Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, December 21, 2017

The Bill Isn't Signed Yet, But Other Countries Have Already Launched a ‘Race to the Bottom' to

Undermine New U.S. Corporate Tax Cuts. The Trump bill, which reads like a wish list for Goldman Sachs and its clients, has already triggered an aggressive "race to the bottom" in international corporate tax rates, rules and regulations. It is the exact opposite of his campaign promise to help the middle class.

What the mainstream American news has failed to notice are the global responses, including: see article.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

In Washington, Congressional Republicans have tried for years to weaken Social Security and undermine its finances in the hopes they can kill the most popular social support program in the country. They are expected to step up their efforts to weaken Social Security, arguing that with the tax cut legislation there just isn't enough money to sustain the social safety net.

An indication of this approach emerged with regard to CHIP, the popular Children's Health Insurance Program. It finances often life-saving medical care for more than nine million children and 300,000 pregnant women.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

not youtu.be

#1 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-21 10:45 PM | Reply

Everything is awesome!!!!

Good news...5 x 5.

#2 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-21 10:47 PM | Reply

Race With The Devil

... on a Spanish Highway

youtu.be

(been a very long time since listening to Al Di Meola!)

#3 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-21 10:59 PM | Reply

The only thing we need to cut from our budget is military spending.

All problems will be solved and we'll be end up with a surplus.

#4 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-21 11:01 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

The only thing we need to cut from our budget is military spending.
All problems will be solved and we'll be end up with a surplus.

#4 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

Please cite the percentage of our budget that is military spending.

From there, please cite how much you think should be cut.

From there, please cite how in the world that said cuts not only balance the budget short-term, but also begin to address a couple of trillion of our debt, interest payments on said debt, and our $100+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:07 PM | Reply

"Suffer the little children to come unto Me... but give their lunches and health ins funds to the corporations. Oh, and do it on the taxpayer's credit card!" -Supply-Side Jesus

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-21 11:09 PM | Reply

@ JeffJ

Stop being ridiculous, there's easily hundreds of billions of dollars in the DoD budget that can be done away with, saving trillions over the span of a decade.

Even a blind man can see this fact.

#7 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-21 11:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

From there, please cite how in the world that said cuts not only balance the budget short-term, but also begin to address a couple of trillion of our debt, interest payments on said debt, and our $100+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:07 PM | Reply | Flag

Squawk

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-21 11:16 PM | Reply

Yep, Squawk.

Let's instead pretend that these unfunded liabilities don't exist. In an era of annual $trillion deficits, that seems incredibly prudent.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:20 PM | Reply

"In an era of annual $trillion deficits..."

The party who screamed about deficits just trashed another talking point into the ashbin of history.

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-21 11:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Advertisement

Advertisement

Conservatism died with this tax bill. If they still existed, they would have at least made sure it was deficit-neutral rather than putting the exceptionally high cost on the taxpayers credit card... and charging them double-digit interest, no less.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-21 11:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Let's instead pretend that these unfunded liabilities don't exist. In an era of annual $trillion deficits, that seems incredibly prudent.

Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:20 PM | Reply

They don't exist slick.

www.theatlantic.com

Wanna scare somebody about America's debt on the eve of the Fiscal Cliff? I mean, really scare somebody? Here's a trick. Don't talk about the debt. Talk about "unfunded liabilities."

The U.S. national debt comes out to about $16 trillion today. That's something. But it's nothing compared to the extra $87 trillion in unfunded liabilities to Social Security, Medicare, and federal pensions. Here's how that works. If you add up all of the U.S. government's promises to pay retirement and health care benefits for the next 75 years and subtract the projected tax revenue dedicated to those programs over the next 75 years, there is a gap. A $87 trillion gap -- in addition to a $16 billion hole.

(1) That's not our debt. Our $16 trillion in debt and our $87 trillion in "unfunded liabilities" represent two very different ideas: real past promises and projected future promises. Real past promises are, well, very real. We have to pay back our debt. Failing to do it would be an illegal and disastrous default. Unfunded liabilities are future promises, and, since they're not as real, we can change them whenever we want without destroying ourselves. For example, raising the taxable income ceiling and slowing the growth of benefits could reduce the Social Security gap to zero tomorrow.

And that's if there is a Social Security "gap" to begin with. Technically, it's not legal for Social Security to have "unfunded liabilities" since it can only pay as many benefits as it receives in earmarked taxes. Both it and Medicare hospital insurance are prohibited from spending money they haven't collected from specific revenue dedicated to their programs (i.e.: payroll taxes). It is impossible for either to technically be "unfunded", since they cannot legally outspend their funding.

#12 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-21 11:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

cut the drug wars too.. probably both save and make a trillion...in perpetuity.

#13 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-21 11:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The party who screamed about deficits just trashed another talking point into the ashbin of history.

#10 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

True. The GOP is horrible when it comes to fiscal responsibility.

Where are the Dems at when it comes to the entitlement debt bomb?

SS can be solved for a few decades by adding a point on both sides of FICA - a regressive tax, BTW. But Medicare, Medicaid and debt interest are set to grow far more quickly than the SS liability.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:42 PM | Reply

"Where are the Dems at when it comes to the entitlement debt bomb? "

They voted 100% against the tax giveaway. Meanwhile, where were the Republicans? I know there are deficit hawks, and the only one who swore he wouldn't vote for it was Corker. And the Never-Trumpers? All voted with Trump.

Oops.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-21 11:45 PM | Reply

#15 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You didn't answer my question.

FYI - It's OK to acknowledge Dem shortfalls when castigating the GOP for being worse.

Just sayin'

#16 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-21 11:50 PM | Reply

- fiscal responsibility.

Would start with upending CU and replacing it with some real campaign finance reform to keep the influence-peddlers in line.

Then it would be prudent to not take money from the safety net to give to the corporations, as these rwingers will do, keep corporate taxes where they are as no one pays the full percentage anyway, and tax capital as we do work.

www.faireconomy.org

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-21 11:53 PM | Reply

"You didn't answer my question."

You must have missed the part where they voted 100% against this tax heist.

They also voted against Dubya and Cheney resetting the fiscal sights from Surplusville to Debtsylvania, after Clinton delivered true surplus budgets.

Your Sessions-like memory is duly noted.

#18 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-22 12:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Let's instead pretend that these unfunded liabilities don't exist. In an era of annual $trillion deficits, that seems incredibly prudent."

Everyone who supports the Trump tax cuts can't mention enough how 2027 is a looong way away.

When do these unfunded liabilities kick in, where Social Security actually doesn't have enough money to pay 100% of what it owes? 2038?

As RoC would say, "Flap, flap, flap." And he would be right about you in saying that.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-22 12:23 AM | Reply

"Let's instead pretend that these unfunded liabilities don't exist."

Sorry, Republican.

You don't get to pass a $2 Trillion deficit balloon on Wednesday, and then be upset about deficits on Thursday.

The time to bring up your grave, grave concern over deficits was...you know, Tuesday.

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-22 12:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

You must have missed the part where they voted 100% against this tax heist.
They also voted against Dubya and Cheney resetting the fiscal sights from Surplusville to Debtsylvania, after Clinton delivered true surplus budgets.
Your Sessions-like memory is duly noted.

#18 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

This new tax law does little to change the trajectory of our unfunded liabilities.

You either conflated unrelated issues deliberately or did so due to poor articulation on my part,

Setting aside Wyden - Democrats are universally opposed to even remotely discussing unfunded liabilities.

A 1-point increase on both sides of the tax equation will certainly elongate SS, but it does nothing to address the biggest liability-driver- Medicare, or Medicaid or interest on the debt.

Disagree with their "solutions" all day, but the GOP at least acknowledges the "math" underlying these growing problems. The Democratic Party, that you seem loathe to EVER criticize, employs Republican Math (TM) to suggest everything is honky-dory. It's not. And while a 15% increase in FICA will extend SS it doesn't address the far bigger drivers of our liabilities. Not to mention the impact such a heavy tax will have on the economy...

#21 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 12:42 AM | Reply

#20 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Are you unwilling or unable to address my point?

That was incredibly lame. WAY beneath what you typically bring to the table.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 12:44 AM | Reply

and our $100+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities.

#5 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Dude. That talking point is bogus.

Stop using it if you want be considered intellectually honest at any time in the near future.

#23 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-22 12:58 AM | Reply

"This new tax law does little to change the trajectory of our unfunded liabilities. "

Another $2 Trillion? An additional 10% of every dollar we've ever borrowed??? Quiche my assets.

And from now on, any bitching about debt or deficits from a Republican should be met with a punch in the mouth.

"Democrats are universally opposed to even remotely discussing unfunded liabilities. "

Nonsense. Let them loose, and they'll correct the SS equation, and institute single-payer. Otherwise, you're stuck with Republicans, and The Kansas Miracle™ writ large.

"Disagree with their "solutions" all day, but the GOP at least acknowledges the "math" underlying these growing problems."

Too rich. The Rs last "solution" didn't even address the problem, as Dubya had to finally admit by the end of his disastrous campaign to privatize SS. And "acknowledging the math" would have been using the surpluses to shore up against the coming baby boomer retirement tsunami, which we've seen approaching for a generation. Instead, Cheney and the Rs chose tax cuts, and chose to reset the fiscal sights from paying off our debt to record deficits as far as the eye could see. This week, Rs chose another $2 Trillion in deficits--ALL on borrowed spending. Sorry, but you don't get to claim you're "acknowledging the math" when you go the opposite way of where the math clearly points.

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-22 12:58 AM | Reply

"Are you unwilling or unable to address my point?"

I'm saying your chance to complain about debt was BEFORE you added another 10%, and your sudden re-discovery of unfunded liabilities seems questionable, given the timing.

SS can be fixed with a point on both sides, or a combo of raising the ceiling and extending the retirement age.

Medicare's fix is tougher, but it starts with single payer. Other countries pay a lower % of their GDP, cover a much higher % of their populace, and deliver better measurable results. At some point, the economics will leave no other choice, and every day we wait, it will cost us more.

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-22 01:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

nd from now on, any bitching about debt or deficits from a Republican should be met with a punch in the mouth.

That has been the case for the past 3 decades. Does the same hold true for Democrats? Or are they above reproach?

and our $100+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities.

#5 | POSTED BY JEFFJ
Dude. That talking point is bogus.
Stop using it if you want be considered intellectually honest at any time in the near future.

#23 | POSTED BY JPW


The actuaries say otherwise. If the trajectory was flat and sustainable I would wholly oppose changes to SS/Medicare/Medicaid. Sadly, the trajectory isn't anywhere close to flat and sustainable.

#26 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 01:05 AM | Reply

Medicare's fix is tougher, but it starts with single payer. Other countries pay a lower % of their GDP, cover a much higher % of their populace, and deliver better measurable results. At some point, the economics will leave no other choice, and every day we wait, it will cost us more.

#25 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Thank you for acknowledging Medicare's trajectory, left unchanged. It's a welcome breath of honesty that I encounter far-too-infrequently when discussing this issue,

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 01:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"the trajectory isn't anywhere close to flat and sustainable."

True.

But the last remaining possible fix is single payer. The government is currently responsible for somewhere north of 40% of insurance, between Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, Government workers at all levels, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It's in taxpayers' best interests to switch over to 100% as soon as feasible, especially since we already all pay for all of our collective health care.

And the last thing we need now is a moron and his party who willfully inject uncertainty to the health insurance market. While self-insurers and the privately insured have reported 2%-3% increases, public policies have jacked up 20%, all thanks to Trumps inferiority complex when it comes to All Things Obama.

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-22 01:20 AM | Reply

Have a merry Christmas, Danforth. I'm off to bed. Per usual, thank you for the reasoned discussion.

#29 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 01:33 AM | Reply

The only thing we need to cut from our budget is military spending.
All problems will be solved and we'll be end up with a surplus.
POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2017-12-21 11:01 PM | REPLY | FLAGGED FUNNY BY NULLIFIDIAN, NEWSWORTHY BY PINCHALOAF, NEWSWORTHY BY ICHIRO

Love you too, Nulli.

😘😘😘

#30 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-22 02:32 AM | Reply

Pentagon buries evidence of $125 billion in bureaucratic waste

www.washingtonpost.com

The Pentagon has buried an internal study that exposed $125 billion in administrative waste in its business operations amid fears Congress would use the findings as an excuse to slash the defense budget, according to interviews and confidential memos obtained by The Washington Post.

Pentagon leaders had requested the study to help make their enormous back-office bureaucracy more efficient and reinvest any savings in combat power.

But after the project documented far more wasteful spending than expected, senior defense officials moved swiftly to kill it by discrediting and suppressing the results.

The report, issued in January 2015, identified "a clear path" for the Defense Department to save $125 billion over five years. The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel.

Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.


So there's enough DoD waste to that, if eliminated, could increase military combat power AND to simply save money for reinvestment in other areas of the US Government.

And then there's wasteful weapon systems ...

The 10 Most Blatantly Wasteful Defense Items In The Recent $1.8 Trillion Spending Bill

www.forbes.com

No one can legitimately say that there's no where in the DoD budget where savings can be had.

#32 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2017-12-22 06:54 AM | Reply

#31

An entire rejoinder consisting of nothing but ad hominem.

Sad.

You're normally better than this, Clown.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-22 06:57 AM | Reply

When you ignore the very basic principles of economics disaster will follow. When an economy, like ours is expanding, has low unemployment and corporate profits are at an all time high, YOU PAY DOWN DEBT! You don't stupidly cut taxes for those who are doing better than any corporations have ever done before in the history of the world. We could be reducing our debt right now instead of allowing billionaires to pile up more billions. This is the dumbest thing we have ever done as a nation. Go ahead, argue with me because you will get one simple answer. "You're simply irresponsible and your children and grandchildren are going to hate you." Mine already do.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-22 09:11 AM | Reply

Sadly, the trajectory isn't anywhere close to flat and sustainable.

#26 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I'm not denying both need to be fixed.

I'm saying the scare mongering with the "$100 trillion" is nonsense. Just say it needs to be revamped/tweaked/adjusted and leave the scare tactics behind.

I've posted this before:

www.washingtonpost.com

Which is why I made my comment that it's a bogus talking point.

#35 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-22 11:51 AM | Reply

#14
ending all drug war operations and national healthcare system...will in the long term save trillions.
we haven't even begun to reform...they're juggernauting right along eating more resources than ever.

ya gotta start somewhere, start THERE.

#36 | Posted by ichiro at 2017-12-22 05:00 PM | Reply

Bears repeating:

But the last remaining possible fix is single payer. The government is currently responsible for somewhere north of 40% of insurance, between Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, Government workers at all levels, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. It's in taxpayers' best interests to switch over to 100% as soon as feasible, especially since we already all pay for all of our collective health care.

Medicare for All is going to happen, once our politicians on both sides of the aisle grow some balls and do it.

"I'm saying the scare mongering with the ________ is nonsense. Just say it needs to be revamped/tweaked/adjusted and leave the scare tactics behind."

Words of wisdom for almost every thread on the DR.

#37 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-12-22 07:45 PM | Reply

"Medicare for All is going to happen, once our politicians on both sides of the aisle grow some balls and do it."

Flapworthy.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-22 08:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#37 from here on out refer to me as "oh wise one" please.

#39 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-23 12:34 AM | Reply

Everything is awesome!!!!

Good news...5 x 5.

#2 | Posted by madbomber

When I read the first line I thought you were referencing this:

www.youtube.com

Because this is pretty much Trump and his supporter's theme song IMO.

Then I realized you're part of the kool aid drinking crowd so....

#40 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-23 01:43 AM | Reply

"Then I realized you're part of the kool aid drinking crowd so...."

Maybe in the future your people will take control and build a few, um, re-education camps to make sure that people like me recieve proper instruction on what is and is not acceptable thought.

#41 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-12-24 07:50 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort