdown of the system. They were supposed to be correct. They labeled Trump all the proper things and the labels did not produce the desired result. It would have been the same with any other presidential candidate. Liberals ran their campaign like they always do based on how evil Trump was. He was not America. He is sexist. He is racist. He is a fascist. America chose him anyway. Not only that they gave him majorities in both the house and the senate. There are two options liberals can choose from. Either the rest of the country does not define racism, sexism, and fascism the way they do or Russians. They chose Russians.

To the intellectual liberals Trump represents are far greater threat. Not only did the system malfunction Trump did not participate in it. Atlas Shrugged has some questionable assumptions regarding the economy and the value of the capitalist but it is spot on morality. Trump is like Hank Rearden in his trial. The system is set up so that everybody has an original sin. In Atlas Shrugged it was making a profit. In Trumps case he was white, male, and rich. Trump never downplayed any of that. In fact one of the central themes of his campaign was I am rich. Trump did not play the racism game either. When a reporter called him out on the Pocahontas comment he just repeated it. When they said his ads were anti-semetic he didn’t care. He ran on illegal immigration reform and did not care that he was called racist. The intellectuals know that all it takes is one person with great reach to show that the system is a mirage for the entire system to break down. Losing their cultural privilege is the greatest fear of these intellectuals.

The Myth of ObamaCare

9e43bfde477f6bdac2ace3cc993dd3c4.jpg

With the repeal of Obamacare by the Congress yesterday the Democrats are now pushing a new message. 24 million Americans have lost their health insurance due to Republicans. I have no idea where they got that number from but it ignores the main issues surrounding Obamacare. The number of insured is not the only metric to judge insurance by. For most people the quality of the insurance matters more.

Obamacare

Any discussion on insurance has to begin with Obamacare. Obamacare essentially made a very small set of the population very happy and a larger set angry because it did two things. First off it made the people who had pre existing conditions very happy as it allowed them to purchase health insurance for the first time. Second it made the rest of the people angry as it screwed up their health insurance. This is not surprising as the sicker costumer base made the risk pool worse.

If there is one thing that Obamacare consistently did is that it constantly increased the Premiums and deductibles of the plans under it. Year after year these went up which is why Democrats lost so much ground in the government. This then begs the question. If the insurance you is so bad can you really be said to have insurance? Does quality matter? The purpose of insurance is to provide quality healthcare. If you have “insurance” with deductibles so high that they never help in making your payments for health services do you really have insurance? Or do you have a piece of paper with the word insurance on it costing you more and more money in premiums every month?

What Democrats do not want to tell you is that insurance had gotten so bad under Obamacare that people who were paying for insurance could not use it. I am not even going to go into the fact that doctor choice was more severely limited under Obamacare as well. There was no indication that this was going to get any better. The Democrats say 24 million people would lose their health insurance. You cannot lose something that was already taken away from you.

TrumpCare

I am not a fan of Trumpcare. I have already stated in the past that my primary requirement for a healthcare bill is price controls on drugs. Every other first world country follows their national interest and puts price controls on their drugs. The US citizen is left behind as he is fleeced to pay for the research costs of new drugs.

That said Trumpcare is better than Obamacare. At the very least it represents a chance to fix the healthcare system that the Democrats broke. There is one fact that Sanders, Clinton, or Obama will never mention. Under Obamacare the insurance companies have increased their profits by more than 200%. Let this sink in. They are required to cover a sicker pool of people. They increase premiums and deductibles by saying they are unprofitable. Yet they have increased their profits by 200%.

It is not difficult to imagine why. If the government holds a gun to the head of the citizens and says they must buy your product or suffer the consequences, and then compounds this by saying that you are the only one they can buy insurance from, then it becomes very easy to make money. You can offer whatever crap you want and call it service and people will be forced to buy it. Removing the individual mandate and forcing the companies to compete may actually improve services for everyone. The insurance companies may even be forced to lower profits.

At the end of the day Obamacare is failing already. We may as well find an alternative solution while we still have time.

100 Days of Winning

images (3).jpg

It has been 100 days since the onset of the Age of Trump and it has been a fun ride. Everything seems to be moving in hyper speed and it feels like Trump has been President for years. There are some things i love and some things that I am not too fond of but overall I am pleased. I would rate his first 100 days as a success.

Think back to when you first supported Trump. Why did you do it? For some people it was all about the courts and getting more conservative justices. For others it was economic nationalism. We needed jobs back into this country. For more people it was about the fight against terrorism. Immigration and the 2nd amendment was also an issue for a lot of people.  What unifies us is our desire for change and in this regard Trump has delivered. We wanted something different from what previous administrations had done before. Clinton, Bush, and Obama largely delivered the same economic and foreign policies despite all claiming to be agents of change in their particular elections.

Courts

The age of Trump has had the biggest impact on the legal system. Justice is of course a great pick. Almost all of the people who support Trump support Gorsuch too. Most people who do have some sort of issue with the Justice would have just preferred a different name but would have made a pick that is just as conservative. This is a change from the type of justices that Obama would have selected.

The biggest benefit of the Trump presidency is that it allowed the judicial system to display its arrogance. In Hawaii v Trump and other similar cases the liberal courts have stated, in their legal decisions, that the travel ban and other acts are unconstitutional on the sole basis they were done by President Trump. If any other President had done the exact same executive orders then they would suddenly be constitutional. Nothing could showcase the need for judicial reform more than the courts acting on their animus towards one person.

Immigration

Another area where our President has been very successful. Almost every source I have seen confirms that illegal immigration and border crossings are down. This is despite unprecedented levels of obstruction from the judiciary. It turns out all that is needed to curb the problem is government officials who are willing to enforce existing laws. It costs a lot of money to have the cartels smuggle you across the border, Visa application processes are lengthy and plane tickets are expensive as well. Once the potential illegals picked up on the fact that we would begin to enforce our laws there it made no sense for them to continue.

That takes care of the present but we also have to take care of the future. This means only one thing. Build that wall. An everlasting testament to our commitment to following the laws and policies of our country. One that cannot be turned off by future administrations. We can only hope that congressional Republicans realize that they work for their voters and work with him on it.

Economic

We are in a unique time in history. Companies are actually afraid of sending your jobs overseas. With his use of twitter our President has made it clear that there will be public relations consequences for companies who outsource. This has stopped a lot of the damage and has even managed to fix some of it as companies put extra effort into making sure that the jobs stay in America. The stick only goes so far though. It only ensures that companies are afraid to leave the country. Given enough incentive from other countries they will still do so.

The other half is the carrot. We have to make sure that America is a place that they want to do business in and not just a place that they are forced to be in. The tax reform package takes care of that. A one time fee for repatriating funds. Lowering the tax rates from 39% to something more reasonable. Streamlining the deductions of the tax code to make them easier to apply. All are things that help the country be more attractive to business. Requiring companies to buy American and hire American and rewarding them for doing so, easing regulations, and issuing more favorable executive orders for American companies all help as well.

Foreign 

We can see that America is finally getting the respect it deserves worldwide. Other countries may not like it as this means they can take advantage of us less but the respect is there. Mexico and Canada have asked to renegotiate NAFTA. Trump has also pulled us out of the TPP. Russia and China our two great competitors in the world have become more friendly and willing to work with us in the Middle East and North Korea. It is worth noting that in the Obama administration Russia gave the US the same status as ISIS in their recent peace treaty in the middle east and China would not even give Obama the same recognition that it gives lesser states. You could feel their contempt for the United States but no more.

It is concerning that the President launched a missile strike into Syria. Yet what is one more missile strike in the Middle East? Its just another grain of sand in the desert. The residents send out their children to kill others as suicide bombers and kill more before lunch than the US does in one missile strike. The fact that it was used to get a better negotiating platform with the Chinese alone justifies it. A couple of missile strikes here and there to further our interests is acceptable.

North Korea is a difficult situation as well and worries me more though I am willing to give our President a lot more leeway on it. Every single President all the way to Obama has punted the issue. It is very possible that Trump will punt on the issue as well. Yet the problem still remains and has to be dealt with sometime. It is very possible that the next President will have to deal with North Korea as they have nukes capable of reaching Los Angeles. I hope we resolve it before that even if the solution hurts.

100 days have passed. Here is hoping to many more days of winning.