Trump suggests 25 cent increase in gas tax to pay for his infrastructure plan

[Lenonis]

Also, if we were to give big businesses another break on taxes, then I could see them reinvesting into roads, bridges, and other infrastructure.

There is no reason to think this is a thing. Shoveling money into business won't make them maintain our country's infrastructure the way you claim.

Plus you are signing the death warrant of rural America. Big businesses don't invest in rural america because of the low population density.

Why on earth do you expect businesses to be altruistic? There is zero reason to believe that based on their behavior to date.

[Dontrike]

Maybe, but this should be a State level issue. It's not the fault of the Federal Government that States have misused their money and spent it on other things like, legalizing marijuana.

You know legal weed brings in millions, right? More so than the tax cut will ever do, in fact weed hasn't added to state debts that started it, but the tax cut will add to the deficit.

$270 million in the first quarter of 2016 alone.

New analysis from the Tax Foundation found nationwide legalization of marijuana could generate up to $28 billion in tax revenues for federal, state, and local governments.

That includes $7 billion in federal revenue, $5.5 billion from business taxes, and $1.5 billion from income and payroll taxes, the report outlined.

Also, if we were to give big businesses another break on taxes, then I could see them reinvesting into roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. Especially, Big Oil. They're constantly needing to pave roads to get their large machinery across.

You actually think that places like Wal-Mart, General Electric, Dairy Queen, and Regal Cinemas will invest in roads, bridges, and other infrastructure? How exactly do you come to this conclusion? Do you need to eat dozens of trays of special brownies to do this, or what?

[Masark]

There is no way to take this much tax from the public.

Bullshit. The USA is nowhere near the limits of effective taxation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...e_to_GDP_ratio

[Blur4stuff]

It's clear where Trump and the republican party's priorities are. They are all too happy to give billions to the top while giving next to nothing or even taking away from the middle class and poor.

[Heladys]

This should go over well given his support base's near-frothing pathological hatred of taxes. I can't wait for the dodging and evasion of his local troll squad as they swallow their bile and cheerlead this.

[Felaris Stormrage]

There is no reason to think this is a thing. Shoveling money into business won't make them maintain our country's infrastructure the way you claim.

Plus you are signing the death warrant of rural America. Big businesses don't invest in rural america because of the low population density.

Why on earth do you expect businesses to be altruistic? There is zero reason to believe that based on their behavior to date.

Hell, rural America isn't exactly the people we should be worrying about. They've lived the majority of their lives with poor infrastructure due to money mismanagement by States and have accordingly adapted; i.e. jacked up trucks, building their own roads, etc.

Also, oil companies are always in rural areas digging. They are constantly upgrading roads to get their heavy machinery across. So, it would be a win-win to give them a tax break, because they would reinvest it back into the community. Especially, rural communities.

- - - Updated - - -

You know legal weed brings in millions, right? More so than the tax cut will ever do, in fact weed hasn't added to state debts that started it, but the tax cut will add to the deficit.






You actually think that places like Wal-Mart, General Electric, Dairy Queen, and Regal Cinemas will invest in roads, bridges, and other infrastructure? How exactly do you come to this conclusion? Do you need to eat dozens of trays of special brownies to do this, or what?

Yes, I do think these companies will easily invest in infrastructure. They need customers, so if we give them bigger tax breaks, then they will build more stores and outreach to distant communities. People need a safe way to get to stores and I guarantee these billionaire dollar companies wouldn't mind spending 50M on infrastructure upgrades if it nets them triple that.

Also, I don't appreciate you implying that I do drugs. Never touched the stuff in my life. By the way, you should learn to respect your elders son. We are the reason you're here in the first place.

[Dontrike]

Yes, I do think these companies will easily invest in infrastructure. They need customers, so if we give them bigger tax breaks, then they will build more stores and outreach to distant communities. People need a safe way to get to stores and I guarantee these billionaire dollar companies wouldn't mind spending 50M on infrastructure upgrades if it nets them triple that.

So you truly think that these same people and businesses that were just given $1.5 trillion, the ones that only gave out 2% of what they saved or received to their employees, are going to spend more on roads than they did their own employees? I'm going to go back to assuming you do recreational drugs and a lot of them to think that Chick-fil-A, Target, Sam's Club, and American Airlines (just to name a few) are going to pony up the dough to build and fix roads when they can't even give their employees a living wage.

Also, I don't appreciate you implying that I do drugs. Never touched the stuff in my life. By the way, you should learn to respect your elders son. We are the reason you're here in the first place.

And I think we could all agree that me being around isn't a good thing, so really you "elders" just made another mistake assuming that I'm worth a damn. I mean holy shit, look at this ma'am trying to tell me that I should be glad to be around. Hilarious, truly some funny stuff.

Also, yes you have done drugs, they're called prescription drugs. So don't go thinking you've never had any drugs ever, in fact if you've taken opioids you've kind of taken heroin.

[Lenonis]

So, it would be a win-win to give them a tax break, because they would reinvest it back into the community. Especially, rural communities.

Corporate profits are the highest in recent history. Why haven't they provided first class infrastructure? You are literally making this up with zero data or factual backing to demonstrate this is a viable way to maintain our infrastructure.

Also, why would big business invest in infrastructure in residential areas? You are basically advocated for passable highways and that's about it. It's dumb.

[Tijuana]

Corporate profits are the highest in recent history. Why haven't they provided first class infrastructure? You are literally making this up with zero data or factual backing to demonstrate this is a viable way to maintain our infrastructure.

Also, why would big business invest in infrastructure in residential areas? You are basically advocated for passable highways and that's about it. It's dumb.

Calling other posters dumb, doesn't make you more right. Just sayin...

Cutting corporate taxes solves a number of problems, despite the tantrums of Democrats. It's a global economy, and having the highest tax rate in the world, is inferior to having a competitive rate. Freeing up all those tax dollars spurs a ton of growth. That is undeniable. When you give people money, particularly those not living hand to mouth, they will most often spend that money on making more money. It's undeniable that growth ensues from cutting corporate taxes.

[Lenonis]

Calling other posters dumb, doesn't make you more right. Just sayin...

I'm not calling the poster dumb. Hence the "it's" rather than "you're". I'm calling the argument dumb. It's the same trickle down nonsense that we've had decades of evidence that it doesn't work. To think that business would create a national infrastructure worthy of anything out of the goodness of their heart is ridiculous.

Cutting corporate taxes solves a number of problems, despite the tantrums of Democrats. It's a global economy, and having the highest tax rate in the world, is inferior to having a competitive rate.

Please learn the difference between nominal and effective and try again. We don't have the highest effective tax rate in the world and no business cares about nominal rates.

When you give people money, particularly those not living hand to mouth, they will most often spend that money on making more money. It's undeniable that growth ensues from cutting corporate taxes.

You also apparently need to learn the difference between corporate and personal taxes.

[Tijuana]

I'm not calling the poster dumb. Hence the "it's" rather than "you're". I'm calling the argument dumb. It's the same trickle down nonsense that we've had decades of evidence that it doesn't work. To think that business would create a national infrastructure worthy of anything out of the goodness of their heart is ridiculous.

Please learn the difference between nominal and effective and try again. We don't have the highest effective tax rate in the world and no business cares about nominal rates.

You also apparently need to learn the difference between corporate and personal taxes.

1. Trickle down is not an economic theory. It has never been suggested, by any politician. Ever. It's a pejorative, and it's inaccurate. The KEY to supply side economics, is that the working class gets more money in their pocket, so they can spend it. This is why every GOP tax plan cuts taxes on the working class. NO tax plan of Democrats cuts the taxes of the working class (or anyone, for that matter). The entire point of supply side economics, is to put money back in the economy, out of the hands of government waste and abuse.

2. I have not heard anyone suggest that corporations would create infrastructure out of the goodness of their hearts. Toll bridges are not built as charity, they are built to collect the toll. Obviously.

3. You seem to be unaware of the things you have to qualify for, in order to get to effective rate land. Spoiler alert: without lobbying, you are excluded. If you are not a giant corporation, you are excluded. Having the lowest effective rate did nothing for my business, that qualified for zero of the goodies that make the rate effective. Your notion that no business cares about the tax rates they are actually paying is ludicrous. So what if GE gets a huge deduction? How does that help businesses that don't qualify for the give away deduction? I mean, come on man. Think this through to the end.

4. With all due respect, I just don't think you understand. Corporations are owned by shareholders, aka people. Cutting corporate tax instantly makes every business more profitable. They get to keep more money now. What will with they do with that money? They will either re-invest in their company, creating growth. Or, they will give it out to shareholders, who will then re-invest it in other businesses, creating growth. If any part of your understanding can be helped by me, it's this: The favorite thing in the whole wide world that rich people like to do with money, is use it to make more money. That's just human nature.

Lastly, why do you have to be so vitriolic? Just speak your mind. There is no need to insult people, and call them names, just because they disagree.

[Lenonis]

I just don't think you understand.

You know what...given how much misinformation is in your post (supply side economics is defined by giving tax cuts to the middle class...what??) I can only come to the conclusion you are intentionally arguing in bad faith.

I neither have the time nor inclination to deal with your big bag of lies, especially when it's intentional.

Fortunately for me reality is on my side and the last several decades refutes just about everything you posted.

[Tijuana]

You know what...given how much misinformation is in your post (supply side economics is defined by giving tax cuts to the middle class...what??) I can only come to the conclusion you are intentionally arguing in bad faith.

I neither have the time nor inclination to deal with your big bag of lies, especially when it's intentional.

Fortunately for me reality is on my side and the last several decades refutes just about everything you posted.

If you can't refute what I have said with facts or arguments, I guess you can always resort to baseless insults.

Here read up. Learn what supply side is really about, if you won't take my word for it. The point is to spur growth via consumer spending, that resulted from people having lower taxes to pay. If you don't cut the taxes of the actual consumers, obviously this won't work. Hence EVERY GOP tax plan, includes tax cuts to all of the brackets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics

[Breccia]

The point is to spur growth via consumer spending, that

Sorry to interrupt, but Trump is still making waves with that gas tax, which is the opposite of spurring consumer spending. Specifically, both sides of this issue (party irrelevant) seem unwilling to accept that Trump has walked away from the gas tax, because Trump can't keep his story straight on anything.

Trump has delighted transportation groups and infuriated conservatives with his latest show of support for a federal gas tax, but advocates on both sides of the issue say they aren’t taking his calls too seriously.

They say the president’s tendency to flip positions on a dime — and the tough political reality of raising the gas tax — suggests it would be foolish to put too much faith in the White House putting significant political weight behind the issue.

“My first thought was, will this last 30 minutes or 3 days or 30 days?” said Marcia Hale, president of Building America's Future, who supports raising the gas tax.

“It doesn’t cost him anything to say we’re looking at everything,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, an influential anti-tax group that has enormous sway over the Republican Party.

Trump’s latest endorsement came during a bipartisan meeting Wednesday at the White House, where Trump said he could get behind a 25-cent gas tax hike to pay for his newly released infrastructure plan.

Trump’s apparent willingness to touch what has long been considered the “third rail” in politics has baffled some on Capitol Hill.

Raising federal fuel taxes — which hasn’t been done in over two decades — would be a herculean lift in Congress, where conservatives have repeatedly drawn a red line over the issue.

Yet Trump, who has bent the GOP party to his own will on other issues, has repeatedly entertained the idea.

He first signaled openness to a gas tax hike in an interview with Bloomberg last spring, though the administration was quick to walk the comments back.

Trump also mused about a 50-cent gas tax during a private meeting with lawmakers a few months ago, according to The Washington Post, while his economic adviser Gary Cohn has pitched a lower increase to some members of Congress.

Most recently, Trump said “several times” during a meeting with lawmakers that he could back a 25-cent fuel tax increase, according to Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), who attended the meeting following the White House’s infrastructure roll out. Others familiar with the meeting said the suggestion was more of an off-the-cuff remark than a serious policy position.

Yep, that's a fifty cent gas tax right there. It's next to the 25 cent increase that this thread is about. Pretty sure driving up the prices that much -- can you imagine fifty cents more per gallon? -- kills a lot of the voluntary demand.

Sorry to interrupt, please continue describing Trump's ability to handle basic economic principles. I'm sure he learned it at Trump U. between his fifth and sixth bankruptcies. Say, how's the dollar doing? Still dropping? That's neat.

[ringpriest]

I posted in another thread, the WH saw the immediate hue and cry from, well, everyone, and starting What He Meant Was-ing.

So, it was over in a couple hours. Trump said something monumentally stupid and incompetent, and his handlers explained that those things he said didn't mean those things he said. Same tune, different verse.

If I didn't know better, I'd think that the "President" of the United States was just an actor playing a role for reality television, who occasionally goes off script and the show-runners have to correct it in post-production.

[Dontrike]

Sorry to interrupt, but Trump is still making waves with that gas tax, which is the opposite of spurring consumer spending. Specifically, both sides of this issue (party irrelevant) seem unwilling to accept that Trump has walked away from the gas tax, because Trump can't keep his story straight on anything.



Yep, that's a fifty cent gas tax right there. It's next to the 25 cent increase that this thread is about. Pretty sure driving up the prices that much -- can you imagine fifty cents more per gallon? -- kills a lot of the voluntary demand.

Sorry to interrupt, please continue describing Trump's ability to handle basic economic principles. I'm sure he learned it at Trump U. between his fifth and sixth bankruptcies. Say, how's the dollar doing? Still dropping? That's neat.

Wow, Trump is just trying his best to fuck over everyone.