Trump voters are ready to risk everything. Why?

[HokieJoe]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

[ip_law-hokie]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HokieJoe]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay. Guess I don't understand your response. The Fair Tax isn't a progressive tax.

[ip_law-hokie]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay. Guess I don't understand your response. The Fair Tax isn't a progressive tax.

I understand. It's naive to suggest that the working class would not bear the brunt of it. Just like fair trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HokieJoe]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay. Guess I don't understand your response. The Fair Tax isn't a progressive tax.

I understand. It's naive to suggest that the working class would not bear the brunt of it. Just like fair trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess we'll just have to disagree. The working class already shoulders corporate taxes in the form of higher prices.

[HokieHam]

I expect abolishing corporate income taxes and a progressive tax rate would be just as helpful to the blue collar worker as free trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Fair Tax is consumption based.

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay. Guess I don't understand your response. The Fair Tax isn't a progressive tax.

I understand. It's naive to suggest that the working class would not bear the brunt of it. Just like fair trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess we'll just have to disagree. The working class already shoulders corporate taxes in the form of higher prices.

Doesn't the Fair Tax provide tax credits to the less fortunate for the necessities?

[HokieFanDC]

Would it be unfair to say that your criteria was based on emotion?

Not really. My anger at the GOP establishment is of course emotional. But that emotion is based on their betrayal to the voters. They were voted into power to stop Obama's horrible policies and they caved at every chance.

As for my non-emotional reasons for supporting Trump, a few of them are:

1. I want illegal immigration stopped. I want our border protected. I believe he will do this. The media is making him out to be against all immigration and I don't believe he is anti immigrant at all. He is anti illegal immigrant. He also states that we need to slow down immigration of poor, uneducated, unskilled workers and open immigration up to educated, skilled workers. I strongly agree with him on all points here.
2. I am very pro 2nd amendment. I don't want any more gun laws passed and there are several I'd like to see rolled back. Trump says he will strongly support the 2nd amendment and not pass any more laws. I strongly support him there.
3. Trump said he doesn't want to take any muslim refugees and wants to stop muslim immigration until he can be assured our vetting process is effective. It may not be popular, but I agree with him here. I'm fine with American born muslims who have been raised here and just want to pursue the American dream. I realize that many immigrants want the same thing, but unfortunately there are also a lot of immigrants who hold radical Islamic beliefs and until we can find a way to distinguish the two, I believe stopping it all is the only responsible thing to do. It's our government's duty to protect its current citizens, not to put them in danger for political correctness.
4. Countries like China ARE manipulating their currency and not playing fair in the world financial market. Our current government is too afraid to do anything because China holds all our debt and they feel that gives China all the power. I think Trump will do something. For one, China's economy relies on us purchasing all their crap. Because of that, we too have power. We can put import taxes on their crap or stop buying it and their economy will collapse.
5. China, Russia, and Iran are constantly hacking us, stealing intellectual property, etc and we are doing nothing about it. I think Trump will pressure them into slowing down.

On the touchy feely side, Trump is a successful business man. He knows how to build a company. He understands market and how the government can help and hurt the economy. He hasn't gotten to where he is by being dumb and not surrounding himself with good people. I believe as President, he will surround himself with the best people (advisors), hold them accountable, and turn the Country around. Almost nothing can be worse than the last 8 years. Clinton will be an extension of the last 8 years or worse. I still think she may end up indicted before it's all over.

Trump's understanding of international trade is scary bad. You should read some of the pieces by economists about his trade proposals.

Here's one that contains a host of links to references.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/20/alm ... -is-wrong/

Reading a little bit, one problem I have, and it's the source of much the voting public's consternation, is this:

In this light, the U.S. trade deficit reflects little more than America’s longstanding comparative advantage as a global investment destination. Not so scary, huh?

Global investment destination means nothing to someone who lost a manufacturing job. Moreover, because they have no or a low paying job, they can't leverage investments to their advantage. Because of trade policies, we've substituted manufacturing for the benefit of the financial class. That's a poor trade off because it benefits far fewer people.

True, automation has killed jobs as well, but 3rd world slave labor amplified the problem. Slave labor benefits the financial class/multinationals-not J6P.

Correct, but the answer to the problem isn't tariffs, that won't solve anything. We need to encourage companies to bring jobs back to the US, incent them to do so, make sure we have people trained to do those jobs, and make sure that we aren't taxing the crap out of them when they do.
In addition, the pendulum is already swinging the other way. The main disadvantage the US has had is labor rates, but we have advantages in cycle times, quality, and shipping costs, with domestic manufacturing. The overall cost of production between China and US, for China imports, has gotten much closer, and with a little boost, it will bring even more jobs back. Tariffs will not do that, it will just increase costs for the consumer.

See my reply to ip above. If they'd incentivize job creation, real job creation, not fast food jobs, I'd amend my position.

I'm happy to incentivize job creation (we can figure out what is real at some point) by lowering taxes on companies driving the job growth, in industries we need to grow. But, only if that comes with significant cuts in spending, and reform of ss and medicare.

[HokieJoe]

[
Doesn't the Fair Tax provide tax credits to the less fortunate for the necessities?

Yes it was called the prebate. In any case, I don't care what the current tax code is replaced with. Just replace it with something simpler.

[HokieJoe]

I'm happy to incentivize job creation (we can figure out what is real at some point) by lowering taxes on companies driving the job growth, in industries we need to grow. But, only if that comes with significant cuts in spending, and reform of ss and medicare.

I agree with all of that. What we have now is simply untenable. This election is only the beginning of populist anger if some of the issues effecting Joe6Pack aren't addressed. Lack of action, in some regard, to address our structural issues will only incite people more.

And I must add, I don't hew the Von Mises or strict Libertarian line on free trade. I agree in principle with the free flow of commerce. However, one also has to be practical. We must, as a country, protect our industrial bases as a strategic economic and military asset. That includes the semiconductor industry. I'm will always side for protecting our national sovereignty. Even if that means we don't enter trade pacts.

[houtexhokie]

Question of the Decade!....

....

[houtexhokie]

Question of the Decade!....

....

[HokieFanDC]

I'm happy to incentivize job creation (we can figure out what is real at some point) by lowering taxes on companies driving the job growth, in industries we need to grow. But, only if that comes with significant cuts in spending, and reform of ss and medicare.

I agree with all of that. What we have now is simply untenable. This election is only the beginning of populist anger if some of the issues effecting Joe6Pack aren't addressed. Lack of action, in some regard, to address our structural issues will only incite people more.

And I must add, I don't hew the Von Mises or strict Libertarian line on free trade. I agree in principle with the free flow of commerce. However, one also has to be practical. We must, as a country, protect our industrial bases as a strategic economic and military asset. That includes the semiconductor industry. I'm will always side for protecting our national sovereignty. Even if that means we don't enter trade pacts.

Agreed. I'm on the side of folks on this board that are for domestic free trade, and limited intl free trade. I do think, though, that we do need trade pacts b/c the world outside the US has too many people, and too many mature and emerging markets, to not do so.