President-elect Trump expected to pick Goldman Sachs veteran Steven Mnuchin for treasury secretary. abcn.ws/2g3DKlQ
What was it Trump said about how he was going to change Washington?
Wasn’t Hank Paulsen, Treasury Secretary under Bush, also an ex-Goldman Sachs guy?
How did that work out?
And Rubin, and Geithner, and the list goes on and on.
I think we’ve had enough of Government Sachs.
He was going to drain the swamp.
Some people have short memories.
To begin with Mnuchin should buy a vowel.
Trump may have been elected on a populist platform, but his selections so far are anything but populist, mostly consisting of well conected billionaires who will probably advocate for a trickle down kensian economic policy with a growing military industrial complex.
i expect his tax policies to continue to benefit the wealthiest 0.1% of the u.s.
Yep, it’s almost like voters who actually believed he’d change anything for them have been had… :eek:
Yes. A non partisan tax policy center along with economists at more conservative think tanks, such as the Tax Foundation and American Enterprise Institute, and nearly all independent analysts have agreed with your analysis. Most of the benefits of his tax policy flow to the wealthiest Americans.
Nearly half of Trump’s tax cuts would go to the top 1 percent of earners.
While less than a quarter of the cuts would benefit the bottom 80 percent.
A majority of single parent households, some no doubt widows, and married couples with 3 or more children would pay more.
By contrast, the wealthiest 1 percent — those earning over $700,000 — would enjoy a tax cut averaging nearly $215,000, boosting their after-tax incomes 13.5 percent.
And the richest 0.1 percent — those making above $3.7 million — would receive a bonanza: An average tax cut exceeding $1 million.
And if we’ve learned anything about such policy in the past, it’s that not much is trickled down upon those below. Not anything great at least.
Just saw a CNN discussion about how for someone who campaigned against Wall St, he sure is filling positions with a lot of billionaires and from Wall St. I wonder if maybe now he could find those speeches.
I can only imagine had Hillary Clinton not only won more votes nationwide but the EC as well, and had named a Goldman Sachs veteran, the same people silent on this or defending Trump, would have been up in arms.
These are just attempts by the left to continue to try and undermine Trump because he doesn’t play by the elite rules and to cover for their failures under the Obama/Biden ticket.
Also, trickle down economics work. It’s called the Roaring 20s and the Reagan Revolution for a reason.
The left is always making lame excuses to try and discredit conservatives because post-modern liberalism is a glaring failure.
Considering that Democrats claim on paper to be for the little guy (even that is FAR from true), I would say they would be more angry and it would make sense in that regard if a person believes all of the surface arguments.
Obviously, that wasn’t as the GOP now has a very clear mandate to clean up the mess left by Obama, Biden, Sanders, Reid, Schumer, Durbin, Lynch, Pelosi and the rest of the political establishment.
The Democrats gained two seats in the Senate and six in the House, plus a large popular vote in favor of Clinton. There is no mandate among the people of the US.
How about we eliminate gerrymandering in favor of computer drawn districts? Then let’s see who wins the house and many state seats.
What we also need to create are some bluedog Democrats as we did back in 2006-8. A few more victory laps by the Republicans ought to get the ball rolling on that.
Gotta admit I think it’s funny that so many Trump supporters are happy about his appointment of a guy who has been very close to George Soros, of all people, and in fact worked directly for him for a while.
We also had the roaring 90s where tax rates increased and the economy boomed. In the 2000s we cut taxes and the economy had a major crash. How well trickle down works is certainly debatable.