Comments by "maynunal" (@maynunal) on "Trump legal rep on not guilty plea to 'one-sided BS' indictments: It's 'our turn'" video.
-
7
-
"Trickle-down economics," also known as supply-side economics, posits that when government policies favor the wealthy and corporations with tax cuts and reduced regulation, the benefits will eventually "trickle down" to the broader population. However, this theory has faced significant criticism, and here are five reasons why it's often considered ineffective:
Income Inequality: Trickle-down economics tends to exacerbate income inequality. Instead of wealth trickling down to the average person, it often concentrates at the top, widening the wealth gap between the rich and the rest of society.
Limited Benefit to the Middle Class: The benefits of tax cuts and economic policies that primarily favor the wealthy may not reach the middle and lower-income groups significantly. This can result in stagnant wages and reduced economic mobility for many individuals.
Insufficient Job Creation: Proponents of trickle-down economics argue that tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations will stimulate job creation. However, evidence suggests that this doesn't always translate into substantial employment gains, and job creation may not keep pace with the benefits enjoyed by the top earners.
Reduced Government Revenue: Implementing tax cuts for the wealthy can reduce government revenue, potentially leading to underfunded public services, budget deficits, or the need for tax increases on the middle class in the long run.
Lack of Incentive for Investment: Trickle-down economics assumes that if the wealthy have more money, they will invest in job-creating businesses. However, the wealthy might choose to invest in assets like stocks or real estate rather than in job-intensive industries, leading to less direct economic benefit for the majority of citizens.
2
-
STOP Giving tax breaks to Billionaires!!! Here are ten reasons why:
Income Inequality: Tax breaks for billionaires exacerbate income inequality by allowing the wealthiest individuals to pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes compared to the average citizen. This can lead to a growing wealth gap.
Reduced Government Revenue: Lower tax rates for billionaires mean less revenue for essential government services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. This can hinder the government's ability to address societal needs.
Underinvestment in Public Services: Reduced tax revenue can result in underfunded public services, which can negatively impact education, healthcare, and social welfare programs that benefit the majority of the population.
Social Unrest: Growing income inequality can lead to social unrest and instability, as people become frustrated with a system they perceive as favoring the wealthy at the expense of everyone else.
Market Distortion: Tax breaks for billionaires can distort markets by incentivizing certain investments or behaviors that may not be in the best interest of the economy as a whole.
Unfair Burden on Middle Class: When the wealthy pay lower taxes, the burden of funding government programs often falls disproportionately on the middle class, who may struggle to make ends meet.
Lack of Economic Stimulus: Contrary to the idea that tax breaks for the wealthy stimulate economic growth, evidence suggests that such policies often do not lead to substantial job creation or economic development.
Erosion of Public Trust: When people perceive that the tax system favors the ultra-rich, it erodes public trust in the fairness of the system and can lead to tax evasion and non-compliance.
Wasted Resources: Instead of being used for productive purposes, money saved through tax breaks for billionaires may be funneled into tax havens or speculative investments that don't benefit the broader economy.
Political Influence: Wealthy individuals who receive significant tax breaks often have more influence in shaping government policies, which can further perpetuate policies that benefit the wealthy at the expense of the general population.
2
-
2
-
1
-
@richardcook4111 BREAKING: The Washington Post reports that Truth Social faces a potential $300 million investor payout if the merger collapses by the September 8 deadline. If the deal fails, Trump stands to gain nothing, marking a fitting end for the former president.
The merger must close or be extended by September 8, or Truth Social will be legally obligated to return $300 million to investors. Initially, Trump Media & Technology Group pledged that the merger would create a tech giant worth up to $1.7 billion, but the deal now faces serious risks.
Truth Social has seen executive departures, insider trading allegations, and an $18 million settlement over false statements to investors and the SEC.
Digital World needs 65% of nearly 400,000 investors to vote 'yes' for the deadline extension; otherwise, they'll wind up operations, repaying investors at a much lower share price.
Trump, retaining 90% ownership if the deal falls apart, has not addressed the shareholder vote on Truth Social.
The platform has struggled to attract users, falling far short of the projected 41 million by year-end.
Truth Social adds to the list of Trump's business failures, deceiving his supporters into investing in another doomed venture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1