U.S. Politics 2017: You Flynn Some, You Lose Some

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The General Council for the CFPB diagrees, formally, with Director Courdray’s action:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/26/consumer-bureau-trump-english-cordray-260062

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-fbe7-d90d-a37f-fff74f280000

The general council, who before this sued the CFPB on behalf of payday lenders? Yeah, sounds right. 

Even Trump's appointed judge says that it should be decided later and is a constitutional question; all they did was block the temporary restraining order. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

TRIPLE POST!!!

I'm surprised so many Republicans are saying they're dead if they can't pass tax reform right now. There's always time to pass a better bill in a few months from now, and while their donor base is demanding action, their constituents hate this bill. I've seen a few different polls and in none of them did this bill have support equivalent to Trump's (most polls I've seen are in the 25-30% approve range while all had a majority opposing it). Passing this and making it retroactive could bite them, especially in districts held by Republicans in big, liberal cities that rely on the SALT deductions. 

Here's to hopefully winning the House and turning the investigation cannons around. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

The general council, who before this sued the CFPB on behalf of payday lenders? Yeah, sounds right. 

Even Trump's appointed judge says that it should be decided later and is a constitutional question; all they did was block the temporary restraining order. 

That’s perfectly proper in a petition for a TRO.  And it is a serious constitutional issue.  One that is being addressed by the DC Circuit en banc I’m very curious to see how the PHH case comes out.

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

TRIPLE POST!!!

I'm surprised so many Republicans are saying they're dead if they can't pass tax reform right now. There's always time to pass a better bill in a few months from now, and while their donor base is demanding action, their constituents hate this bill. I've seen a few different polls and in none of them did this bill have support equivalent to Trump's (most polls I've seen are in the 25-30% approve range while all had a majority opposing it). Passing this and making it retroactive could bite them, especially in districts held by Republicans in big, liberal cities that rely on the SALT deductions. 

Here's to hopefully winning the House and turning the investigation cannons around. 

Dude, Alabama is wanting to vote in a pedophile over a Democrat. The constituents hate the bill, but so what? Who else are they going to  vote for?

[Martell Spy]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

TRIPLE POST!!!

I'm surprised so many Republicans are saying they're dead if they can't pass tax reform right now. There's always time to pass a better bill in a few months from now, and while their donor base is demanding action, their constituents hate this bill. I've seen a few different polls and in none of them did this bill have support equivalent to Trump's (most polls I've seen are in the 25-30% approve range while all had a majority opposing it). Passing this and making it retroactive could bite them, especially in districts held by Republicans in big, liberal cities that rely on the SALT deductions. 

Here's to hopefully winning the House and turning the investigation cannons around. 

That's to create false urgency and carry this horrible bill over the finish line. Also, 25-30% makes it hugely popular compared to the various Republican Zombie Healthcare bills. 

Republicans Better Get Ready For an Embarrassing Report About Their Tax Plan

https://slate.com/business/2017/11/republicans-better-get-ready-for-an-embarrassing-report-about-their-tax-plan.html

Obamacare Repeal Failed, But Tax Cuts Will Probably Pass. Here’s Why.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/repeal-failed-but-tax-cuts-will-probably-pass-heres-why.html

Daniel Ellsberg Is Still Thinking About the Papers He Didn’t Get to Leak

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/daniel-ellsberg-on-the-doomsday-machine.html

[Mlle. Zabzie]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

TRIPLE POST!!!

I'm surprised so many Republicans are saying they're dead if they can't pass tax reform right now. There's always time to pass a better bill in a few months from now, and while their donor base is demanding action, their constituents hate this bill. I've seen a few different polls and in none of them did this bill have support equivalent to Trump's (most polls I've seen are in the 25-30% approve range while all had a majority opposing it). Passing this and making it retroactive could bite them, especially in districts held by Republicans in big, liberal cities that rely on the SALT deductions. 

Here's to hopefully winning the House and turning the investigation cannons around. 

Guys, this bill is going to pass.  And when Democrats are inevitably in charge again (I know it seems impossible, but it's not) and they undo it, it will be billed as a tax hike and terrible for America.  Also, the Democrats will be blamed for the then-$hitty performance of the economy even though caused by predecessor policies. Haven't you read the script?

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Guys, this bill is going to pass.  And when Democrats are inevitably in charge again (I know it seems impossible, but it's not) and they undo it, it will be billed as a tax hike and terrible for America.  Also, the Democrats will be blamed for the then-$hitty performance of the economy even though caused by predecessor policies. Haven't you read the script?

The only quibble I have about this is that I find it unlikely that Democrats are going to be in charge again. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Guys, this bill is going to pass.  And when Democrats are inevitably in charge again (I know it seems impossible, but it's not) and they undo it, it will be billed as a tax hike and terrible for America.  Also, the Democrats will be blamed for the then-$hitty performance of the economy even though caused by predecessor policies. Haven't you read the script?

Hopefully they learned their lesson from Obama's "don't spike the football" tactic. 

7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Dude, Alabama is wanting to vote in a pedophile over a Democrat. The constituents hate the bill, but so what? Who else are they going to  vote for?

That's Alabama though. Raise taxes in Stanton Island and the Jersey Shore types will vote for a Democrat. Buying a new container of hair gel each week get's pricey, bruh. 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

4 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The only quibble I have about this is that I find it unlikely that Democrats are going to be in charge again. 

Nah - think that is short sighted.  I know it seems like it will never be different, but I think that is just wrong.

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hopefully they learned their lesson from Obama's "don't spike the football" tactic. 

That's Alabama though. Raise taxes in Stanton Island and the Jersey Shore types will vote for a Democrat. Buying a new container of hair gel each week get's pricey, bruh. 

I think the Staten Island/NJ/Long Island etc. answers are more nuanced.  Remember all politics are local.  The first outcry will be at the local level to reduce the tax burden at the local level (particularly property taxes, but also income taxes).  That will have a knock on effect on social services etc.  Basically the point is that we city dwellers should expect a period not seen since the bad old days of the mid-80s.

[Martell Spy]

As far as the CFPB goes, the goal is to replace the Director with a committee full of Steve Mnuchins. Wall Street is upset that they haven't captured it yet.

[OldGimletEye]

I've always thought I didn't get as much of the Dubya experience as I wanted to. Glad to know, were going to get a repeat.

[Kalbear]

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's Alabama though. Raise taxes in Stanton Island and the Jersey Shore types will vote for a Democrat. Buying a new container of hair gel each week get's pricey, bruh. 

They already vote Democrat though. As someone else pointed out, 2/3rds of the senate is going to be representing 30% of the population in about 15 years. Congress is already gerrymandered. This doesn't end well. 

7 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Nah - think that is short sighted.  I know it seems like it will never be different, but I think that is just wrong.

It's not exactly about things being different. It's that Trump represents a sea change in how much the people will tolerate. Our political norms have been changed absurdly in just a year; ethical concerns that would have been calls for impeachment every day just a few years ago are now simply the way things are. Trump putting in provisos into the tax plan that directly benefit him and few others is now considered a shrug. Multiple accusations of sexual assault are considered nothing special or even will be apologized away. Absurdly large corruption, graft and purchasing is effectively ignored. Coherent policy, coherent vision, even basic facts can be ignored.

Media is largely toothless in defending this. Well-researched reporting that is airtight is ignored or actively contradicted. 

What this tells me is that Republicans are now seeing how incredibly far they can get away with things, and this is with a fairly shitty POTUS that most people don't like. They can push, say, an incredibly corrupt guy in to be a Republican POTUS and as long as he's somewhat popular, he can do whatever he wants. 

Furthermore, the courts are being packed to an insane degree now that filibustering is done, and republicans don't care about quality of candidates or even if THEY are corrupt or have conflicts of interests. And those are lifetime appointments; over 500. That is going to shape the justice system for a generation. 

I'm willing to believe that there might be a Democratic POTUS in 8 years. It's possible. I suspect that there won't be, because by that time voter suppression tactics will be so broad and so fairly biased that turnout will be low and biased towards Republicans. After all, who is going to be prosecuting it?

[Darth Richard II]

29 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I've always thought I didn't get as much of the Dubya experience as I wanted to. Glad to know, were going to get a repeat.

Time is a flat circle.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

TRIPLE POST!!!

I'm surprised so many Republicans are saying they're dead if they can't pass tax reform right now. There's always time to pass a better bill in a few months from now, and while their donor base is demanding action, their constituents hate this bill. I've seen a few different polls and in none of them did this bill have support equivalent to Trump's (most polls I've seen are in the 25-30% approve range while all had a majority opposing it). Passing this and making it retroactive could bite them, especially in districts held by Republicans in big, liberal cities that rely on the SALT deductions. 

Here's to hopefully winning the House and turning the investigation cannons around. 

They're terrified of a voter revolt in even red states, where the rethugs passing such tax laws etc. have proven to be a catastrophe for the average voter. That's why they're determined to do it now whatever it is while they still hold the majorities in both houses, in both state and federal level.

[OldGimletEye]

Well, more on Taylor and the rest of the Conservative Clown Crew's endorsement of the Republican Tax Plan.

http://larrysummers.com/2017/11/28/dear-colleagues-please-explain-your-letter-to-steven-mnuchin/

Quote

First, many members of Congress are citing growth estimates consistent with your letter to claim that the tax cuts would pay for themselves and that the legislation being considered by Congress would not add to the deficit or debt over the next decade. Your letter, however, does not say that tax cuts would pay for themselves. Would it be fair to say that you agree with Martin Feldstein (who did not sign the letter) that these tax cuts will not pay for themselves and, in fact, would add about over $1 trillion to the debt over the next decade?

 

Quote

Second, can you explain how the studies you cite justify the conclusions you reach? You cite three studies to justify your conclusion that the annual growth rate would rise by 0.3 to 0.4 percentage points over the next decade. But two of those studies actually appear to have estimated substantially lower growth rates — potentially as low as a 0.01 percentage-point increase in the annual growth rate.

 

Quote

What was your reason for citing only the upper end of the range of Treasury’s estimates, from one model and ignoring Treasury’s other estimates? Also, why did you not mention that the middle of the range of Treasury’s 10-year estimates was 1 percent, a figure that would corroborate the views of critics of the tax bills since there would be only a 0.1 percentage-point increase in the growth rate? 

 

Quote

You also cite an OECD study that you say justifies the conclusion that long-run GDP would go up by 2 percent. But since you are explicitly talking about 10-year growth rates in your letter, would it not be better to use estimates from this same study that show that the effect in the 10th year is less than one-third of the long-run effect, translating into an annual growth rate of less than 0.1 percentage point?

 

Quote

Fourth, the pass-through provisions in the House and Senate bills would appear to create new sources of complexity in the tax code and violate the basic principle of tax policy that similar sources of income should be taxed at similar rates. A number of you have expressed concerns about the pass-through provisions in the past. Did you model the impact that these provisions would have on macroeconomic impact of the tax cuts?

 

Quote

Fifth, President Trump has expressed concern about the magnitude of the trade deficit and his chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers said that “a corporate tax cut to 20 percent would dramatically reduce the trade deficit.”

Just fuckin lol. I mean if the point of corporate tax cuts is supposed to attract foreign investment, how does that work again? Thats about the dumbest thing I've seen in awhile(well not really cause well they do a lot of dumb things).

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 Prepare to open your big, beautiful, Christmas present, America!

 

 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

The only quibble I have about this is that I find it unlikely that Democrats are going to be in charge again. 

Really?  Here I thought you were, like, Tony Robbins.  

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Furthermore, the courts are being packed to an insane degree now that filibustering is done

Can we stop this misconstruing of facts?  Harry Reid eliminated the filibuster for all judicial nominees outside of SCOTUS in 2013.  

[Jace, Extat]

28 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Prepare to open your big, beautiful, Christmas present, America!

 

 

Awww shit.

There goes my stock options. Oh wait, I'm aggressively middle class. Do you think I need to update my healthcare? My foot has been making this weird grinding noise lately, like sound your transmission makes when you're high as fuck and in between gears. It's not a good situation, but hey. At least I've got my health...care...

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Genius.